Ignorance is certainly not power; nor does it lead to wealth as a means of comfortable support and enjoyment--which is the legitimate end of all labor. Will _ignorance_ give respectability, or sweeten the toil of the husbandman? Will it elevate his thoughts and desires to higher and nobler aims, or inspire him to "look from nature up to nature's God?" Will it lead him instead of a fixed stolid gaze upon the earth over which he walks, to engage in the study of those great and omnipotent laws which regulate all matter, and which so wonderfully, yet certainly control both the animal and vegetable kingdoms? No! It will accomplish none of these desirable ends, but the very reverse of them all. This proposition is so self-evident to intelligent men, that to advance it to such an audience as the one before me--except as the basis of an argument--must be entirely superfluous. But what was the social position of the farmers, let me ask--even in this highly favored country--fifty or sixty years ago? Were they not then regarded as men without knowledge--devoid almost of sensibilities--unfitted for anything except the mere routine of daily labor and toil--and capable only of delving in the soil day by day? And were they not then considered, even by themselves as well as by others, as occupying the very lowest position in the scale of society? Such were the facts. Every person who was regarded as too ignorant and uncultivated for other pursuits, was, by common consent, considered as having a prescriptive right to farming as a vocation. In fact ignorance was regarded as the proper and sufficient diploma for the farmer. And as a consequence he was not only poor and without influence, but too often considered by others as without respectability merely because he was a farmer; and all that was conceded to him--in fact all that he claimed for himself--was a simple subsistence upon the hardest fare, without any of the luxuries, and very often with a scarcity of the necessaries of life. Remember, I am speaking of the farmers, as a class, _fifty_ or _sixty_ years ago--before there were any county fairs, or agricultural colleges, newspapers or magazines, and when agriculture was the result of labor without knowledge, system or calculation. But although the farmers have emerged from this condition very slowly, yet what is their position now? Are they not regarded as being on a level at least with those of other callings in social importance? Do they not occupy positions of confidence and trust in society? Are they not found in our Legislative Halls in fair proportion with men of different pursuits? This is certainly true: and the advance alone is the result of a higher mental culture--of a wider range of thought--and of an increased fund of knowledge, and consequently of an improved system of farming.