F. W. HILGENDORF

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24899, 12 June 1946, Page 6

F. W. HILGENDORF

SCIENCE ON THE LAND

An address delivered at Canterbury Agricultural College. Lincoln, by Mr L. J WILD. M.A., B.Sc. Principal of the Feilding AgricS High School. and g tomerly prudent rftte Royal Agncu ltlWil IV

Before considering the second period of Hilgendorf’s work we must go bacx a little. Through the years from 1900 onwards the Board of Agriculture, tasta-ed by J G Wilson (afterwards Stages) and Edwin Hall of Auckland, were continuously urging a reorganisation of the Department of Agriculture and the provision of more and better facilities for agricultural education. ... The attitude in the North Island appears generally to have been not so much to criticise Lincoln as to leave it to provide in the South whatever was there deemed suitable and sufficient, but to concentrate efforts on a college in the North Island. These efforts were, as we shall see, only too successful; but for their success some responsibility lies on the authorities who controlled and directed the policy of Lincoln. The ferment to which I have already referred, manifested itself otherwise in the establishment of boys’ and girls clubs, in the appointment of agricultural instructors, often imported by education boards and by some high school boards, in the opening of new kinds of post-primary schools on lines differing from those in the academic tradition, and the further development of Ruakura as a farm school. It came at length to a head in the establishment, of chairs of agriculture at Victoria University, College (1924) with funds donated by Sir Walter Buchanan, and* at Auckland University College (1925) with funds from the Logan Campbell Bequest, and with the appointment of a Royal Commission on University Education in 1925. And all this, together with the incentive to research given by the war led further to the invitation to Sir Frank Heath to report on the organisation of Scientific and Industrial Research, followed by the establishment of a special department. Two Reports— The Royal Commissioners, Sir Harry Rudolf Reichel of Wales, and Mr Frank Tate of Victoria, in the section of their report dealing with agricultural education, showed a somewhat shocked public the realities of the situation. Strongly opposed to the continuance of three schools of “anaemic mediocrity," they recommended that an agricultural college in association with the University should be established in some suitable locality in the North Island by a combination of the schools proposed for Wellington and Auckland. The Heath Report (1926) was equally emphatic in its condemnation. In the section dealing with the primary industries Sir Frank Heath said: The most serious difficulty in any plan for a systematic organisation of effort on behalf of the primary industries is the shortage of well-trained and competent workers. There is as yet, no Institution in the Dominion of University rank devoted to the training of leaders in these industries and to the prosecution of research, which is an essential part in the training for leadership. . My impression, based on a visit to the Government Farm of Instruction at Ruakura and to Lincoln College Institution, which represent two necessary types of agricultural school below that of a University, leads me to the conclusion that science, especially on its practical and experimental side, receives even in the?e grades of institution, less than its due attention. At Ruakura there are no science laboratories, though there is Instruction in science. At Lincoln the laboratories are less well-found and maintained than is desirable, and, with the exception of the valuable work m wheat-breeding and grass-selection, the standard and efficiency of the work in science seems to me to fall below that necessary for young men, some of whom are intending to become teachers of agriculture. But the principal gap is on the University plane. Without a college of the highest rank devoted to investigation and teaching, no systematic approach to the scientific problem of the primary industries will be possible.

—And the Sequel The reiiult of all thia was that the Government passed the New Zealand Agricultural College Act, 1P26, committing itself to a national University College of Agriculture at Palmerston North; and, by implication, relegating Canterbury Agricultural College to the status of a provincial farm school. Lincoln and the South at once rose in protest and their opposition secured important concessions. The name of the northern college ’ was by an amending Act in 1927, changed io the Massey Agricultural College, thus honouring a former Prime Minister. Lincoln also received a grant of £19,000 for the building of new laboratories and a pledge of equal univeraity status, and in due course the Senate of the New Zealand Unisrwejt'&aßrs s Dr Hilgendorf as Professors of the University. To complete the picture it should be added that in 1937 a further amending act, the School of Agriculture Act, was passed by which . tw 2 > 'Y. erc together constituted the New Zealand School of Agriculture. ... As a logical result of the new status °w f edited. P thi*s aO jo?ni n g Oa the teaching staff in responsibility for the organisation of the academic work; and a further result was the complete revision, long overdue, of the courses of study for degrees In agriculture. Now when these fires of cohtroversy have died- down and the ashes are S?d earlier days to get Lincoln to do the whole work that the country expected of it, the crisis of 1026-1937 might not have arisen; and while the special needs of the North Island in regard to k-a y . re ® earc h would ultimately have had to be met in the way in which they have been met, the birth Of a second teaching institution might b l en a X oid ? d - ?ut.long before had hopelessly deterioi ated and there* was nothing the sur ?« In the North. For this It is now neither necessarv nor profitable to apportion blame A s , a re,ult the upheaval Lincoln got Its new laboratories, a share of J.”*!!??® 1 Permitting the long s‘"‘“l of the ,taff on profesßorshFps. 81^0 a " d ,n 1930 ltß tw ° _ Wheat Research Institute From this time until his retirpmpnt his lB l 3 a ß h^? te ”^ Hll ' ,e J!^ rt contlS unabated zeal, but Un »rfl different conditions. . . . bv «£i.improvement work had time been transferred to the wn« at rj R ? search Institute. ... Dr. was nat ural choice as v. rec ? or ’ ihe appointment of trained geneticist, Dr O. H h ?? Ve the opportunity that he had well earned to hand over the arduous field and experimental Truly he had “cast his bread many ® nd f ° Und U “ aftcr r n ?M. th . e work of the Wheat "“, ea r | //“‘‘‘ute was quickly revealed in the discovery of the merits

of a line in the hybrid variety 7, "the first new wheat to be DroduStoS in New Zealand.” The cross—SoS Straw Tuscan, the standard Cant®/ bury variety, by White Fife » Canadian wheat of high baitn! quality—was made by HilgendorfiJ 1923, and incidently reflects the vahS of experience gained abroad; and cross was carried on by himself Mr J. W. Calder till 1929, by time the F 5 generation was in hand The material, comprising some hw lines, was then handed over by th» college to the Wheat Research W tute and came under comprehenSX laborator}’ tests at the institute anS under field trials by the DepartmeS of Agriculture. By 1931 one particuhJ line revealed growth characteristieiS special merit, and the staff of tu Wheat Research Institute, with new equipment for milling and baking tests, revealed something else—this line gave 2 per cent more Ron. and a 10 per cent, better loaf than Tuscan. Accordingly, in 1934 frJJ the Fll generation, one special lin® was finally selected and its popularifr is still increasing year by year 1937 the sowings amounted to 1215 ft acres, in 1938 to 34,000, while in th# last four seasons Cross 7 has accounted for far more than half the total area There is not time now to do l&S than mention some of HilgendorfJ other contributions to the progren agriculture, lhere was. of course, hS work with grasses, taken over in due course by Mr Calder, and the produe. tion of the C 23 strain of Akaroa cocla. foot. There was his work in simplify, ing the statistical method of inter, preting field experiments. The Department of Agriculture adopted hi method; and he himself applied it to the vast array of unsyste. matised data accumulated over the years by the department, fa Bulletin No. 1 of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research under the title “Manurial Experiment! in the South Island of New Zealand prior to 1923.” As Bulletin 47 he later published “The Grasslands of the South Island of New Zealand”—a vegetation survey, first of a series of that kind. In these years we see Hilgendorf at the zenith of his career. He now had laboratories in keeping with the dig. nity of his position and with the importance of the work of his department. He had able and congenial assistants trained by himself. He could enjoy the work of supervising and co-ordinating their endeavour*, He could at length gather in his harvest and enjoy the fruits of his labour Several scientific papers, the informs tive annual reports of the Wheat Research Institute, and finally his authoritative book, “wheat in New Zealand," are products of the period. Acting Director Then in 1935, with rather dramatic suddenness, he announced his retirement from the Chair of Biology. He had -reached an age at which men in our profession usually retire; and there is no doubt that the stress and strain of the years was beginning to telL But at the end of 1935 ft was also announced that Professor Alexander was vacating his position as director. He had held office since 1909, and in 1934 had celebrated his jubilee as director, and been honoured by the King with the Order of C.M.G.—an occasion marked by a great gathering at the college to do him honour, and to present gifts and congratulations. His years of service were years of revolu* tionary change of ideas, and the increasing complexity of the duties of director was such as to have taxed the energies of a younger man. He had given his best to the college, and 1 am sure there were many who, while differing from him on matters of policy, paid tribute on his departure. The retirement of Dr Hilgendorf was therefore postponed and yet again he assumed the position ot acwdirector until the arrival of Proiessor Hudson in November, 1936. . . . His more abundant leisure was flow used in readiing, in enjoyment of the society of a goodly company ot friends, and for setting down in orderly form his memoirs and the garnered str.res of experience and observation. But the sands were running out more rapidly than any could have supposed, and on September 23, 1942, while on a visit to Wellington he collapsed and died. In the words of the Preacher: “There ifl no man that hath power over the spirit to retain the spirit; neither hath he power In the day of death: and there is no discharge in that war." When your committee did me the honour of inviting me to deliver this, the inaugural Hilgendorf Memorial Address, they knew that I had been a colleague of the doctor for tlx yean. They probably did not know that I woi a pupil of his in Southland Boys’ High School in 1903. So I knew him for nearly 40 years, and before I «J<* would pay a personal tribute. Nihil .Human! AHenum . . . We were close friends; our family were on terms of intimacy; each moved freely in the other’s house. •! saw Ml as a kind and understanding family man. We worked together, sometta« on related topics. We traversed the plains by cycle and car; we ranged the river valleys and mountain passa on foot. He was a good companion. There was no limit to his intererts-in the world about him, in his fellow in affairs—and out of wide knowing® and experience came deep human sympathy and understanding. He a considerable reader, and a good co°' versationalist with a quick wit and a ready humour. Kindly and genial » was at home with young and witn students, colleagues, and friends; a™* his advice was both shrewd ana soundModest in his bearing and wearing M honours lightly, he delighted to see n» students travelling successfully ® paths where he • had led them. some he was a guide, to many • philosopher, and to all a friend. I set myself in this address to some understanding of the timea conditions in which Frederick WiU«® Hilgendorf worked, without which »» not possible to appraise his work. * have endeavoured to provide a bacKground, leaving others, better acquainted with technical aspects, to in the details of the picture. I bjve tried to be careful in my assessment ® values and to maintain a sense of proportion, as indeed is my duty to science and to the memory of a man of If I have not used enough colour picture, it will be an agreeable lor some successor to repair the flenc iency. I should do less than justice to the subject, to my successors, ano £ my audience if I were indiscrimwa® in praise of his accomplishments, bj» blind to the limitations of his geto’JJ Whether I have succeeded in my “-.J matters little enough, if we take of this; that the work of the learned professor is recorded in the annait oi science; the worth of Fr L e< ? er !S William Hilgendorf is enshrined in the memory of his friends. (Completed)