ment in recent years, as evidenced by discussions in magazines and newspapers, further emphasis is given to the need of laying a solid foundation in facts before attempting to effect changes in the superstructure. We may rest assured that the laudable effort of promulgating programs of reform for the betterment of rural life will carry weight only when it reflects a due appreciation of what life now affords to the average individual living in a typical rural community.

These considerations suggest that no apology is necessary for making intensive studies of representative regions provided the work is carried on in the proper spirit and sufficient care is exercised to secure approximate accuracy in the results.

The fact that a given community is selected for the purposes of such a study does not reflect in any way upon the standards of its people. While weaknesses are naturally to be divulged wherever any community is subjected to careful scrutiny, there are merits to be noted as well, a knowedge of which should be available for communities elsewhere. Moreover, it is hoped that the Survey will prove of value, not only to the extent that it reflects the rural-life conditions of a leading township of southern Minnesota, but also in the suggestions it may furnish for undertakings of a similar sort for other regions of the State. To those who feel interested in such work, the coöperation of the Bureau will be freely offered in furnishing suggestive outlines and other information helpful for the purpose.

With due appreciation of the difficulties as well as the importance of studies of this kind, the Bureau of Research in Agricultural Economics has, therefore, undertaken an intensive study of one of the more prosperous rural townships in southern Minnesota. The particular community under review was selected largely because of the information already available from other forms of study made in the same region. During the last ten or twelve years statistics regarding cost of production have been gathered from a number of typical farms in this township. A detailed soil survey of the whole county was made by the Bureau of Soils of the United States Department of Agriculture three years ago. Moreover, a farmmanagement survey aiming to gather data regarding farm practice and returns on all the farms of the same township was being planned simultaneously by the Division of Farm Management of this institution. With these other lines of information available for the same township it seemed fitting, therefore, to engage in a social and economic survey in order to ascertain the larger relations between the life in the township and the outside world. as well as the internal relations between the farm units and local institutions and between the farm units themselves.

In order to secure the necessary information the Bureau proceeded with the consent of the authorities of the University to gather first-hand

data from one hundred and thirty-six families living within an area of thirty-six square miles of rural territory, as well as from the various markets and other agencies tributary to this region.

This field work required the full time of one man during June, July, and August, 1912. While considerable care had been exercised in the preparation of outlines showing kinds of data desired from each of the homes visited, the amount and value of the information gathered depended, of course, to a great extent upon the resourcefulness and tact of the person making the inventory. Fortunately, the field agent selected for this purpose, Mr. G. P. Warber, is a man singularly equipped to undertake such a task. Endowed with unusual native ability and favored with the experience of the average boy from the farm as well as with agricultural and scientific training at the University of Minnesota, Mr. Warber adapted himself readily to a multitude of situations, winning the good-will and confidence of nearly all the people with whom he came in contact. The importance of this becomes apparent as one examines the contents of the following chapters. No small part of the quest under the different topics treated is that of getting the attitude of the rural folks themselves towards the various agencies and institutions in their midst. Much of the merit of the work lies in the inventory of attitudes thus set forth.

While the heaviest part of the work in preparing this Survey has necessarily devolved upon Mr. Warber, credit is also due the chief clerk of the Bureau, Miss Olga Axness, who has tabulated and summarized the different kinds of data and prepared all the diagrams on the following pages. C. W. THOMPSON,

Director