Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1854-07-15

Thus presenting the extraordinary average valns of
'arminG lands, in the nine first named aud commercial
states per acre at s25 35, while in the nine last named az
reututal States the average value Of farming lands
acre is s5 46. We find that the fanin lands in the
hrs named aud commercial States arc worth at cash val
uanon nearly hye times as much, similar lands in the
nine last named agricultural States Yet the nine agr
cultural States excel the former iu the value OF their
Grsat staple productions. These astonishing fcts
and demand great consideration. We may account for
ms disparity oy ascring portion Of it TO the uneq1al
action oil the Federal Government but the greater
doubtless owing tothe wealth derived from commerce
Federal legislation and disbursements may have given a
great impulse to every variety Of business in the Northern
aud Eastern States but 20 commercial thsy
mainly Indebted for their unprecedented prosperity
These tabular statements show ,ha. the average value
o farming lands in the aijoning state OF Marylani Il,
SIS 81 per acre, while ours Is estimated IS 91 per
acre But the average value OF the farming lands in The
District OF Columbia To the last Is put at the epor
nous sum Of sos O3 per acre These facts ourh; To
atouse us to prompt aud decided action. What but the
commerce Of Baltimore has given Maryland such decided
advantages over Virginia 10 the value Of her lands? Can
fail to perceive that the isolated District OF Columbia
owes s superiority In the value Of w lands over both Ma,
iyand aud Virginia to the combined advantages resulting
from the action Of the Federal Government and tbs
trade Of Washngton Georgetown end AeKaudria? Does
any believe that in;rpscily the land, Of Msrvl,nd
productive vsuible than those OF our State
Can We suppose that the NeE Engsnd lands are "a rich
productive the lands Of Kentucky, Tennessee MIS-
souri, Mississippi Alablmaf Yet the farming land, in
the Latter, valued at about So % per acre while
farming lands in the former are estimated a, an average
oi Sg2 40. The farming lands In Michigan are valued At
sl ss acre while those Of Kentucky are placed at
only 50 el In Ohio farming lands are valued at siq o.
p, sce ~hle those ~ Missouri estimated at s6 so
per acre. Are the lands in Missouri and Kentucky
ntrioscay about equal to those In Michigan and Ohio
Yet ubs, astonishing disparity in cash Violation. We
sscbe ,hs dherenc. 10 values to ar7hlns az ls
gitmae;y, a. to tho benefits aowng om the superior
commercial enterprise Of the two more rortunatc States
The farming lands in Vrguia estimated In the census
returns at sll scres which the average valua
tion Of S2I per aero is worth t2l64lO4ll Suppose
the people by advocating and encouraging nduca srol,
extension Of our commerce. sud a. Consequence were
to double the present value Of farming lands or e..
vte theic cash price up 10 Ito Maryland standard Of
tlssl per acre who could calculate the direct and incl.
dental benefits resulting 70 all the great interests OF IN
stef Who does u 80 well bee1me 70 take the initiative
in this gteai improvement the county people Under
this impression respectfully invite The co operation and
aid OF ell parties all INTEREST," aud all elasses II true to
heuscvesh alive to the uturc prosperity Of the State
we trust they will actively snj efficiently e1e.t them
selves in This great common cause The i,cis heretofore
sdduced Telsve TO the extraordinary average value OF
the farming lands 10 those States enjoying the Joint al.
Vantssss Of eomtnerce aud agriculture sdmonsh that