Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1859-01-08
miscellaneous.
AGRICULTURAL

NNeo tfO"
"Our land docs not produce tco-hirds as much
no,c as Il did fifteen years ago"
SO writes a farmer from a region which cannot
have been settled more than from twenty to thirty
years.
Our reflection is. that the farmers there cannot
90 worth more than two-thirds Us much as they
would have been if they had 50 managed their land
90 to increase instead Of diminishing its product
i%veness.
There may DO exceptions-some men may be
keen enough to make money and wear out their
land by the same operation. But the general rule
10 the reverse Of this-that the moot profitable bus.
bsndry i'm improves the land, and that the husbandry
which deteriorates the land is not profitable. We
hold that o farmer Of only ordinary means cannot
afford to make bis own land poorer and that, even
If he were cultivating another mans land for a sue.
cession Of years. he could not possibly afford to
leave it much worse than he found it.
Less Land or More LqJor- Which I've arc not
one ofthoso who indiscriminately small
farms. We fear there is a tendency in small farms
to make small men and We deprecate the idea
that the farmer is to he a man to be looked down
upon by men in other O%allings. There has been
enough of that in the history of this world, and
W. hnuh W q " UiCs u
would seem better to get u good living from ten
acres than to fail of a living from a hundred.
In another place We have intimated that it is
cheaper to make land more productive than to wear
it out, as the phrase is that, If we enrich the land,
u enriches us and that if we impoveIish it, it i'm.
poverishes US. Something like q demonstration Of
this kind would crafty some of our readers. This
wo will attempt and what we have to say shall
be in close connection with our motto, LESS land
or moro labor"
That it is cheaper to raise a farm to a higher
than to sink it to lower productiveness is our prop
osi,ion and what We mean by it is, not that it
costs more labor to diminish than to increase the
productive power Of soil, but that it does require
more unpaid labor to wear out q soil by a ten years
cultivation than to enhance its producl.veness in
the same timo.
To simplify as much as may DO, we will suppose
here are three acres of arabic land now in turf, and
Of a fair quality, to be cultivated respectively by
A, B, and c for the next ten years. A is q calcu.
lating, thinking farmer, in no way oxtravagant,
but willing TO expend money and labor where he
sees q reasonable prospect Of a return with profit.
B is a careful soul, willing to labor. but as shy Of
oil other expense for crops as of the itch. c takes
IL easy. and will reap what his land will give, with.
out giving it back much CT either labor or manure.
Indian corn we will suppose to be the crop the
Hrss year. A turns over the turf in November to
good depth harrows in fifty loads of compost in
the spring, made, it may be, of twenty loads Of
barn manure and thirty loads Of something which
his industry and ingenuity have gathered up at a
cheap rate for the purpose plants the best variety
Of corn that he can get any certain knowledge OF
about the middle of May tends the crop well, and
gets eighty bushels to the acre.
B wants all his manure for other crops, and
thinks this turf-laud will do pretty well without
manure. lie plows in May, five or six inches deep.
but very nicely. His team is not strong enough to
pillow much deeper and, as for paying for extra
team work and manure to warm the deep soil that
wouli be plowed up, he cannot think of it. Farm
ing, in his opinion, is not a business to spend mon
ey in, but to get money by. But be plants in good
season, tends the corn well all summer, and gets
thirty bushels.
c takes it easy plows when it is most conven'
lent plants and hoes when nothing binders; does
tho work ~shabbily, according to his wont and,
more by provid entail favor than by his skill and
industry, gets sixteen bushel of decent corn and
plen. Of pig ears.
Now B has done more work than c A has ex
pended more labor than either, besides a costly
m~an6ring and, if the race ended here, they nigh
not come out SO unequally.
But suppose oil three to follow the corn cror
with rye, and seed with clover, herdsgrass, ans
Yodtop in April. 1t is not unreasonable to sup
pose that A will get twenty-five bushels. B viii
have nothing to complain of if he gets fifteen bush
els. If G gets more than ten he ought to be thank
full But these crops cost one no more than til,
other. And now a is fairly ahead-has been be,
ter paid for his outlay. But this is only the be
ginning.
The third year A gets two aud a half tons of hay
j one and three. fourths, and c not moro than on
and o half at best besides that, AS acre will pas
ture a COW well from the middle Of July to wiute,
whereas the feed on BIS and Cs is of but ittl
worth. Next year the disparity will be still greal
or, il all three acres are kept to Craze without fui
ther manure. AS acre will produce more value
though perhaps less quantity, both Of hay and fa
feed. than the previous year. BIS grass will hav
nearly and C's quite run out. Neither will b
much more than werth cutting and as for fall feed
cows that arc condemned to it will give but it'll
milk and make less butter and if they have mucI
pluck, will be apt to break fence and seek bette
fare. especially those on C's premises, where fence
cannot be exI ected to be ov r and above good
We suppose our readers have noticed that poor fer
ees generally keep company with shallow cultur
and poor feed, on the old principle that birds of
feather flock together"
BY this time the expenses Of BIS and Cs culIivt
siDn will have been more than hall as much as th'
Of a. but AS return will have more than double
sksirs.. Nor is this all. AS land has now a deeI
ar. richer turf than theirs-is in far better cond
tion for another round OF crops.
We intended to have gone through with the r,
naming six years. But il is unnecessary. ou
readers will understand that if calculating A., an
careful B. and careless G were to 20 on in thei
respective ways to the end of ten years there woul
ha q Lila diHaranca In tia ual,a nf4la;. - &.