Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1861-11-28
From the Rural Register.
ENGLISH HUSBANDRY.

The Hon. Henry F. French, has furnish
ed for the Agricultural Report Of the Patent
Office, an article of marked ability in rela-
ton to the system Of husbandry practiced
in England. It is altogether too long for
extract, but its leading points are well wor-
thy of some comments.
The average of the crop of wheat in the
United States does not exceed nine and one
eighth bushels per acre. The average acre
able product of the same grain for all Scot
land is twenty y-nine and half bushels
The average of the great grain growing
States Of New York, Indiana and Ohio show
but twelve bushels. Illinois and Missouri
but eleven bushels. Iowa but fourteen
bushels per acre. The average crop of all
the wheat lands in England is estimated at
twenty-eight bushels to the acre. The great
secret of the success of the English farmer
lies, in the opinion of the French, in the
low price of agricultural labor. 'Wemay,"
he says, admire the clean cultiyation-the#
result of SO much ploughing and cultiva-
ting-of hand hoeing and hand wedding Of
their wheat crops but whether it is possible
for us to follow their example depends main
ducing the crop, and its price in market"
In another place he remarks -''were the
English farmer obliged to pay sAmerican
prices for the labor on his farm for term
of Eve years he would be ruined" This,
however, appears to US but single phase
of the question, and it by no means accounts
for the extraordinary crops which the Eng
lish farmers raise, and, very frequently. on
lands not naturally fertile It is the skill
full application of labor to given end-the
selection of judicious rotation Of crops. the
adoption of a system of deep ploughing and
thorough drainage, and the free use of COM
mercial manures, which constitute the es-
sential differences between English and
American farming. Most Of the English
farmers are the tenants of large landed pro-
prietors. They hold their farms on long
leases-they bind themselves to lay out so
much money annually in the improvement
of the land-they are obliged by the terms
of their leases to keep 50 much Of the land
under the plough, and so much in grass and
permanent pasture, and, above all, they are
thoroughly educated to the duties which
they have undertaken to perform. These
tenant farmers pay to the landlord heavy
rental, and are, therefore, obliged to exert
themselves to the utmost to maintain the
soil in the highest degree of fertility. They
are not poor men, but men of substance,
who can, and do. frequently, expend twen-
ty, thirty, and fourty thousand dollars or
more IN Improvements upon property in
which they hold but a leasehold interest.
They look to the increase of crops to re-
munerate them for the outlay before the
lease expires, and they rarely fail to COM
pletely reimburse themselves with interest
during the period they occupy the land
Mr.. French, therefore, is wrong, when he
attributes the principal difference observable
between English and American farming to
the low price Of labor in England, for that
difference is more than set of by the fact
that the English farmer pays high rent
for his land. whilst our farmers own the
land which they till. The greater value of
all kinds Of agricultural produce is indeed
an advantage on the side of the English
agriculturist; but there is also partial set
of to that in the enormous taxes which he