Arkansas true Democrat., 1861-07-11
Ths Agricuitufal aesoaress of the seash

.s Ths Agricultural Resources of the seuth The producing capacity of the South is appreciated but little by foreign nations and the people of the North; indeed here at home we are not as self-reliant as the facts will allow us to be. We do not under stand our own strength. On this subject we find an interesting communication ill the Baltimore Sun, from which we extract as I follows:
 We find every yboiy, almost, entertain l ing the mistaken notion (which find in 1 the London Times of the 3d inst, too--but l don | wonder at It since 1t gets its intorma- tion from the North. that the northern | States are and the southern States not. pro ducing States. There never was greater mistake. With your consent will call public attention to some striking and inter esting facts in this connection, to show that the bug bear of Starving out the South,' and cutting ofsupplies, < etc, may be said with ease, but done with much difficulty. will select first, South Carolina to run the parallel with, for several reasons, the chief of which are that she has been supposed to produce nothing but cotton and rice, and she is the most derided and con- temned of all the slaveholding States. Not many persons are aware that this State alone produces five sixths nearly of all the rice grown, but the seventh census of 1850 shows that to bs the fact; besides nearly all the rice, she produces wheat to within 5000 bushels of all produced by the six New England States together. She pro- duces almost as much corn as the State of New York; and 5000, 900 of bushels of that grain more than all the New England States together, for she produced upward of 16,- OO0, 900 of bushels. She produced more oats than Maine; more by 1000, 900 bush els than Massachusetts; more than 1,000,- 000 of bushels of potatoes over and above what Maine produced; more beans and peas by lS0, ,000 than all the northern States to- yether, except New York more beef cattle than Pennsylvania by 1,740, and almost as many as all the New England States togeth- CT; more sheep than Iowa and Wisconsin by 10,690; more hogs than New York by A. ,25l; more than Pennsylvania by 25,l37, and 86, 900 more than all the New England States, with New Jersey, Michigan, Wis consn and California in the bargain; more horses and mules by 10000 than Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Rhode Island together; besides all which she pro- duses largely of oxen, cows and a variety of products of the smaller kinds.
 Virginia and North Carolina produced
 jointly 13, 363 coo bushels of wheat, or 241, 900 bushels more than the great wheat State of New York, or quantity equal to the whole product of the six New England States, with New Jersey, Michigan, Iowa and Wisconsin, all put together. Virginia, North Carolina and Tennessee produced ll5,47l ,563 bushels of corn, quantity ex- ceeding by BOG, 900 bushels the joint pro- duet of New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine.
 Tennessee alone produced lG 5O6 more hogs than all the New England States. with New York. Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Iowa and Michigan, for that State produced ,, 104, 800 hogs, while the eleven northern States produced but BOSS, 304 Most peo- tle have thought that the North was really the hog producing section. but such is by no means the fact--he whole number of hogs produced in 1850, 30. 3l6, ,60S-of which the slaveholling States furnished 20,- 770, 730, or more than two thirds of the whole swine production.
 It will doubtless surprise many persons to be told that the gnlfor cotton States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mis- sissippi, Louisiana anl Texas, produced 45, 1S7 more beef cattle than the six New England States, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey. Indiana. Michigan and for the census of 1850 tells us that these seven cotton States produced 3,35S, ,4S9 beef cattle, while the thirtceen northern States named produced but 3.3l2327.
 A single glance at the live stock columns of the seventh census will prove to the en- quirsr that the slaveholding States produc- ed more beef cattle than the non -slavehold ing by 1,72S, 5S7. That while the North produced 3, 541, l21 cows, the South pro- duced 2,829,S1 That the Northern States produced S66, ,397 work oxen, against S20,- 340 produced by the southern States. That while the North produced J, BIC, ,962 horses and mules-the South produced 250, ,358 more for the southern production was F. 570 ,320.
 In conclusion, as the people have been so much in the habit of conceding superior ity to the North, in these and other points eff view, may be tine above statements may be doubted; if so refer the skeptical 10 the seventh census of 1850, the last date we have,