The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1867-11-19

which is reprinted in the Christian
World, from the New York Ledger.
1t is strange that Whittier
poems have not been reprinted in
England The English public are
ignorant of the existence of that
= Bard of Freedom" / have fallen
in with several literary persons who
never had heard of him. Is. it be-
cause he has been so true to freedom,
so much in sympathy with the OPP
pressed, that the purveyers of litera-
ture have not thought it wise to in
troduce him to English society, Hest
his genius should stir the hearts of
millions here as it has in the United
States?
Books written by Americans Care
sold by the hundred thousand per
annun in England, for which the
authors do not receive a penny. Eng
liSh publishers sometimes pay an au-
thor trife for the advance sheets of
his book, but | have yet to learn that
an English publisher has done that
which some of the American pub
fishers are doing in the absence of
international copyright-paying the
author per centage on the sale of
his works.
Tennyson, Dickens, THE CeHn-
try Parson.' Miss Muloch, Anthony
Trollope, Mayne Reid, Mrs. Charles,
and many other English authors, may
count upon receiving a fair per cent
age from American publishers. |
doubt if any American author has
ever received any such treatment from
E-~l.-L II rro.ri1 - h
understood as saying that all Ameri-
can publishers are up to this high
standard of dealing; but, as rule,
courtesy in this matter is on the side
of the Americans, and piracy the
practice of the English. Is there
any reason why this system of rob-
berry should be carried on? The in
ventor of a rat-trap can patent the
wonderful product of his genius In
England and receive the benefit, what
ever it may be; and why should not
Longfellow, Bancroft, Motley, and all
those who have made and are. making
American literature, and the. Ameri-
can name honored among thesnations,
have like chance as the hands-of
Congress to receive some pecuniary
reward tortheir years of mental tot?
Can any member of Congress, or any
body in the wide world, give areasen
why there should not be law of in-
ternational copyright?
Since writing the above, 1 have
found in the Daily NeIOs an article
copied from the Atlantic Monthly on
this subject, which puts the whole
subject in the strongest light.
SYSTEMATIC AGRICULTURE.
The Journal is read by many far
mer's freside in New England, and
the information which / give in the
of this letter will, [ trust,
not be uninteresting to that class of
your patrons:
| compile some statements made In
the Reuue des Deuc MOndeS of Paris,
contrasting the agriculture of Ger
many with France, but treating more
writer states that up to 1888 farming
in Europe was as it had been from the
time of Charlemagne-a rotation of
two years In cereals and one in fall
low. Since then the system has been
mainly two years of cereals, alternat-
ing with potatoes, turnips, carrots,
beets, or clover. The result has been
a great increase of-neat stock; cOnse- |
quently an increase of manure and a |
diminution of unproduetive fallow
from one third to one-seventh.
France has gone on mainly IN her |
old Way-the area of fallow land be- |
ing about the same now that it was
a third of a century ago. The writer
has taken all the live stock of Ger
horses. asses, swine =
and reduced them to the value of
horned cattle, and he finds by the
A griculturak Census of 1865 Germany
had 100 .nits of such value for every
1913 inhabitants. while France had
en- Y 100 units to 1S5 people. Going
years, he finds that the po-
sitions of the two countries was ex-
actly the reverse of what it is at the
present time =
Germany, as welEas France, manu-
features nearly all her own sugar
from beets. In 1881 the product was
three million pounds of sugar, in
1865 it had reached the enormous
amount Of three hundred.and Seven
ty- FIVE million pounds This is North
Germany, and does not include the
States of Baden, Bavaria, and Wur-
Under the improved sys-
tenn of agriculture, land has advanced
upon an average $50 per cent. Most
striking is the difference in popula-
ton. From 1916 to 1860, fourteen
years, North Germany added in round
nun bers one million to its agricultur-
al populations, while France, during
the same period. lost seven hundred
thousand of its farming population
The writer inquiries into. the cause
Of this marked divergence. of the twoJ