Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1868-10-07

Indian tribes, of 81 ,443 1922, there were
, l73. 1O4 .924 bushels of wheat produced, or
5 so bushels to each inhabitant, showing an
increase of one bushel and One-sixth to each
inhabitant, or an increase in proportion to
population of over twenty-five per cent;
The New England States with population
of 2,72S,II6 in 1850, produced 1000 1874
bushels. or only thirteen quarts to each
inhabitant In 1860, with a population OF
3 ,135 .2s3, the New England States produced
,OS3, 1913 bushels, or about eleven quarts
and a half to each inhabitant. The fifteen
slaveholding States, in 1850, with popula-
ton of 9,69S ,487, produced q .o19 ,426
bushels, nearly three to each inhabltant
The same States in 1860, with a population
of liz, 6S3, produced so ,OS0, $40 bushels
of wheat, or little over four to each lnhab-
liant.
The non-slaveholdiug States and territories,
, in 1850, with a population of IA 49,, 1888,
produced ~, 5SS ,518 bushels, or five to each
inhabitant The same States and Territories
in 1860, with population of 10 ,330, 500,
produced 123 ,O24 .2S2 bushels of wheat, or
about six and one-third bushels to each inhab-
liant. To recapitulate: The production of
wheat in the whole United States and Terri
tories was four and One-third bushels in 1850
to each inhabItant and in 1860 five and a
half bushels to each inhabitant.
In the New England States the production
Of wheat in 1850 was thirteen quarts to each
inhabitant, and in 1860 only eleven quarts.
Thus while the total increase of the product
throughout the country averaged one and
One-slXth bushels to each inhabitaut, on an
average yield of five and a half bushels New
England actually lost on her annual produc-
ton between these years on the very small
yield of thirteen quarts to each inhabitant,
about fifteen per cent. Such record should
he wiped out. There is no reason why it
should not be. The Census Report says, in
the report from which the above extracts have
been made: THAT wheat can be grown in
New England there is abundant evidence
There is scarcely a soil in which it cannot be
grown. at least occasionally. We have seen
good wheat produced in Connecticut as in
western New York in Ohio -
- 1t has been said that the reason why
New England produces so little wheat is on
account of the exhaustion of the soil. We
believe the soil proper is as rich in New Eng
land as it ever was, and that it can be made
highly productive has been proved in repeat
ed instances. =
The census superintendent quotes John
Adams's remarks on the untitness of New
England for wheat culture as follows: g Full
fifty years have L observed, inquired, read,
and tried experiments to raise wheat in New
England. The result is total despair"
Speaking of some experiments by Josiah
Quincy with Siberian wheat he says - He
(Nlr. Quincy succeeded very well had fine
crop, which suffered nothing from the Hessian
fly, mildew, blasting, or weevil. Enthusi-
asm was excited in the neighborhood, all the
seed he could spare was purchased at a high
price for sowing. My wife purchased some
bushels others more. Quincy himself sowed
the greatest part of all he had. Expectations
were high that it would become the staple OF
New England. The neat year 1oe all failed
every plant of it blasted, and seed, labor, and
all were totally lost. - - Notwithstanding
all this he further says. 81 have no doubt
wheat may be raised in Massachusetts as well
as anywhere else but the land must be I'M
der proper cultivation, particularly manured
abundantly, the seed sOwn SO early that it
may be forward and vigorous enough to bear
the winter, and start early enough in the
spring to shoot the grain and ear forward be-
fore the season of insects. But this process
which | know has succeeded, and will succeed
is expensive, and the wheat will not procure
price equal TO the labor. -
New England then can grow wheat, but il
viii cost more than it will realize.
bir. Adams contradicts in his own letter
his assertion that it will not grow here, anC
we all have seen as iourishing wheat felds
in our eastern States any that the wes
can boast of. On glancing over the state
ments on crops, entered for premium at ON
agricultural fairs, we find numerous instan-
ces of the very successful cultivation of thi'
grain, ard that it is profitable, and there is
hardly one among our readers, who, having
given any attention to the matter does not
know that with proper care in cultivation ii
is as certain many of the other grains
That it cannot be sold at a price Temunera
tive above the cost of production is absurd
At the present rates of wheat and flour, il
ought to be as profitable as any other cereal.
-PIoughn1an