The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 1850-1873, 1873-07-04
naury County Farmers's Club.

A. few OF the members of the Club met
last Saturday, President Ledbetter in
the chair.
The President called d. J. Estes to the
appointed by the Club to write, and
which we print below:
Mr. President aud Gentlemen Of the Mauy Coun-
tn EGrmers's CLUB
At former meeting you imposed upon
me the duty of preparing an essay Tor the
present occasion on the prOpriety of grow
ing Cotton in Tennessee.
consisted in recOunting a succession OF
triumphs in the Iarts of Agriculture in our
State and our permanent betterment as
tiIlers of the soil. But L am unfortunately
spared the pleasure of so agreeable a task.
/ lay down then the proposition, that Ten
neSsee is not adapted to the growing of cot
ton the climate and soil being unfavorable
to that crop. / speak of Tennessee not as
whole, for | am aware that portion OF
West Tennessee may be used to advantage
in growing cotton. / think L shall be able
to prove that in Middle Tennessee at least
it is bad policy to grow cotton ana wen
calculated, if persisted in, to finish up the
rapid impOverishment of our soil now go
ing on, and thereby impoverisb, if not
bankrupt our people.
But to a better understanding of our sub
ject it is proper to take a brief view of our
lands just prior to the cotton mania, some
ten wears ago. And what am about to say
is Intended for the great limestone basin of
Middle Tennessee, and more especially Tor
Maury county, the field of my observation.
Well what was the condltlon OF the lands OF
Maury county ten years ago? To say that
there were no lands in our county worn
and reduced in fertility would be an eXag-
geratiOn; but to say that Maury county was
a county of very superior lands, taken as
whole, would be only uttering truism. But
how is it now? Much of our lands are not
worth cultivating. The renter is becoming
poorer every year, while the landowner is
scarcely mere tOrtunateS for after paying
for REPAIRS OffarIn, tools, etc, together with
sarnFNH IONS ia yynS q
loser in the end. What then is to be done?
But let us go back a little, to account ration
ally for the "cottOn MANIA" The truth Is,
at the close of the late civil war, and little
previous, cotton possessed fabulous mark
ct value; our people were in debt, their
property gone, having been swept away by
The war A few shabby way-worn horses,
mules, few cattle, two poor to tempt the
appetite of hungry soldier, and a few
g,0gdi peTSU aston, composed the live stock of
our once wealthy oOEnty. Thus situated,
our people could not wait to get under way
in StOck-raising, but flew to the cultivation
of cotton as the great panacea for all the
ills of life, debt included. Then say our
people had plausible pretext for engaging
temporarily in the cultivation of cotton,
but certainly not for a blind, suicidal per-
sistence in this branch of agriculture cla-
culated as it was to ruin us in the end.
Now let us look things full in the face, a
thing we will have to do sooner or later, by
asking the question: What have We gained,
II mean net gainsl, by the last ten or twelve
years wholesale destruction of our lands by
the growing of cotton? Show me a farmer
who has worked himself out of debt by
growing cotton, and think will be able
show you five who have worked themselves
deeper in debt by its cultivation. In this,
however, may be mistaken, But the mis-
chief does not stop here, for there can be no
sort of question about it, that our farming
lands have been damaged full One-third in
their intrinsic value within the last ten years.
| This doubtless will seem eXtraVagant, 10
| some at least but ii is true nevertheless,
| and iSone of those unpleasant truths that
| should be kept constantly before our eyes.
But the question for our consideration is,
| will the growing of cotton in Tennessee pay
| us larger net income than any other crop OF
| crops adapted to our soil and climate, bear
| ingin mind at the same time, that our lands
| are our capital mainly, and that whatever
impairs their productiveness is a drain on
our capital. Mark that. Well let us see.
| Maury county in 1863 produced 1857 bales
/ cotton, 400 pounds to the bale, which is al
| lowed in statistics), and sold at IA cents per
| Douud and was worth, therefore, in maKet,
| $50, $50, q little more than half million
| But IA cents per pound is q little below the
| average price for the crOpo of 1869, but about
| as far above the average price for the
| crop of 1870. 1 have therefore taken the
| mean betwixt the the price of the crop OF
| 1863 and IS7A they being consecutive years, in
| order to get the run of prices, and will add
/ that the yield per acre of the crops just
| mentioned but slightly differed. This 1885,
| bales of cotton was grown on 2S,l0l acres Eo1
| land, at three acres TO the bale, winch sup
pose to be about right. Not being cotton