Connecticut western news., 1873-04-11
Shall Farmers Combine?
[Extract from paper read before the Beloit, Wis.
 Farmers Club, by c. D. Fox.l

ests ? No. Is there any occasion for such a combination for such purpose if it were practicable No. In view of the best interest of society, as a whole, of which tie farmer is but part, is such combination for such purpose desirable, even if the object sought could be accomplished? No. Gentlemen, have trained too long in the farmers ranks, my interests, pro- clivities and instincts are too completely welded to our noble calling, to willing ly say one word, or entertain one thought, knowingly, to the prejudice of it's highest interest. l expect to live, while I live, and dying, die hard-tist- ed yeoman and yet, incongruous and suicidal as it may seem to some who pelled to say No modestly, yet firmly, to this whole subject. r' ..s. gas
 It is not practicable to combine to promote our own especial interest first, because such a combination for such purpose is wrong in principle. T need not stop long to prove this. It Is sufficient to be reminded that we, as an industrial class, have often felt and now feel the crushing weight of monopoly. Look at the carrying trade. The full price or two bushel of corn required to get one bushels to the seaboard. With one voice we say Git is wrong." If it wrong when applied to an interest in significant, comparatively, as that of carrying bread to market, what shall we say of monopoly that lays hold of bread itself? I refer to this as repre- sentative instance. We instinctively stamp "wrong" on everything of the kind. But may we not combine in self detence? Two wrongs will not make one right besides, the remedy would be more fatal than the disease in great majority of cases. For be it remem- bered time is necessary to the motion of great bodies, and 8 monopoly, so huge as combination of all the farm ing interests of the nation, would re- quire so much time before results could be reached that the rank and file would be bankrupt, while the shrewd managers feather their nests, just as they do in railroad and other monopolies. Then it is wrong in principle.
 And, second, if it could be accom- plished 1t would be worse in practice. If such combination for such pur- pose is feasible, where is thss guaranty that it will not be abused Such Q movement anticipates a power fearful to contemplate. This power is supposed to be in the hands of soulless monopoly. They are supposed to have power to se- cure their own interest. They are themselves to be the judges as to when that interest is reached. Considering the supreme selfshness of poor human nature, would such a delegation of un- limited power be safe ? To come nearer home-What would be the price of wool year by year, if a few of us could have our say? What would be the price of fuel in this city to-day under the same circumstances Nine or ten dollars a cord seems quite steep enough, no doubt, to those who have to buy, but what would be the price if wood traf- fickers could combine? Is such a com bination, then, safe to the Common wealth
 Not only would such combination be wrong in principle and unsafe in practice, but there is no occasion for such combination for such a purpose. First, the evils necessarily attached to our calling are mostly imaginafy, not real; and the real evils no more nu- merous or irksome or insurmountable by personal effort than those that our brethren of all callings and professions
 1.-TWO UO 1uCC uO every UuLA.
 The fault is not in our stars,
 But in ourselves, that we are underlings.
 Go where you may, in the country, and every now and then you will come across desirable home. The farm is well kept; the house and surroundings have 8 cheerful countenance the out buildings are ample, convenient and comfortable the stock of all kinds "f fat and sleek" You enter the house. The proprietor is hale, intelligent, cheerful and happy the wife ditto, the boys ditto, the girls ditto. There is interest, yea, zeal, in all that relates to the prosperity of their home. Nothing is done by way of drudgery, but every thing with Q will the kitchen is large, the parlor small, and each appropriate ly furnished. Useful books, magazines and papers are not wanting /; and you notice, too, the appliances for the em- bellishment of life are at hand. An easy independence, generous hospitality and Christian fidelity, though unobtru- sive, are yet we'll defined. And you say as you pass on, "I wish were a farmer"
 You say this is picture. We'll, here is another-in natural advantages of soil and climate and location, as desirable as the other but what a difference The land is reduced by unskillful hands to the verge of starvation. Dilapidation is everywhere half famished stock roam at large over bare fields, or seek shelter from the Decemberwind under Q
 broken wire fence-hollow horn, mur-
 rain, glanders and epizoot - what a
 sight You turn in at the front gate
 that creaks dolefully on one hinge, and
 find your difficult way through thorns
 and thistles and mullen and pig-weed to the door; you knock for admission a vinegary voice bids you come in. You enter desolate place, and are :: now prepared to meet the peevish dame and half a score or more of children o1 l kempt hair, from oldest to youngest l filth You inquire for MT. Slouch. He has gone to town to-day. He went yes terday, and day before, and five days 1T . every seven ever since he was farmer } and he has been seated on the same dry goods box whittling the same, shingle l Some call it "loafing." You turn away 5 and say you are glad you are not farm ) CT. Well, our friend of the shinglt says: Farming don't pay" But farm
 CT No. l was satisfied, and so was hi family; but No. 2 is dissatisfied; saysh' has missed his calling; should have 9 turned his attention to law, medicine O. 5 divinity, dry goods, grocery, ora saloon l in short anything butthis tedious mon : otonous farming And his amiabl, f spouse is sure she would have beer t vastly more amiable had she married } prosperous merchant or popular at 5 torney. It may be so. He may hay , found his depth in some of the so-call l ed learned professions. But the grant g probability is, he would not have sue :; ceeded any better at any calling. Sue