The Lake County star. [volume] (Chase, Mich.) 1873-current, 1877-09-06
MAcHINE VS.. HAND LABOR.

Does it pay small farmers to buy
moving and reaptlig machines? There
can be no question that 1t Is good econ-
omy for those who have large breadths
of hay and grain to keep mowers and
reapers, but what of those whose oper-
ations are on a limited scalef There
are many men running fifty-acre
farms who would not think them
selves equipped for their business
without these machines. Yet we
doubt the wisdom of investing the
amount of money such implements
cost, unless there be time and Oppor-
tunity to cut grass and grain for 9TH
ers. Necessity compelled us to forego
the purchase of one of these machines
the present season. We begin to
think, after one trial, that we shall
hardly find 1t profitable to buy one al
all. Five acres of barley had to be cut
with the scythe. much of it being too
short in the straw to reap with ma
chine. We Graded one acre of bearded
wheat which ripened in advance of
five acres of the bald kind, and we are
grading eight acres of oats. We hired
the cutting of fifteen acres of clover
and timothy, and five acres Of wheat,
in all twenty acres, at so cents an acre.
A combined machine would have cost
say $40, the interest on which at eight
per cent. would nearly amount to our
outlay the present season. Will u ma
chine last ten years? If so, count So
a year expense, What will breakages
and repairs cost? We have no idea,
but we continually hear Of neighbors
requiring new parts, or mendings.
So or So a year would, we suppose, be q
moderate estimate. Altogether, it
would cost, if our calculation be correct,
somewhere in the neighborhood of SOS
a year to keep q machine. Thisamount
will pay for the cutting of fifty acres of
grain and grass. We conclude that a
farmer should have at least fifty acres
of moving and reaping to do, or 1t is
not good policy to buy a machine. 1t
seems to us there are several of the
more costly machines that four or half
adozen farmers might own in common
to advantage. A 2-horse. power
thresher is one of these. A feed mill
is another. A clover hulfer is third.
1t requires the outlay OF too much
money thoroughly to equip small
farm with all the implements 1t Is de.
sirable to have, and either partnership
or hiring seems inevitable In the case
of small farmers, whose means, like
their holdings, are small. Wholesome
farmers are crippled for want of needed
implements, Others are impoverished
by an over-supply. 1t is the fashion
to have them; agents are numerous
and very persuasive; neighbOr A. has
one, and it is humiliating to be behind
him; 80 the implements are bought,
on credit, very. likely; crops do not
turn out as expected, extension oftime
must be obtained, or money borrowed,
and in either case interest draws like
the worst of blisters. Is not. this the
way that many farmers get their
hands tied and find themselves in
financial straits? We do not underrate
the convenience of having full supply
of the best labor-saving implements;
In fact, we rather envy some of our
neighbors who are well off I'm this re-
spect; but is IL not better to put up
with some inconvenience rather than
be hampered with debt and drained
dry by interest? This may be an old
fogy view of the subject, but 1t Is one
we cannot help INDUCING, and we are
inclined to think we shall stick to ii,
and act upon 1t. We approve Of the
old farmers advice TO his son, to avoid
debt II possible, and If he went In debt
at all, let 1t be for manure. ~ a
= II.