The Pulaski citizen. [volume] (Pulaski, Tenn.) 1866-current, 1877-11-29
Ehe Granger
The Business Feature of Farming.


be thought of merchant who woulC
keep no account of the state of hi'
business-would make no entries
of his sales and expenses-of hi:
profits and losses? He would bt
set down as a very careless business
man and destined TO come to grie
sooner or later. Why should no
the same opinicn be formed of :
farmer who would adopt the same
course? Is his business less i'm
| portant than that of the merchant
is it not equally as much SO, de-
handing equal system, accuracy
and care? Thus it must be vie wed
What is the habit of most of our
farmers on this subject? Do they
keep books, make entries and pre-
pare a balance sheet of the years
operations? Not one in q thousand.
They do not know whether they
are making or losing money. At
the end of the year they can't tell
how they stand, neither on the
road to prosperity or approaching
bankruptcy. This is not the condi-
ton of the merchant, for he is gov
erned by business prir ciples, as al
ready minated Periodically he
takes careful inventory of hi ;
stock, and knows exactly where he
stands. 1t is rarely the case that
he takes an inventory of his cattle,
horses, sheep, mules, corn, wheat,
rye, oats, hay, and so on. He does
not set down the value of his farm,
his work stock, his surplus stock.
the labor he employs, the quality of
grain and provender necessary to
feed his stock, the taxes he has to
pay and his family supplies. All
this should be accurately noted and
the interest on the investment
clearly understood. This is the
debtor side of the account that the
law of self preservation rigidly de
mands should be Enthusiastically de
fined. He is equally Indifferent as
TO the credit side of the account.
He keeps no record OF his sales. If
he disposes of his various crops and
his surplus stock, he makes no note
of it, and, consequently, strikes no
balance sheet at the end of the year.
Hence, he is in fatal ignorance as to
how he stands, whether. he is max
ing or losing money. In word, he
knows nothing of his business.
We know of no more essential
qualification to a farmer than a
thorough knowledge of book keep
ing. In England it is an indispen
sible qualification, and book keep
ing is matter of necessity on every
estate. Why should not the same
qualification be insisted upon among
American farmers?
There is no reason why they
should be less intelligent in this re
spect THAI English farmers. They
have as much at stake. The same
business principles are involved,
and the same results are to be at
tanned. Farming pays in England
because business principles lie I'M
derneath it. If it does not pay in
it is because of the loose !
and disjointed manner in which it
is managed. The wonder is 1t pays
as well as it does. If the merchant
were to conduct his business in the
same way, he would 90 into bank
ruptcy in less than twelve months. |
1t would be impossible for him to
survive. 1t is absurd in the ex-
IRENE to suppose that farmer can
make his business profitable when
le ignores all business principles in
rs management. 1t is owing to the
absence of these that there are so
'ew of us successful-thato our
profits are so meagre, and that we
are ''hard rum from January to
anuary. 1t is the absence of these
principles that has raised the howl
I'll over the country that farming
won't pay" OF course, it won't
)ay" after this fashion. On the
contrary, it will keep our noses to
he grindstone" all our days and
our children after we
re dead. The idea that any num-
kul can be a successful farmer has
'rought a serious, if not fatal
light upon agriculture in this coun-
ry. We must explode this idea.
We must denounce it unsparingly,
nd take the high ground trat farm
ng should be conducted upon the
anne business principles governing ]