The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1882-02-16
MORE STOCK LAW FIGURES.
Comparison Between Anderson and
Bornweil Counties.
Corre'Donlence EdyeGld Adrertiser.
COLUMp1A s q Ion Q, 100


Bornweil Counties.
Cn'e'oondence EdgeGeid Adrertiser.
:, COLUMBIA, S. c., Jan. 81, 1882.
-hcssrs. Editors: In your issue of Jan.
uafy ~, which has been kindly forwarded
70 me by friend, l notice quite lengthy
a1u ..1 interesting communication signed
barnwell," in which the writer attem pts
review or Criticism OF some figures on
the STOCK law, that had the temerity to
contribute to the columns or the CHroui.
cfe ana Constnufiondlist. 1t seems to me.
however. that "Barnwell" has written an
aoie article in favor of increasing the
acreage 10 grain, and decreasing the cot
ION prodI ,ion. l agree fully with him
IN this, sd think that we will never be
permanently prosperous until our people
produce what they consume.
In the article alluded 10 by "Barnwell, !"
uia not attempt an argument in favor
OF the stock law, but merely placed the
ngures before the people as shown by the
various reports mentioned; and they must
nave oeen convincing, for "Barnwell"
assumes that l belong to that Certain
Grass that have advocated the passage
OF the law to "oppress" the Certain
class wi'o have opposed it. He says that
my letter was "teeming with Statistical
We'll, 1t occurs to me that his was teem-
ing with assertions easier to make than
70 prove. ANY one can go into the field
OF supposition and make any reasoning
plausible, but it is said that figures don't
lie; therefore, l am perfectly willing to
I:sy rlsk my figures and pounds with the
little earthquake" that "Barnwell"
raised. Perhaps it would be cruel in me
10 answer any of "Barnwell's" assertions
Dy more statistics, as he found tho others
SO "Aauseous," but l will give him an
elmer small dose, and ask him to "take it
TX as 1t will cure him." provided he does
not heave it up before il is dgcsted.
lie asks me to prove that the small
farmers OF the stock law counties get as
much hog meat, beef and butter to eat
or buttermilk to drink, as of yore. Well,
L confess can't answer this by figures,
because haven't the statistics 'of yore,"
out the people in the stock law counties
say .hat they have an abundance of these
good things of life. While / cannot
prove by figures that the stock law coun-
ties are making more Of these things tb an
formerly, except by "Barnwell's" method
- asserting i'll think 1 can prove that
they are producing more beef. butter and
buttermilk than the anti.stock law coun
ties. I'll continue the comparison be.
tween Anderson and Barnwell:
Anderson slaughtered in 1879 I 400
head Of cattle for beef; Barnweli ,O83.
Anderson had 1851 head of cattle ::
Barnwell 20,37S. And yet Anderson
made beef of 1856 head moro than Barn.
well, 5ecause-its the only reasonable
solution-the cattle in Barnwell were too
poor to kill, or had strayed off into the
swamps and could not be found when
beef was wanted. Anderson made 264.-
124 pounds of butter; Barnwell 3S. 1876 !:
and 1T must be remembered that Barn
we'll had Oil more milch COWS than An
derson. suppose it Is O moderate esti-
mate to say that it requires three gallons
of milk to make one pound of butter :.
therefore, Anderson had 1892 gallons
of buttermilk, and Barnwell had to be-
satisfied with 114,585 gallons, because
the people preferred fences to butter.
milk.
"Barnwcll' says: "But there are thou
sands of pounds of butter and cheese
produced in Anderson countyl What of
thai, if only certain class produces
them, and another has to purchase or do
without; any price is q dear one when
paid for what should be raised at home"
Exactly. Then, "Barnwell," why don't
you do like they do in Anderson0ma!.e
1t at home? But perhaps you mean that
all the butter made in Anderson is made
by certain class" -landowners-andi is
sold to the landless, who would otherwise
make their own butter if the stock law
WAS not in force. Supply and demand
regulate the price of oil articles. Now
do the landless make their own butter in
Barnwell? Assuredly not, unless the
census is incorrect; therefore, if they use
1t, they are forced 10 buy, and they could
certainly purchase cheaper in Anderson,
where 260,O00 pounds were made, than
In Barnwell where only $4,000 pounds
were made.
"Barnwell" says: at is not fair to con-
trast high, broken, clay soil, adapted to
grains and grasses, with the fiat, sandy
soil OF Barnwell, bound hand and foot to
the tyrant cotton, where the natural grass
OF the pine barrens and the cane of the
branches and swamps is the best and
cheapest grazing"
Well, let us enquire into this and see
If Anderson is so much better adapted to
the grains and grasses than Bnrnwell. In
1879 Anderson produced I43 bushels of
buckwheat, 492, 2,646 bushels of corn, o.
GLIB bushels of oats, $50 bushels Of rye.
1Ol $50 bushels of wheat, and harvested
81 tons Of hay. Barnwell produced 625
bushels of buckwheat, 1885 bushels of
corn, l40, $50 bushels Of oats, 1856 bush
els of rye, 1867 bushels of wheat, and
harvested s tons of hay. So that Barn
we'll actually largely exceeded Anderson
In buCkwheat corn oats and rye and fell
below Anderson only in the production
toi wheat and hay. And if it had not
been bound hand and foot by tho tyrant
cotton" and expensive fences, it would
doubtless have been ahead in wheat and
hay also. Anderson produced, in even
numbers, bushels of buckwheat per
acre, Barnwell 9; Anderson 8 busbe' "
corn, Barnwell z; Anderson busaols of
oats, Barnwell IA; Anderson bushels
of rye, Barnwell 4; Anderson bushels
of wheat, Barnwell nearly 5. 1t will bo
seen from this that Barnwell produces o
third more buckwheat, twice as much
oats, and as much rye per acre as Ander-
son, while Anderson exceeds Barnwell
only in the production, per acre, of corn
and wheat. The larger acreage devoted
to wheat, and the better yield per acre
obtained, is due to the fact that the
farmers in that county have the time to
properly prepare their soil and plant
their seed, that the Barnwell people
have been giving to building fences.
Now, do not mean to say that the soil
of Barnwell county is as we'll adapted to
grain and grasses as Anderson, but I do
say that the difference is not sufficient to
be used as an argument against the stock