Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1886-01-14
Continued from Filst Page.

Eaae 10 less pleASuTe-SeSheI. 1hSuSA
sejsyinf genuine Independence which
ae othsr naH can boast, be is by no
sseans g wealthy man, aud he has deep
ssase Of the constant necessity OF turn
ing everything which he buys, and eve
rythins which hs does. to the best praeN
,Issl account. in order to reslize a profit
from his business EvsrythiHs, there
fere. which is to permkaeatly claim the
asteHtion and cozmsnd the purse Of the
farmer must appeal to him through bis
great appreciation Of tue useful. This
is ne more true Of the farmer as u tiller
of the sell than Of the farmer as stock
Taissr. II be does net buy an improved
variety Of wheat sslsly for the purpose
of furnishing q more beautiful field of
waving gold On which to feast bis eyes.
he is but little more likely to purchase
handsome horse, or cow.or sheep, simply
to adorn his landscape. The new wheat
is souEht in the expectation Of securing
more and bstter grain, and the improved
horse, sheep, or COW, an assured gain In
their products or service.
The ultimatum OF fine stock breeding
is the general introduction of improved
domssticated animals on the farm. There
is nothing elss which can justify Amer
ican stockmen for the time, business en-
ergy and capital which are absorbed in
their work Looking at the matter in
this light, is their object, outside OF the
nercsnsry one Of temporary proht,a real
liable and desirable consumnat,on? The
anewer to this question, which is of VI
tsl Importance to American agriculture,
rests wholly in the determination OF the
relative intrinsic value to our farmers
of the stock which breeders would give
us, and IF that which We really have. In
the matter of comparative merit alone is
involved the rsasouableness or the INV
reasonxblensss of the change which the
advanced stockmen ofths country would
introd ace. In short, the breeder is USE
full according as mis- wsrk is valuable TO
the farmer; and on this ground, by the
way, it is certainly most amply vindica-
ted.
But let US suppose, for moment, that
there is no adequate ground for showing
a preference for improved over native
domesticated animals. On this hypoth-
esIs ths most progressive, intelligent and
prosperous farmers in the world stand
convicted of cohsummate folly. The
time, and paias and brains devoted to
developing and fixing special types Of
stock have been simply thrown away.
The volumes upon volumes and periodic
Gals Hpon periodicals issued in the advo
cacy of systematic breeding have no
mere actual value than the literature of
the nursery. Fat stock shews, the live
stock departments of agricultural fairs,
public stock sales, breeders meetings,
ETC., are on this theory only parts of a gi
gantie system of tomfoolery.
The S5. 10000 spent in the last fiscal
year for imported brseding stock was
utterly wasted. The uncounted millions
now invested in high class hocks and
herds all over this broad land are as
hopslessly impotent for good as though
they had been swallowed up in the pock
ct of defaulting cashier and carried to
Canada. To sum it up, this superstition
contravenes what are in these days cont
sidered the foundation principles of
prosperous agriculture.
None of US, perhaps. appreciate the
full significance Of all this; nor could
we do so unless We should, by some fell
power, be suddenly deprived Of all the
good which past progress in fine stock
breeding has given US. The measure of
this good, as investigation reveals it, is
SO izcalculably vast that it cannot be
adequately represented by figures. This
feet, of which an occasional man is os-
ten,iblg skeptical, is intuitively rscogniz-
ed to such great extent by thinking
people that to it without hesitation they
pin their agricultural faith. In spite of
the discouragement of woolgrowers, the
apprehensions of cattle feeders and dai
rynen. and the fears OF ultimate over>
production INDUCED in by growers of
swine, there is sn undercurrent of popu
lar belief unsbaken and unshzkable, that
the future material greatness of this
Nation will depend as much upon the
increased merit of its farm stock as
upon any other source of wealth.
1t is not the purpose of this paper,
then. te try TO proVe that what is known
as "well-brsd" stock really is, per se,more
profitable to the farming community
than our native scrubs. Taers was
time when course of argument bearing
on this point would have been in place
but that is forever past, and 1t is safe
to assume as true what 30 one who is
sufficiently progressive to attend an ag-
rioultural gathering will dispute. The
idea is rather to bring out few practi-
cal points relating TO merit, such as crop
outin the daily business intercourse be-
tween farmers aud stnckmen.
Comparative merit as shown by rival
breeds is gsEmane feature of the subs
ject in hand which connot be introduced
with profit in discussion of this kind.
Ner is it certain that its introduction
would bs absolutely safe before an audi
ence in which the breeders Of many dif4
fsrsnt straihs of stock are represented.
4 farmers meeting is not the place to
bring up vexed questions whose discus
sion only intensifss prejudice, unless by
that process they could be forever set
tlad. Aud when it is remembered that
the verdict Of jury composed Of the
seven wise men OF Greeee aud solomon
himself, would not be taken as final in
matter of this kind, it is donbly patent