The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1886-05-19
agricultural.
T. H. HOSklNS, m. D., Editor,
Newport, Vermont.
American versus English Farming.

AucTIChH NeTSuS English FARMING.
why is it that the average yield of
wheat on the long-used soil of the
United Kingdom last year amounted to
thlrty-one bushels an acre, while the
average yield on the comparatively new
soil OF this country was only ten and
one-halt bushels? If prices, as seems
likely, are to be lower here in future,
won't 1t be necessary to force the soil
TO yield larger crops, or to abandon
wheat-ralsing altogether, as a source of
loss instead of profit?" This question
was asked, editorially, in a late number
OF the Rural NeW Yorker. l made an
observation to the same effect in late
number of this journal; and, in reply,
my excellent friend, DR.. Hoskins, was
pleased to devote column and half
of the Vermont Guardian sic] to an ex-
position of the superior wisdom and
economy of the American farmer who,
by producing ten and one-half bushels
OF wheat per acre, grew wealthy,
whereas his English brother found no
profit from his trebly superior harvest.
l fancy that the American farmer, in
reckoning up his gains at the end of the
year, imagines that, as the farm is his
own, he pays no rent; but rent is rent,
whether it is viewed as the interest of
the cost of the land or otherwise. A
farm which is worth, as many farms in
the state of New York are worth, say
twenty thousand dollars, is in reality,
rented at twelve hundred dollars year
money being worth, l presume, at
least six per cent, to say nothing of the
interest, at much higher rate, on the
capital invested in stock and imple-
ments.-Montredl Jour. Of Agriculture.
Our Anglo Canadian brother is hardly
fair in crediting the $4,000 New York
farm with only the small average crop
of the whole country. The average
wheat crop of New York in the year
of the last census was II ,5S7 ,766 BUSH
els on 1861 acres, or over seven
teen bushels per acre. This takes in
all the poor farms and poor farming
of the state, and there are probably
very few $4,000 farms in New York,
among those on which wheat is made
a leading crop, where the average yield
would not run very much higher
than the average for the state. In re-
gard to the question of rent, large
proportion of American farmers actu-
ally pay rent in the form of interest on
mortgages covering from fourth to
three-fourths the value of their farms.
The question whether extensive farm
ing, rather than the intensive farming
of England, is not most profitable for
America, is a question of facts not fully
collated or accessible, and like all such
questions is not to be made plain by the |
use of few decisive figures. If, as our
friend seems to insinuate, we were
rather diffuse on the subject, it was be-
cause of our desire to set forth as we'll |
as possible a view of the matter which |
seemed never to have struck him. We |
are as far from thinking as we were
from saying that our farmers are grow
ing wealthy by wheat culture at present !
prices, but we did and do say that our
farming population as whole, by the
profits of their farming as whole, are in
much more comfortable situation than |
those of England to-day. 1t is ques-
ton whether, if the farms of that coun-
try were to pass into the ownership of its
farmers, they would be valued so highly
as now, but we feel sure that if the
farmer in consequence had to reckon
so much less to rent account, he could |
reckon so much more to profit account.
And this is precisely the situation of
American farmers who are out of debt. |
Men in debt are always in bondage,
and farmer in debt is as badly off,
and in some ways much worse, than a
renter.