The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1888-05-26

money as possible upon his farm adjuncts
in the shape of improvements, fences,
and buildings, aud making it his primary
view of realizing the largest money re-
turns from every acre had grown rich,
without regard to tue mere appearances
of his farm premises or buildings.
Discussion on the question of farming
methods 10 reference To the net income
earned by farmers as suggested by Mr..
Coudon being in order, Nj. Thomas G..
Bond thought that while the appearance
OF farmers land and buildings was
generally Indicative of his methods of
farming and whether he was thrifty
farmer or not, he did not advocate such
systems of farming as sacrificed every
other consideration TO mere money max
ing. In other words he believed a rea-
sonable portion of the income of every
farm should be spent in main Gaining
proper and necessary improvements upon
it. That a slip.shod system of farming
did not justify the money making view
OF the business. That proper buildings
for the comfort aud protection of stock,
comfortable houses and well-kept fences
should be maintained as essential elements
of the value of any farm.
Mr. Adam r. Magraw concurred in
| Mr.. Bond s views. He did not advocate
the expenditure of large and extravagant
amounts in buildings or improvements
but believed that the proper maintain
ance of the buildings of farm, the keep
ing them in a slightly condition, consti-
tuted better system of farming than
more slovenly methods which realized
more money in the farmers pocket yet
at the sacrifice Of the general appearance
of a farmers premises.
Mr.. G5orge W. Sutton also advocated
a system Of farming which bad true
regard to the general improvement of a
farmers property rather than such sys-
tenn as sacrificed every other cousidera-
ton to mere money making. Tnat he
would prefer smaller net profit at the
end of the year. after keeping up his
farm and maintaining his buildings in
| good style rather than to realize larger
money income by letting buildings depre-
ciate in value by neglected OF them, and
by conducting what might be termed a
purely money making but slovenly sys-
tenn of farming.
Mr.. Stephen C. Magraw held the same
views and cited several instances which
had come under bis observation, that
money making system of farming is not
inconsistent with that which carries with
it good improvements, suitable fences
and excellent buildings. He believed
that Improvements-using that word in
/ it's general sense-enhanced the general
value Of his land and Indirectly con-
tributed to the farmers receipts. For
instance farmer raising the largest
quantity of grain without providing
suitable buildings for its protection when
harvested would, in the deprecated value
of the grain he sold, loose sufficient in a
few seasons, to cover the expense of
erecting the buildings, he thought he WAS
saving money on by not erecting.
Mr.. Noyes thought many farmers ex-
pended too large proportion of their
crop earnings in unnecessary fences and,
while he did not advocate a slip-shop or
slovenly method of farming, he believed
the sharp, shrewd calculator who abol-
ished every needless expenditure was the
farmer who made the most money.
Mr.. Mccullough, because he believed
the old adage that stitch in time
saves niue," thought a good, clean, and
careful system of maintaining the i'm
provements of farm, paid better in the
end than cheap or slip shod system
which refused dime for needed repairs
at the time, to lose Il dollar next year in
unprotected stock or uncared for farm
machinery.
Mr.. J. P. Wilson, in considering the
different systems of farming, advocated
neat system which contributed not to
the extravagances but was promotive of
|
When he considered the purely money
making system which sacrificed every
other consideration to that of accumuIat-
ing, while few farmers can grow rich
forts were concerned, he thought them
favored class.
Mr.. Fasset thought that, for many years
past, the system of assessment in Mary
land put premium upon slouchy farm
ing by taxing too heavily the improve
ments on farms.
Mr.. Henry S. Coudon said that, as
regards systems of farming, he believed
that one the best which increased most
the productive value of his lands. When
he had succeeded in bringing his laud to
the highest state of cultivation then he
could afford to erect buildings and make
improvements. Buildings themselves
were not productive property. Very few
farmers can make money simply by
growing gram, considering its market
value and the present cost of labor.
Buildings and improvements, of course,
were good things to have but still they
were not absolutely necessary. They
were really not essential to money max
ing by growing grain. There were, it is
true, other lines of enterprise with far
mers which required greater expenditure
in buildings. For instance, stock raising
which he thought would, at present
prices. burn the fingers of any farmer
who ventured into it.
The discussion on farming methods
having been closed the president des:g-
mated Messrs. Enoch Mccullough, Enoch
Noyes and Stephen G. Magraw the COM
mittee to examine Mr.. Coudon's premises.
At this juncture dinner was announced
and which, it is almost needless to Say,
maintained fully the reputation for gen.
erous hospitality which distinguishes the
mansion at "W oodlands.''
Upon assembling after dinner Mr..
Enoch Mccullough made very favor.
able report npon the condition of Mr..
Coudon's stock and premises which, on
motion, was adopted.
Commenting on the report of the COM
mittee Mr.. Sutton commended particularly
a specimen of the Berkshire breed of
swine in the shape of SOW with litter
of eleven pigs, as especially fine.
Mr.. Magraw, with that considerable
fealjup of pallantrv which aIpyovS die.