Fort Worth weekly gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-10-16

such thing as failure; without IL drouth
and want are &C mmon. With irrigation
of the Colorado Austin could have abund-
ant, varied and constant supply of veg
etables and fruits and be relieved of the
enormous tax we now pay for irrigated
Western fruits. With irrigation every
FIVE acres of the Colorado valley would
support in luxury a family. whereas
without IL II is now difficult for a farmer
to earn living upon twenty acres. r.
| rigation would enable farmers to relieve
themselves of the cotton growing slavery
to follow higher agriculture. Irriga-
ton woul / enable Austin to possess can
ming factories and thereby increase our
manufariory resources. An acre of Irri-
gated land of proper kind produces
500 to $500 worth a year. An acre of
cotton seldom produces more than
$50 net year, and requires the
maximum of labor. 1t Is a great mis-
take TO suppose that irrigation should he
produced only in arid regions, and to
think that Central Texas does net need
It. The wealth of Texas is pre-emi-
Dently in her soils which exceed in value
all possible mineral possibilities, and
this soil is too rich to be forever devoted
to poorly paying plantation crops, I'M
worthy of thu highest skill OF the Anglo
Saxon laborer. Even where the rainfall
Is treble ours, irrigation Is practiced
most successfully. Not only does it give
water, but also fertility to the soil, ana
by its aid the rich red raises of the Colo
RADIO and the Brazos valleys, laden with
gypsum, lime and other ingredients,
would restore and MAINTAIN the sandy
loans in the Colorado valley below Aus
tin in high degree of fertility.
1.-The subject of irrigation is assuming
such proportions in the United States at
present that 1t is merely q question of
years when we will see the rivers aud
artesisn wells of Texas quadrupling our
agricultural reductions.
So say We. We must arrive at means
of making our lands produce more than
they are now producing ere We can ever
reasonably expect to become q highly
prosperous people. We have had people
tell US that the country is alreadvIproduc-
ing more than it can sell. Why? Because
thsre ure not more consumers, of course.
Heavy production invariably brings
heavy local consumption, but light pro-
duction cannot do otherwise than hold a
country down to a thin population. If
every cultivated acre in Texas could be
made to produce four times as much as
IL uoW pIouucrs, leAdS WUulu uIdW 80
strongly upon all parts of the civilized
world that but five decades would go by
ere people would be living everywhere
within calling distance of each other.
And they would not all be soil workers,
either-a very large proportion OF them
would be consumers and not producers
of soil products. An extremely pros
porous agriculture brings in thousands of
other industries. The products of the
soil must be worked up in some way, and
where they exist in attractive abundance
those workers invariably come to take
charge.
The production plea is simply
nonsense, and to hold back on account
of any such notion is exactly on q par
with having rich gold mine and run
ming it on half time through the fear
that more gold would be taken
out than would be in de-
mand. The products of the soil
are more than gold. People of all the
world live off them directly or indirectly.
Gold is all well enough for ornamental
purposes, or as a medium in commerce,
but life left to gold alone would soon be-
come extinct.