The Van Buren press., 1895-03-02
A CHAPTER ON GRASSES.

"A SnAF yin Ans%0SGSs
Whv Their Cultivation Has Been Neglect
ed on Southern Farms-Best Varieties
Suitable for Southern Uses.
Why has grass culture prevailed less
at the south than at the north? Is the
cause to be found in accidental or ad-
ventitious circumstances; or must it be
sought in the constitutions of plants
and their relation to climate and soil.
This is most important question be
cause circumstances may be changed,
obstacles may be removed out OF the
way; but if the fight is against nature,
it is useless to make it; defeat is cer-
tain. Our first inquiry then is, do
wild grasses flourish, unaided by
man, in southern latitudes? As
an answer we point to the mes
quite grasses Of Texas, the broom
sedge. the wild rye or Terrell grass,
the Texas blue grass, and many others
that are natives of the southern states
of foreigners that have been natural
ized and have found congenial home
in our climate. We cite crab-grass,
crowfoot, Bermuda, and johnson
grass. These not only flourish here,
but thrive better than they do at the
north. From this fact would it be
logical to infer that grasses did not
grow well at the north? Just as rea-
sonable as to say that because some
northern grasses do not grow well at
the south, the latter is not grass
country. The truth is that few
or no grasses are cosmopolitan; every
species is more or less localized, and to
make grass culture successful in any
locality, the varieties best suited to it
must be sought.
We now repeat our first inquiry. Why
has grass culture been less prevalent
at the north than at the south? First,
because at the south sparse popula-
tion created q smaller demand for food
products, including meat, milk and
butter, which latter rests largely on
grass foundation. As country be-
comes more and more densely popu-
lated, it's soil becomes taxed more and
more, simply to feed its inhabitants.
As compared with the south the north
is much more populous.
Second, abundant slave labor and the
large number of acres to each inhabi-
tant at the south rendered it possible
to cultivate export (money) crops ex-
tensively over and beyond the neces-
sary food crops.
Third, the peculiar adaptability of
climate and soil to the cotton plant,
the leading textile plant of the world,
stimulated it's cultivation to wonder
full degree.
Fourth, free labor and dear labor at
the north stimulated the cultivation of
crops there that required least manual
labor. The problem there was to find
the crops which enabled them to utilize
their lands with least labor and great
est production Of food. Grass and stock
fill these requirements
Fifth, the cultivated grasses Of Great
Britain (whence the northern people
themselves, and their views and Gus
toms came) found in the north con-
genial climate, cool, and with abun-
dant SHOWS in winter. The transfer,
therefore, of cultivated grasses from
was easy and natural.
The range in mild southern eli
mates supported an abundance of
stock, and the need of cultivated
grasses was not felt. In the south the
problem was, not how to utilize land
with little labor, but with an abun-
dance of it. Grasses and grain thus
naturally become the crops of the
north, cotton that of the south;
partly from climate, because of
its relations to labor, the ne
groes being unsuited to the north,
partly because OF it's relations
to certain cultivated grasses which
had obtained strong foothold among
the English people, and partly because
in their migrations, people follow the
same belts of climates and therefore
the north (as immigration came from
northern Europe) became more popu-
lous than the south. In the north the
demand for stock was greater, and the
necessity for providing food for it
greater, both on account of severity OF
climate and the absence of range, y
whilst ut the south the opposite
conditions prevailed. The reader
will pardon the stress laid upon
this line of thought. We have
pursued it at some length be.
cause the majority of our people are
skeptical about growing grass at the
south, and regard climate not as the
indirect, but as the direct and imme-
diate cause of the comparative scarcity
of grass fields with us.
The contrasts drawn above existed
before the late war-at present they are
not SO great-slave labor has been sup
planted by free labor; the range" is
gone over large portions of territory
population is becoming more dense, the
demand for stock is increasing, the
means of feeding them decreasing, the
land has been exhausted and
washed away by cotton culture
which has become less remunera
tive, and now the problem press
ing upon us, is like that which con
fronted the northern farmers. how tt
utilize our large farms with the leas
amount of manual labor. Will gras.
culture help to do this, and is it prac
ticable? If SO, what are the varietie.
to cultivate, and the best method Il
pursue? Grass culture certainly re
quires very little labor; whether grazet
by stock or cut by mowers, the labor
required is less than that of any othel
crop. Nothing could fill the require
nent better in this respect. Is it prac
ticable? This hinges, in our judg
ment, in large measure upon tn,
varieties of grass selected. In the
south we must look chiefly to tn,