The Baltimore County union. [volume] (Towsontown, Md.) 1865-1909, 1900-02-24
The Wave of Prosperity and the Farm.

/ me Wave of Prosperity and the Farm.
Sat the last meeting of the Deer Greek
Farmers Club the subject discussed was, How
ia! uas the present wave of prosperity affected
the interests of the farmer?" We append the
views of some of those present:
W. Beatty Harlan said that the farmer had
shared 10 very limited extent in the present
wave or prosperity. The price of cattle, how
ever, has been higher this year than for several
PAST. tomatoes also had brought more. On the
pIner nand everything the farmer has to buy
mas advanced materially in price. AS an instance
ne cited some piping he had bought for plumb
year. The same was with wire fencing and
~ ninuer Irvine. Wheat is extremely low, and if
~ goes any lower it cannot be raised. The trust
mas put up the price of tin, labels and solder SO
mat the Gamer is now practically crushed out
oaae ieast can afford TO pay the farmer only a
reduced price for his tomatoes. The only
remedy that he could recommend was COM
Dlnation, that the farmers were so independent
tnat that seems hardly practicable.
marry silver had heard of the wave going all
around, but it had not located in his vicinity
yel. while everything in the commercial world
Hau advanced. 1t could not continue until the
cattle Tor more money this year, he had paid
Hore Ior them. 1t is true that the price of good
h0rses had advanced.
auVanced except farm products. Tomatoes
were 1a1r crop and had paid well. While the
pLlce OF cattle was higher, the cost price was
also more. The net profit on granted stock
was only y cent when it should be X cents
r. Harris Archer said that it was provoking to
reao tne editorials of all the leading newspapers
ABOUT prosperity, when we think that the farm
ers form one-half of the population of the coun-
Try and they had not been benefited one cent.
everything he has to buy is higher and If he
wanted to erect tenant house it would cost
one,fourth more than it did year ago. The
produce markets are very little better. This
year we will get from to cents less for toma-
Toes, ana will have to pay two dollars per ton
more for fertilizers.
Charles W. Michael agreed with Mr.. Harlan
the prces of buynS ThrougS
Dlnatlons and trusts everything the farmer buys
mas been put up in price, and all he sells brings
canta in Os inconsistency OF soaGoes Oeg ay e
striking. The duty on tin has affected the farm
81 seriously. Land is lower, however, than it
N Frank H. Jacobs did not think that the wave
OF prosperity had struck his section yet. The
only thing that is higher is hay. and there was
more money IN 1t last year at So per ton than
this years half crop at SIG. A farmer, however.
should Rke into consideration the living he gets
off of his farm when he is calculating profits.
in farm as an investment should be viewed
from thestandpOint of landlord and tenant, and
wages of overseers should not be forgotten.
When the farmer is his own tenant he is entitled
to wages as an Overseer)
John Moores said that prosperity had not come
the farmers way. He had been farming for the
past fifty years, and this had been his worst.
He had raised mixed crops and tried every ex-
pedient, and yet had made no money. The
trifting advance in some products yielded no ad-
question, for between the tariff and the trusts
there was nothing left for the tiller of the soil.
In bis neighoorhood. where there was one hun
dred acres planted in tomatoes last year, there
would be none this.
William F. Hayes thought that if the farmers
were not such chronic GROWERS they might do
better. Speaking of the prosperous times he
thought that solution of the question would be
solved if the wealth were more evenly divided.
Speaking of wheat. he said that two years ago he
sol n worth
Seventy-fve this season. While hay is worth
more this year there is no crop.
William W. Finney said that where there was
a general wave of prosperity some one was get
ting the benefit of it. He thought that the great
trouble was that on account of short crops, etc.,
the farmer in this vicinity had become the con-
sumner when he should be the producer.
Thomas H. Robinson said this was most in
teresting subject. There cannot be any sub
farmer. 1t is not fair, however, to judge any
particular locality. Take, for instance, the
whole South and look at the cotton crop. Also
ers are making. He thought, however, that the
abnormal increases were not permanentand the
whole country would soon settle to true basis.
Higher prices of fertilizers and cans is a condi-
ton which is hard to contend with. AS long as
men can control vast sums of money they will
corner the markets.
John ID. Worthington thought that when the
marts of trade are active the people are eating
more and better food, therefore the prosperity
See y if is He Thought that the wave was yery
unequal the capitalist being on the crest and
the farmer in the trough. He noticed that these
ups and downs occurred every ten years. There
is, however, one thing that the farmer should
count, and it is matter above dollars and cents,
and that is the satisfaction in his manner of
living the trust man does not get it all.
John Silver Hughes said that it seemed to fall
to his lot to defend the entprosperous times.
In considering this, it not fair to limit it to
any one locality. 1t would be as fair to say that
every farmer should be prosperous, and we
know that this is not the case, as there are some
people who. through lack of management, could
not be successful at anything. The year past
the farmers all over the country have been rea-
sonably prosperous. 1t was good year for him
if he got all his crops harvested in time.
]. Lawrence Mccormick thought the only hope
for the farmer was organization. Speaking of
AFosperity he thought that the farmer had felt
sbme slight advantages, as for instance in breed