The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1901-04-02
SMALL FARMS VS.. LARGE FARMS AGAIN
DISCUSSED.
Mr.. Gates Replies to Mr., moAD1av


notice in a recent issue of The
Progressive Farmer that a gentleman
from Mecklenburg says that in his
opinion some erroneous statements
were set forth in my article of some
days ago. desire to thank the gen
tleman for his very candid statement,
but am sorry to have to confess my
inability to see matters in such q
light, even after noting the reasOns(?)
set forth by said gentleman.
heartily agree with him when he
says bale of cotton raised on one
acre is cheaper than one raised OF
two. Theoretically the small farmer
Is the one to raise cotton of this
class in practice, however, we find
that this does not work. On the
other hand, the man who secures the
large yield is the man who superin-
tends the cultivation of large areas
Of land
My friend from Mecklenburg is
right again by saying that the ten
ants of large farms are the ones who
are moving to factories, but he
should also have included a large
number of those who own small
farms, as they are doing the same
thing. There are numerous examples
of this here in my own county. A
common cause exists for both these
classes leaving the farm. Aside
from lacking capital and proper
equipment for carrying on the work
of a farm economically, under the
present system they are forced to
rely upon themselves for planning
and experimenting the work, as we'll
as for carrying it on This is where
the small farmer and renter are gen
orally lacking, and it is one large
reason why they find it more profit
d bic to sell their labor to some one
else North Carolina has for long
time been a mere strip of land be-
tween two States, because every
man who titled the soil demanded to
be allowed to do SO according to the
dictates of his own conscience For
tunately many of our land owners
are seeing the folly of this, and the
time is almost in sight when the
work on our large farms will be done
under the supervision of d competent
man, and not for part of the crop,
but for a stipulated amount, either
money, products of the farm, or
both.
Mr.. McAulay speaks of depriving
so many men of homes by the large
farm system. This is a free country,
and surely no man would sell his
home unless he thought to better his
condition. There is in this State, how
ever, enough land now almost de-
serted to more than double the agri
cultural output, If it were only prop
erly, and economically cultivated.
Would not the large farm system,
instead of depriving people of a home,
be a great boon to those who have
found it necessary to leave the farm,
and who are now being denied that
freedom and outdoor life to which
they have always been accustomed?
The gentleman again sadly errs by
taking as standard few poor de-
ludei fellows who, using his own
language, "started off believing they
had the world by the tail, using
the best fertilizers by the ton"
As to small farms affording a
scientific man at the head, it is not
to be supposed that anyone will OBJ
iect to my friend employing the
most scientific man the country can
afford to superintend the cultiva
tiOn of a half-acre plot. It is not to
be supposed, either, that he could
make it pay. If we expect to put a
special trained man, an agricultural
college graduate, on every fifty acre
farm in the State, it looks as if some
of them would have to be imported,
and it is very evident that President
Winston will have to ask for more
money for his college.
1t is conceded cheerfully that the
size of a farm should al ways vary with
the capacity of the man in charge,
and in his confidence in his ability
to manage large affairs. Fortunately
these things will adjust themselves,
and we find that men are generally
advanced or relegated to the rear
according to their abilities.
J. 8. GATES.