The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1902-07-01

"A Line aCF6ag6 Oh LdFLS Is DIS follows
1902 farms of less than 8 acres; 1928
farms of from 8 to 8 acres;a 20,659
from 10 to 10 acres; 59,913 from 90
to 40 acres; 55,O28 from SO to 80; A.
O52 from 100 to ia; 1902 from IT'S
to 259; 1924 from 26O to 499; 1926
from 500 to 999; 949 of 1000 acres and
over, these averaging 1888 acres.
ACREAGE OF VARIOUS CROPS.
The Census Office reports shay and
grain" as the principal source of in
come of H,64Sfarms( Eve expect the hay
member of the partnership is here
given a little more prominence than
it deserves) live stock as the chief
source of income of 23,6O7 farms; to-
bacco of 1896; cotton, 1896. The
hay and grain farms average 97.8
acres; stock farms, 116 acres; tobacco
81, cotton 81. So of the total acreage
of the State hay and grain farms lead
with 1872 per cent, cotton follows with
1877, stock farms 12.1, tobacco "a,
vegetables 1.3, fruit, while 37.6 per
cent are classed as miscellaneous.
This paragraph giving a summary
of live stock conditions we take from
the bulletin: "The total value of all
live stock on farms, June /, 1900, was
$50, LOG, 173, of which amount 1912 per
cent represents the value of horses;
.2S.8 per cent, that of mules; 14.7 per
cent, hat of dairy cows; 1913 per cent,
that of other neat cattle; 8.3 per cent,
that of swine; 4.8 per cent, hat of
poultry; and "a per cent, that of all
other live stock"
FARMING LOSSES IN TIE CIVIL WAR
Very interesting is the table show
ing the number Of domestic animals
for each decade since 1850. The ter
rible devastation of the Civil War is
pictured here in the marked decrease
in the number of cattle, horses, sheep
and swine in the decade between 1860
and 1870-an all round decrease of
more than one-third, we believe.
(Mules and asses, however, showed a
decrease of less than 2 per cent; they
couldn't be eaten and were not in de-
mand in the cavalry.) In that decade,
too, the acreage of improved farm
lands decreased from 100000 to
5,25O,OOO, and the total decrease in
value of farm property decreased from
$3.50, 100000 to about $50, OOO, 900.
LIVE STOCK STATISTICS
But let us get back to stock condi-
tions. This table is hardly less pain
full to consider than that showing the
ruin wrought by war. For though the
State is admirably adapted to stock
raising, from 1890 to 1900 we made
practically no progress in this branch
of farming. True the number of dairy
cows increased from $685. 900 to $780,
900 Git was $4,000 in 1890, but the
number of other neat cattle shows a
decrease from 4O7, 900 in 1890 to 391,-
900 in 1900. And while Samuel Archer
and other Progressive Farmer CORE
sopndents have sought to emphasize
the Importance of sheep raising, the
statistics show that in the decade GOV
cred by the census figures the number
of sheep shrunk nearly half-de-
from 4O2, 247 in 1890 to 2O8 1912
1900. Mules and asses increased
per cent; horses, 81 per cent; swine
per cent.
1t is noteworthy that the negroes
use more mules than horses, the whites
more horses than mules. On cotton
farms the number of mules exceeds
that of horses; of all other kinds of
the reverse is true.
A comparison with the census of 1850
shows hat we have five times as many
mules and asses; less than 10 per cent
more horses; about 5 per cent more
cattle, and one-sixth less of 9th
~ neat cattle; only about one-third
as many sheep, and about two-thirds
IS many swine.
POULTRY RAISING AND DAIRYING
The stock table, however, is not
discouraging. The poultry and
exhibits are the brightest fea-
We produced in 1899 90 per
cent more milk (gain, ~54,275,O84 gal
ons) than in 1889. We made 28.8 per
cent more butter. As the increase in
lumber of dairy cattle was not nearly
% large, these figures indicate that
he grade of cattle was very consider