The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-08-31
BY James E. Neville Commerce., Editor Of
The Journal.


N 70 MORE DIFFICULT TASK could be put be-
nj fore the crop statistician than that of fgur-
" ing out in advance the money value Of gen.
eral harvest. So many and diverse the
elements that enter into such calculation and
changeable and shifting the ratio of production to
xarm value that basis absolutely tenable and insured
against later modification is almost impossible until
late in the year. early in the year following that Of
production The government does not pretend to have
gathered the data that enables to approximate total
farm values until late in the fall, and not until De-
cember does the department of agriculture issue
port in any way final.
Yet to observer Of conditions in the northwest,
there is always possible Sept. just prior to that
date, such approximation as will stand all ordinary
analysis and with allowance for later corrections of
minor Sort will remain unchanged and afford re-
liable basis for all to figure upon, whose interests de-
pend upon the growth of the country and the produc
ton of wealth.
Were it only a matter of estimating the quantity
produced of particular crop, and setting after it
arbitrary figure representative of farm value the mat
would resolve itself into question of ability close
y to determine the production. But, while production
is in itself easy thing to arrive at until the actual
movement of the crop to market establishes gage,
the farm value of particular crop is diff
cult to reach.
VALUE OF LARGE PRODUCTION.
Economically, the country always profits by large
production, if prices somewhat lower ensue for
the money return to the farmer, aho the most mpor
tant is by means the only factor in determining
prosperity Given small crop, and high prices result
ant, the coming into particular producing
ton may readily measure up to the total of year
of larger production but it is false economics to figure
this commensurate, for true prosperity lies in the
employment in full of all industry dependent upon crop
production and the railroad tonnages the transactions
of the banks, and the activity inactivity of the
many whose business consists of handling and market
ing the produce Of the FARMS must not be
The most remarkable Illustration of the mainten
Of stable return against change in the produce
ton is afforded by the two barley crops Of 1908 and
1904 In the former year the state of Minnesota pro-
duced the total of 27,7S317o bushels of barley for
which the money return $10,279773. The follow
ing the production increased to 49, bushels
gain of 4,339Sl bushels yet the farm value, at $780,
279973, showed practically no change difference of
only $500 appearing This is explained by average
farm valuation in 1903 Of 81 CENTS and an average in
1904 Of 80 cents Not only the quantity produced but
the quality Of the crop, the proportion that
low grade, makes a material difference in the value
ANOTHER PROOF OFFERED.
Even striking illustration, and one showing
surprising inverse ratio in the moving of the farm
value relative to production is potato crop
comparisons for the two years In 1904 the states of
Minnesota, North and South Dakota produced $685.,
972 bushels of potatoes and the farm value was
O69. The year previous the production was only 49,
sSo655 bushels, yet the farm value $4,000 1882
S2,1O37S3 greater
This is accounted for by a difference in the value
per bushe for the two years. being 90 cents in 1904
against 81 cents in 1908 in Minnesota 80 cents against
4e cents in North Dakota, against 81 cents
In South Dakota.