St. Tammany farmer., 1906-06-09
FARMER AND PLANTER
ARE FARMERS ALL HoNEsr2
fs the Farmer Who Robs Ills SOIL,
Leaving 1t to His Children Inn.
pOverished, Honest9

LIE teTm honest farmer has bee
applied to agriculturists for so man
years that some Of us have really com
TO think OF ourselves as almost model
Tor people engaged in other trades an
professions to follow. We try to max
ourselves believe that we would no
steal if we had all the opportunity il
the world; while the fact Is, that as
c.ass we are, in way, the biggest
set OF thieves allowed to run at larg
to-day.
A bank robber is looked upon as al
enemy to s0ciety-or used to be at am
rate before such business became thu
style. And, even now, there is prob
ably not one banker in a hundred who
appropriates for his own use the funds
of the institution over which he has
control. -
Every farmer is banker in g
seEse. His farm is his bank; the fer
tlllty OF his soil, his deposits. The use
he makes Of his deposits determines
whether he is, or is not, an honest
banker
To get at this matter in the true
light, We must determine what the
farmers true interest is In the farm
ne controls. Is he the owner of this
soil, or rather is he not simply stew
ard having charge of a certain portion
OF the Creators vast domain, holding it
In trust for the use of his children and
children's children?
This looks to the writer to be the
true situation. Man created nothing,
never can create anything; was given
power to change the form but not to
create. Now, if man created nothing,
what right has he to rob his soil of
the plant food that has been deposited
therein? And is he not a robber to
the extent that he allows himself to
deplete the store of plant food entrusted
to his charge and appropriates the pro-
ceeds Of such depletion to his own pri-
vate use?
This Is exactly what is happening
In nine cases out of ten, all over our
great land, on farms whose owners are
selling raw products in one form or
another. A great many farmers fail
to gasp the fact that to the extent that
they reduce the fertility of their soils
just to that extent have they reduced
theif capital.
Let's look at the matter further, and
see If this be not the truth. A non
productive acre of land is worth moth
Ing to the agriculturist An acre that |
Will produce 10 bushels of corn, We |
Will say is worth S.; while an acre that |
will with the same labor) produce so |
bushels, Is worth at $50. If we have a
[O0-acre field, say that will produce
'ut 10 bushels per acre, the price would
'e worth only $500; while if, by good
we bring that field to
produce so bushels per acre it will be
worth (actual1y worthy 5000.
And the rule will work in the oppo-
lite direction as we'll. Can We not see,
n every hand, evidence Of th;s-farms
hat, 30 years ago, were producing well,
epleted by mismanagement?
This subject Of soil value is Of vital
Importance to land owners of the south
t present, as everything indicates that
here will be- in the near future, a
reat influx Of land buyers. And those
'ho have their soils in good condition
Ill reap the benefit Of the higher value
lat will be placed upon these improved
rms; and If they be not for sale, we
Ill have the satisfaction Of knowing
lat we are leaving to our children as
BOD a value as we were given to be-
n with at least. So let us get through
ling soil robbers and become soil pro-
ctors.-A. L. French, in Progressive
armer.