Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1909-09-03


incredulous amusement at the idea OF
turning cattle raising, whether for beef
or dairying, to a profit in this coun-
try, and really we would not think OF
contrarying them, were 1t not for the
fact that we know that other sections
not nearly so blessed as ours, get
along as we'll with cattle raising as
their principal industry, as we do with
cotton and corn.
Just as cotton Is the principal crop
of this section, dairying and beef rails
ing are the main reliance Of most OF
the farmers of New England. The
most striking difference, however, Is
that while We have every advantage
over the New Englanders with refer
ence to dairying, we hardly count the
industry as a possible source OF In
come, while without it, the New Eng
landers would hardly be able to live.
And to bring this matter squarely
down to brass tacks, how would our
own people be able to get along with
out milk cows? We have no more
cows than are absolutely necessary;
but Just think about what it would be
If we had done at all. No doubt, there
are those who have never thought OF
the money value Of the cows that are
in this county now, and they would
hardly be able to take it in If we
would say that this money value for
milk and butter alone, milk and butter
consumed, not taking into account that
which is sold, is something like half a
million dollars year.
The great feature Of the dairying
industry in New England is the in
come derived from the sale of dairy
products. The people Of that section
consume at home all Of these products
that are necessary for their require
ments, and derive their income from
the surplus. Our people do not even
produce enough for our own require
ments and their sales, either at home
or abroad, are Of but little conse-
quence.
Cities like New York, Boston, Chi
cago, Philadelphia, ETC., offer a ready
market for all the surplus milk and
butter produced within some three
hundred miles Of them. OF course,
our people have no such markets as
these, and there are many who would
at once suggest this as a reason why
our dairy productions are so limited.
But such an excuse is hardly war
ranted. We cannot legitimately use
it until we at least produce as much
milk and butter as we can consume
ourselves.
1t is probably fair to say that even
If we had a market like New York
city within twenty miles Of us, we
would not be in a position to sell milk
and butter to that market until we
had at least doubled our present pro-
6uction OF course, it is understood
that there are many people who would
be able to spare something right at
once; but we speak Of the county as
a whole-we refer to a surplus over
our own needs.
1t is not to be claimed for a moment
that our people are making intelligent
use Of the cow. 1t is hardly to be
claimed that the county, as a
whole, has a fairly intelligent appre-
citation of this invaluable domestic ami
NAL. On the contrary, the majority
opinion really despises the cow. But
just let US stop for a moment to con-
slider the absurdity Of this attitude.
Are the milk and butter we are now
producing profitable to US? If not,
what are we producing as much as we
do for? Why don't we cut it out?
Suppose we admit that we only pro-
doce such milk and butter as we con-
sumo, because we are absolutely COM
PEELED to, would that be any more
creditable to our economic intelligence?
The fact as we see it is, that the
people of this section are not now
consuming half as much milk and
butter as they can consume them
selves with unquestionable profit, and
that we have not got half as many
dairy cattle in this county as we alb
solutely need for our own use.
We are quite sure that increase in
the number Of dairy cattle will add
to the wealth of every intelligent man
who helps to swell that increase, and
the greater the increase in the aggre-
gate, the greater the addition to the
wealth Of this section as a whole.