Norwich bulletin. [volume] (Norwich, Conn.) 1895-2011, 1915-10-23

You will notice that the value of
the diary products and crops not fed.
was greater on the Massachusetts
farm than the one in Wisconsin,
1896 greater, though the taxes show
that the Massachusetts farm averag-
sd nearly a third less value than the
You will also notice that the value
of the total products of the eastern
small farm was 1929 more than the
value of the total products Of the big
ger western farm.
And then you will notice-if you take
your pencil and figure the difference
that the western farm paid 81 ,073 over
all expenses, while the bigger produc-
ing smaller-taxed Observation-Disclosures
eastern farm paid only $3.50 over ex-
penseG.
The average net income of the Mid
dlesex county farmer wasn't a dollar
a day, while the average net income
of the Jefferson county farmer was
almost SO a day.
Now look at the three expense items
OF labor, fertilizer and feed, and you'll
begin to see where the shoe pinches,
I think. These three items cost the
average Jefferson county farmer $191;
cIley cost the average Middlesex coun-
ty farmer s9s7-more than $500 over
his western colleague
He paid 1881 for wages. Why :?
largely because his children left him
for the city as soon as they got old
enough to feel the lure of the siren.
while the Wisconsin farmers children
stayed home and helped till they got
old enough to have farms for them
selves. And why this difference
Largely, again. because the schools
Of Massachusetts, like those of many
the theory of educating boys to be
presidents-or politicians. or counter
jumpers or lawyers-wniie the Wis
consin schools, under the leadership
OF wiser and more far-seeing counsel
lors, have consistently sought to teach
the country child in terms of the
country life,n and fit him for success
therein.
In the matter of feed, the Massa-
rhnsetts farmer averaged 1886 worth
Ryear; bought off the farm. while the
Wisconsin farmer had to buy but $44
worth-a saving OF 1852 in this item
alone.
Why?
IN great measure because-perhaps
on account of the high cost OF labor
the Massachusetts farmer thinks he
can't raise his stock-feed as cheap as
be can buy It
In just these two items of labor and
Feed, the Massachusetts farm had to
III $SSSs I'll 70 De spent on IL Tor
imported work and fodder. before Il
aould take anything for itself, while
The larger WISCONSIN farm had to blow
n but $40 for similar expenses.
The difference Is too great.
n all, lor practically all that a farm
produces must be spent Off the farm
Tor labor and feed the utility OF farm
hg becomes highly doubtful.
Whafs the sense Of spending ones
re pouring waiter into AZ bottonless
bucket?
But 10 70 necessary for New Enrland
armern to rely on western farmers
or their BtOek.Geed TO any elfch ex
rIent as they DOT That Is a very prao-
kcaI question Mnd one on the ri9iat
lolu&fcn OF which the profit Of New
England farming depends to q con
aderahle degree
Admitting that mo eanst raise whea,
md ccen here. to compete with mn
loiB and the Dalsotas In the markets
n the world. II doesn't necessarily
blow that q great many individual
hrmers, here can't raise enough corr
nd oats 20 feed their own COWS and
hgs and chickenG-
raise ft cheaper than they can buy
I. too.
etaing Of q CREST crop FIR export and
pc raising OF mere sufficiency tc
salse the farm self sustaining. don't
link It would have taken an add
E0nal 1886 In wages for labor on thai
Wewmge M3ddfegeg farm 30 have raised
30 worth Of oats and corn and buck
Ehe@e. nc d0@ERnk 4als@ so many acre,
~ ~ NJ 49, 49, ~ -