The Elbert County tribune., 1916-03-03
IN Washington, D. c.. the answer
to certain question Is made by
asking another question. To the

and the boys stay on the farm?" the
answer comes, why should they want
to leave a good thing?"
There is war in Europe, and there
fore it may be held by the entirely
thoughtless that the farming prosper
ity IN the United States to which at
tention has just been called by the
department of agriculture's statisti-
clans. is merely a thing of the year,
and that slump will come. and that
as a consequence there will be sim
ply one bright spot to Offset several
black spots. There is a good deal of
nonsense in this view of the case.
1t is not always wise to take what
may be called boom year and to use
it either as a basis of comparison or
as towering landmark to which some
hole in the ground of the past is to be
compared, with the dismal prophecy
that other holes in the ground are
sure to be dug by fortune in the fu-
ture. This sort Of thing tends to dis
courage the men w,-o believe that hill
tops are to remain the general fea-
lures of picture landscapes.
Fdtuco STOW SoHStdnIlys
The year Just past has been a great
one. The aggregate production of all
crops is estimated to be seven per
cent larger than the preceding year.
The American former has profited, but
1t should not be understood that be-
cause attention is called to a particu-
larry marked growth that development
and increasing prosperity are only
matters, of a twelyemonth that is
past.
Let us see what has happened in
the country in the last few years.
Complete government statistics, be-
cause the census is taken only once
in ten years, are not available for the
last two or three years, but the word
is that the progress of the preceding
decade has been maintained. Here
are some figures which mean some
thing:
In the year 1900 the value of farm
property in the United States, in
cluding land, machinery, houses and
all other things pertaining to agricultu-
raj production was 500 ,439. .901 ,164. In
ten years these values had more than
dopDlod, reaching in 1910 the astonish-
ing figures of $40,991 ,449 ,090.---
Farmers Better Off.
Now 1t might be held by some per-
sons that these figures simply would
mean that the farm had multiplied
tremendously and that the increased
valuation would be spread over an
enormous territory occupied by new
farms and that therefore the individ-
ual farmer was in no wise better of.
Well, let US see about this.
In the year 1900 there were in the
United States 5,737.372 farms. In the
year 1910 there were 6.361.502 farms.
A glance at the figures will show that
while the farm property values more
than doubled, the increase in the num-
ber of farms. comparatively speaking
OF course, were small. To have kept
things down at the old basis of values,
the number of farms should have
doubled, while the values were
doubling.
In the year 1900 the average value
OF all property per farm was S3,563.
In 1910 the average value of all prop
erty per farm was s6.444. These fig
ures perhaps almost better than any
thing else can show the advance OF
prosperity in the agricultural regions
of the United States.
Other figures, however, are avail
able. In the year 1900 the average
value of farm land per acre was
S15.57. In the year 1900 the average
value of land per acre was $32.40,
more than a doubling up in land
wealth.
An go Per Cent Increase.
The census bureau of the United
states furnishes other figures which
have to do with crop values. In the
year 1899 the value of all crops in the
United States was $685. ,704.412. In
the year 1909, that is just a decade
later, the value of the crop was s5,-
4S7, ,161 ,223, an increase of SO per cent
in ten years.
For the same ten years we find an
increase of another kind. In 1893
the average value of crops per farm
was trifle more than $500, while in
1909 1t reached the value of $500.
A curious thing is noted in Wash
ington concerning the thoughtlessness
of some men in gauging the proceeds
of industry on the individual farm, or
II you WILL on farms in the aggregate.
Scme men who think of farming ig-
more uttn"ly the actual land value to
the mai who owns his farm. They
say $50 and So made so much last
year. but the sum is not big" To the
amount made must be added about five
per cent on the value OF the land. A
city man who owns his own house
dedl cts the rent that otherwise he
would have 20 pay from his yearly