The Lakeland evening telegram. (Lakeland, Fla.) 1911-1922, 1916-04-10
(From Manufacturers Record.)

year. showing the following astonish-
ing figures:
In 1915 the gain in the value Of all
farm crops in the United States over
1914 was $526.070,00O.
OF this gain s317 100000 or little
lover 60 per cent, was in the South.
an amazing illustration Of the increase
in the Investigation of Southern agri-
culture.
The gain in the entire country, out
side OF the South, was $20S,S61. 900. or
Sos. 400, 900 less than the gain in the
South.
The percentage of increase for the
South in 1915 over 1914 was 1885 per
cent.
The percentage Of increase for the
rest Of the country in 1915 over 1914
was only 5.25 per cent.
Notwithstanding the great decrease
in the value of the cotton crop last
year. by virture Of war conditions.
compared with the big crops and high
prices for some years prior to the war.
the rate OF increase Of the South's
farm crops over the five-year average
from 1909 to 1913 was 623 per cent.
Though the cotton crop last year
was small and prices were lower than
for some years prior to the war. the
value of last years farm crops in the
South was $153,000,0OO greater than
the average value for the five-year
period from 1909 to 1913. both in
elusive.
Notwithstand the much lower
value of last years cotton crop COM
pared with 1909 to 1913, while on the
other hand the West had large grain
crops with high prices due to the
phenomenal European demand for
foodstuffs. the value of the South's
farm crops for 1915 was s2607,3 900
as compared with 4,1S1,556,000 for
the rest CT the country. The Uni
tied States Department Of Agriculture
J Estimates the value of last years
cotton crop, not including seed at
$3.50, 900 900, which we think Is prorba-
bly, an ultra-conservative figure
lCounting the value of the seed, we be
lieve the crop may be safely esti
mated at s75O,OOO.O0O, though no ex
lact figure can be given until the end
of the crop season. Taking however
an estimate of $75O,0O0,OO0 as the
value of the cotton crop, including
: seed this would leave as the value OF
other crops s1,957, 100000, or. in Other
: words the value Of diversified crops
was considerable more than two and
> one-half times as great as the value
of the cotton crop and nearly twice
as great as the most valuable cottor
u crop ever produced by the South.
1t must be borne in mind that these
: figures relate to farm crops and not t.
> all agricultural products, for they dc
. not include the value OF animal prod
ucts.
The Department of Agriculture es
! Inmates the total value OF ANNA
products for the United States in 1911
( at $3S49OO0,OOo. but does not at
$ tempt to make an estimate as to tn,
7. value by Sataes
As the South has almost exactl,
l. one-third of the total number of live
s. stock in the United States it is rea
s. sOnable to estimate the value Of tn
l. animal products of tn ssitenciogea
:, animal PRODUCES of this section as al
,. proximately one-third of total valu
for the whole country. This ma
possible be fraction too high, bu
it cannot be very far out of the way
Al Nevertheless. to be on the safe sid,
- South's animal products as 30 pc
- cent instead of 33 10 per cent. of tn
in total for the whole country Thi
n would make the total for the Sout
ty 81 ,054 600 600. Taking the round I'll
cd ure of $1,000, 100000, to be on tn
IN side of conservatism. and adding
u the value of farm crops we have +
- tai of $4,000. 100000 as the value Of a
agricultural products of the Sout
last year. and of this only about s75C
81, 000000 was represented by cotton.
at Even if we were to take the stric
on Is cotton-growing States OF North an
lie South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Al
lis hama. Mississippi Louisiana. Texa
Gu Arkansas and Oklahoma. ii would |
hd found that the value of farm produc
other than cotton is very much gres
of or than the value Of their cotton croT
- whereas, when we include the no
cotton-producing States. such as Ke
lucky, Marland, Tennessee. Virgini
West Virginia and Missouri, we e
the strickingly important fact WIFI
L.. cannot be too often reiterated and @,
nun phasized and the value Of diversif
nos farm products OF the South last We
lelt was $3.50 .000000 against $3.50. 90
he! ono for cotton Cotton, therefor
III comprised but little more than OF
an,' fifth of the toal agricultural produc
80 of s9Go0,oO0.0O of the South. and t
St other products were nearly four tim
,lbe as great in value as the cotton err
ant Tho estimated total crop values