Norwich bulletin., 1921-01-14
FARMING NOT AFFAIR OF THE IMAGINATION
(written Specially For The Bulletin.)

(Written Specially For The Bulletin.) i
 It is amazing what an amount of mis- i information really truth-seeking read | CT may amass from current publications.
 Perhaps less amazing but even more pitiful are the numbers and enornaity of the wrong conclusions which spring from the absorption of so much misinforma- tion.-
 Most provocative and irritating of all | is the condescending eontemptuous1ess with which some self-satisfed and half | baked tfeorst tells lot of battle-scar- red old veterans that they don't know much about war-or anything else. There used to be a saying refecting | somewhat on the wisdom of young folks
 who thought they could teach their | grandmothcrs how to suck eggs.
 These remarks are suggested. by clipping, sent me. last week by. a Wind-
 ham County reader, from a New York city magazine called Forbes" The writer of the article from which the clip ping is taken has manifestly soaked him self in figures, and general averages. and
 percentag ges. etc. He has combined and
 re-combined census results: he has null tipied and subtracted: he has turned and
 twisted the long-suffering Arabic numer-
 ais till he has made them prove, to his
 own satisfaction, at least, that the cart
 is before the horse and the tail is wag-
 ging the dog.
 His prime contention is that "the drift from country to city has been checked 5
 and that it is the dollar which has
 done it." because workers are now dis
 covering that it "pays better to work in the country than in the cities" To prove these astonishing assertions 1 he gees back to census figures running , from 1890 to 1912 and to price esti-
 mates running from 1913 to 1977-This D being 1921, as you've recently been forced
 ] to note by the necessary change of tht 6 old almanac for fresh one.-Even if w f were comnelled to admit the accuracy o . the Forbes" figures and the correctnes: n of the deductions therefrom. it is to b. F noted that they are comparatively an :. cient history, now.
 - According to these reported figures. tn l, gain of farm wealth from 1890 to 190 Il was 27.1 per cent. while the gain O l. other industries was 39.1 per cent. But = says this remarkable writer, betweel o 1904 and 1912 farm wealth Increase n 113.9 per cent. as compared with III. 7. Ter cent. for other industries" Certain ,- ly this was a most phenomenal and al l. most miraculous increase in both agri
 culture and other industTies-if it reall Il happened. Those of us who have live
 long enough to discover the sunra-natu A 1 ral caDaciIy or unsupported ngureS :. prove what isn't true, are inclined t
 doubt them rather than accept the as ;s founding theory that farm wealth nor
 than doubled in those eight yeais. -h Where did these figures come iron
 anyway? There was a census in 1a0 ', and enc in 1910. but none in either 190
 or 1912 Furthermore. we farmers wh @, have had to make up two or three censu of blanks in as many decennial rerio 1e know how confusing they are, and ho
 impossible it is even for the most GOT e. scientious farmer to answer them Wit at fullness or accuracy.
 in Certainly, those of us who were al as lively engaged in practical farming b.
 tween 1904 and 1912 have no memory lc any such doubling of our wealth. Or IT, suggestion occurs to me as a possible c. f. planation of some part of this alleged il tn crease. I cannot at this moment, si- d. the exact dates, if. indeed, there We a. any exact dates. but it was sonewhe ds about. the beginning of the present ce y 1; tury that a wave of assessment-raisil n swept over the country. It was taken a. by state after state Local assesso n- were urged and driven to raising asses 'st ments. In this wholly rural town w!,e