28 



Mr. Chairman, I shall print also with my remarks matter not new to 

 the committee, and I shall not trouble it with it extracts from reports 

 made by Professor Dodge, which so fully illustrate the views I have 

 expressed that I am constrained to give them such circulation as these 

 /emarks of mine shall have. They are as follows: 



It was shown conclusively, by figures of the census of 1880, that increase of 

 non-agricultural population enhances prices of lands and farm products. There 

 ivas found a relation, other things being equal, of such prices to relative num- 

 bers of agriculturists and other workers. The larger the proportion of farmers, 

 the smaller were found values in agriculture. Now, in view of the above con- 

 siderations of nearness of producers to consumers, it is important to know 

 whether, within the States, the proximity of different classes of workers in- 

 creases locally such prices. It would be reasonable to suppose it would. 



To test the supposition, by the figures of the census which show the value of 

 the products of manufacture, which represent usually the largest element in non- 

 agricultural industry, let us take the principal manufacturing counties, average 

 the value of their farm lands, and compare the result with the average value of 

 all the remaining farm lands within the State. 



There is a great difference in the aggregate value of manufactures of the dif- 

 ferent States. Mississippi and Nevada have no county with $1,000,000 worth of 

 manufactured products. Massachusetts has only two with less than $10,000,000, 

 and has one with $134,567,625. Therefore it is necessary, in a comparison between 

 the principal manufacturing counties and those of less importance, to take a dif- 

 ferent minimum of value in Alabama, as a line of separation, from the minimum 

 taken in Massachusetts. The minimum proposed for each of the States south of 

 Pennsylvania and the Ohio River is $1,000,000. Each county having not less 

 than that amount of value in manufacturing production is placed in a group, 

 and the average value of their lands compared with the average value of all the 

 remaining lands in the State. 



Then the agricultural States, in which other industries are more important, 

 are allowed a minimum of $2,000,000 per county. In this group come the thriv- 

 ing Northwestern States, new and largely agricultural, yet progressive, and al- 

 ready diversifying their industries, rural and manufacturing, quite rapidly. 

 They are Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa, and California is classed with them. 



Then come the four States of the Ohio Basin, which lie between the river and 

 the great lakes, which are already prominent in industrial development. It is 

 necessary to make $5,000,000 the minimum, so general is the distribution of the 

 industries. With Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, and Illinois are placed the States of 

 Northern New England, namely Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont. 



In a fourth group, comprising each of the Middle States, having a larger in- 

 dustrial development, $10,000,000 per county will make a fair exhibit of the more 

 advanced industrial counties. 



ng- 

 In 



$25,000,000 

 each. In Massachusetts and Rhode Island the minimum is fixed at $50,000,000. 



The result of this comparison shows in every State, without exception, a 

 higher average value of farm land in that portion of each State which makes 

 the largest value of the products of manufacturing industry. These two sec- 

 tions of each State are contrasted in the following statement, which also gives 

 the totals for each State, as follows : 



Statement showing the local variation of prices in each State. 



