320 MONTHLY JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURE. 



the most nortliern lies between the 31st and 32d degrees of latitude, and 

 all of the other three south of latitude Sl*^. St. Tammany, which exhibits 

 the second best product, borders on Lake Pontchartrain. The State ex- 

 tends north to latitude 33^. 



In Florida, all the counties given lie in the same latitudes. 



Mississippi extends north to latitude 35°. All the counties given are 

 south of 32° 30', and one in latitude 31°. 



In Alabama, extending north to the same latitude with the above, two 

 of the counties given are in the northern or mountain region, and two of 

 them south of 33°. 



In Georgia, (same northern line,) one of the counties given is in the ex- 

 treme north, two south of 33° and one in latitude 31°, being the county 

 in which lies the major portion of the Great Okefinokee Swamp ! 



In South Carolina, two of the counties (both bordering on the ocean) 

 are in the low, marshy, tide-water region ; and the other two are in the 

 central region. 



In North Carolina,two of the counties given join the ocean ; one is on Albe- 

 marle Sound, while one lies in the central and northern portion of the State. 



In comparing the product of wool in the Southern States with that of 

 the Northern — and more particularly with that of New-York — we must 

 not lose sight of the fact that in the latter wool growing has become an 

 important business, and is reduced to a system. The sheep are kept in 

 pastures, and are sheared at regular inteiTals. In the Carolinas, Georgia, 

 and the Gulf States, precisely the reverse of all this was generally true, 

 at least up to the year 1839. The sheep were little cared for; were suf- 

 fered to breed promiscuously ; and they roamed at large through forests, 

 where, as the warm season advanced in the spring, their wool, beginning 

 to detach itself, was left on shrubs and brambles, and in not rare instances 

 considerable portions of it were thus lost prior to shearing.* 



Giving their due weight to the preceding facts, the defects in the census, 

 etc., it is, I think, undeniable that they account for all the deficiency in 

 the average product of wool per sheep in our most southern States, com- 

 pared with that of New- York, as set forth in Table No. 2. Indeed, sir, 

 my own convictions are decided, and the facts reported appear to fully 

 sustain them, that warmth of temperature, at least to a point equaling the 

 highest mean temperature in the United States, is not injurious, but abso- 

 lutely conducive to the j^roduction of wool. The causes of this are in- 

 volved in no mystery. Warm climates afford green and succulent hej'b- 

 age during a greater portion of the year than cold ones. Sheep plentifully 

 supplied with green herbage keep in higher condition than when confined 

 to that which is dry. High condition promotes those secretions which form 

 "wool. Every one at all conversant with sheep well knows that if kept 

 fleshy the year round, they produce far more wool than if kept poor. A 

 half a pound's difference per head is readily made in this way. Within 

 the maximum and minimum of the product of a sheep or a flock, the ra- 

 tio of production always coincides with that of condition. 



I have dwelt on this point at great and perhaps tedious length, sir, as 

 the results set forth in the United States Census, unexplained, would 

 clearly point to a different conclusion from that to which I have arrived. 

 To invalidate testimony, ostensibly so certain and reliable, as well aa to 

 combat deep-rooted prejudices, I have deemed it necessary to scan thor- 

 oughly the accessible facts in the case. 



* I make no arrount of diffiTrnco in bnvils, bs affoetins ihe product of wool between the South nnd 

 North. The i'nule Merinoa, not unconiiiKm in New -Yurk, would produce fiu- more wool than ilie " na- 

 tives," the iirincipal sheep in the South in 1839. But the hitter would equal or exceed the product of the 

 numerous Saxou flocks of New-York. 

 (C5(i) 



