

The National VinvJ ' ' '*'- ' '' a'Ol 



and the increased value of the improved acres (about 16 

 per cent, larger) would go in part at least to make up 

 the 39 per cent, increase in value. Had there been a 

 great inflation of values in the war period, the small per- 

 centage of gain of the three last decades as compared 

 with that of 1850-60 would be imputed to the gradual 

 fall to a normal basis. 



Now unless some explanation can be fbund for the 

 apparently far greater prosperity enjoyed before the war 

 than since, it must be admitted that the golden age of 

 agriculture was from 1850-60 under low revenue duties. 

 During this decade there must have been an average 

 annual gain in value of more than 10 per cent, to amount 

 to the 103 per cent, in ten years. What per cent, on the 

 average would give the gain in decades ending in 1880, 

 1890 and 1900 ? A trifle over 3 per cent. 



To show that the greater prosperity 1850-60 was real, 

 and not all due to the gain of new land at the West and 

 Southwest, we present other tables. 



p . Average value per Percent- 



The Number of Acres tlT^ai ^^^® °^ ^^^°^ ^^^ °^ 



of Land in Farms. rt:^ Land, including Gam or 



^^^^- Buildings. Loss. 

 (In round numbers.) 



1850 293.500,000 $11.14 



1860 407.200,000 38.7 16.32 46.5 



1870 407,700.000 0.1 18.26 12.0 



1880 536,000,000 31.5 19.02 4.0 



1890 623,200,000 16.3 21.31 12.0 



1900 838,590,000 35.0 19.88 —7.0 



Here it is seen that the percentage of gain in number 

 of acres of land was not much greater from 1850-60 than 

 from 1870-80, or 1890-1900. And yet the increase in 

 value of farms was 103 per cent, in the first of these 



