122 . The Tariff and the Farmer. 



in total value of such products for the last decade, 1890- 

 1900, be explained ? Leaving out new states where the 

 continual addition of hundreds of new farms would 

 necessarily cause a rapid increase in total value of such 

 products, and gains are everywhere shown ranging from 

 25 to over 100%. The gains in the states of the North 

 Atlantic Division are seen to be from about 50 to 75%; 

 those of the North Central from 75 to over 100%). Ken- 

 tucky, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia are 

 near the 100%c class; some of the South Central States as 

 low as from 25 to 50 %c. According to census reports the 

 national gain from 1890-1900 was over 91 %c. Yet on the 

 excellent authority of Mr. North, already quoted in chap- 

 ter I, we are assured that in fifty years, 1850-1900, the 

 gain in total value of agricultural products was less than 

 two-fold. If the gain in the ten years mentioned was 

 91%o, it is seen, if credit is given to Mr. North's state- 

 ment, that there was scarcely any gain at all from 1850-90. 

 The explanation of the conundrum is that the census 

 reports of the total value of agricultural products for the 

 two periods 1890 and 1900 are not comparable. The 

 value of very many farm products were taken into 

 account in 1900 by the national census for the first time. 

 In the magazine article before referred to, Mr. North 

 says : ' ' The census of 1890 placed the value of the prod- 

 ucts of agriculture at $2,460,000,000, but it omitted the 

 value of live stock on farms, of stock sold for slaughter, 

 etc., and statisticians have accordingly increased the 

 figure to $3,289,000,000." That ''etc." of Mr. North's 

 includes, we think, all the following products : forest 

 products, honey and wax, forage, clover seeds, other 

 vegetables than potatoes, dried beans and peas, peanuts, 

 broom corn, hops, ''miscellaneous" seeds, flowers and 



