118 



James Gowen's Letter to Gen. Richardson on Far?7iing. Vol. X. 



agement, can be turned off regularly at four 

 years old, to weigh from nine to ten cwt. If 

 this be so, and I have not a doubt of it, wliat 

 a saving in time and feed is here — nine to 

 ten cwt. of fine beef in four years, against 

 five or six cwt. of the liard feeding tribe in 

 six to seven years. It appeared strange 

 to me, as passing through several farming 

 districts, to see such devotedness to raising 

 grain, to the almost utter neglect of cattle. 

 As far as the eye could reach from the road, 

 nothing could be seen but grain, with here 

 and there a corn-field; while a few stunted 

 cattle and sheep might be seen running 

 along the road-sides, excluded from the fields, 

 till they and the swine should have a har- 

 vest feast in the stubble-field: — I speak now 

 of some parts of Maryland and Pennsylva- 

 nia — how short-siglited to neglect the cattle, 

 or to keep such a breed ! not one in a hun- 

 dred of them could, by any force of feeding, 

 be made to weigh 6 cwt, or could be put in 

 a condition, from the time it was taken up, 

 at an expense short of the whole value of 

 the animal when he came to be slaughtered. 

 When I have spoken of this ill-judged policy, 

 I have as often been met with the assertion, 

 that those farmers knew what they were 

 about, and made more money at farming 

 than I did : but this making, meant no more 

 than that they saved more money, by ex- 

 pending less upon themselves and families 

 than I did ; for / ilenTj thai they can male 

 more hy farming tlian I can, upon a like 

 quantity of land, so far as the products or 

 yield in crops and cattle are concerned. If 

 some of the farmers alluded to were to be 

 charged with their own labour, and that of 

 their sons and daughters, at such rates as 

 they should be entitled to in another's em- 

 ploy, I would not hesitate to e.iter the lists 

 with the best of them. But, if they and 

 their children do all or most of the work, 

 and, by denying themselves many of the 

 comforts of life, lay up some money, does it 

 prove that their system of farming is the 

 best"? Certainly not. If they could be pre- 

 vailed upon to improve their practice, it 

 would tend to ligliten their load of toil — af- 

 ford, without impairing their income, some 

 relaxation of the drudgery to which they 

 and their children are doomed — and enable 

 them to avail themselves of the education 

 furnished by their own involuntary contribu- 

 tions, under the school law: it would redound 

 immeasurably to their prosperity and elevate 

 their children to that rank in society, which 

 of right is their legitimate prerogative. It 

 is lamentable to thiuk of the ascendancy 

 lawyers, doctors, merchants, and manufac- 

 turers, have acquired over the more nume- 

 rous and wealthier class — the farmers; who 



seem content to drudge on, unmindful of 

 their position, and the burdens imposed upon 

 them by the nobles — par excellence — and 

 that distinguished class, the professional poli- 

 ticians! Such is the false position of classes; 

 and so will it be, until the farmers rid them- 

 selves of the trammels in which faction has 

 so artfully involved them, in the name of 

 party, and qualify their sons to participate 

 in the Government, proportionably to their 

 means and mmibers. Let me not, however, 

 be understood as condemning industry and 

 economy : I mean nothing more than that 

 the hardest toil and the most rigid economy 

 should not be received as evidence of good 

 farming, I am an advocate for industry. 

 No business can ever prosper unless it be 

 carried on with spirit and constancy ; nor 

 can the most profitable returns make rich or 

 independent, without the rational and com- 

 mendable prudence which teaches us to limit 

 our expenses within the line of our income. 

 The extremes, extravagance and penurious- 

 ness, should be avoided by all ; and by none 

 more than the farmer. His prudence and 

 sense of propriety can in no way be more 

 fully tested, than in that of bringing up his 

 children. To reduce his offspring to the 

 condition of slaves, or to bring them up in 

 idleness, is alike censurable — so much so, 

 that it were difficult to draw the line, and 

 show which had the advantage; when, as 

 let it be supposed, the common drudge and 

 the geiiteel idler inherit each a valuable es- 

 tate. The youth trained up in idleness and 

 folly, and. the uneducated, who, from child- 

 hood, has been bound to drudgery and inces- 

 sant toil, — being now in possession — which 

 has the advantage"! Why, the idle and fash- 

 ionable sprig of mock-nobility will have the 

 shortest race; his lands will soon pass to 

 others, while his stupid contemporary will 

 hold, not live, upon his all the days of his 

 life ; but then to think of such an existence, 

 witiiout one ray of intellectual enjoyment 

 to brighten or change its gloomy and stag- 

 nant monotony ! 



To the question whether I think it profit- 

 able to raise hogs, either for market or do- 

 mestic consumption, and what breed do I 

 consider best] I answer, that on such a 

 farm as is under view, it would not be pro- 

 fitable to raise hogs for market, that is, for 

 fatting to sell on foot or to be slaughtered ; 

 while with a good breed of hogs, and under 

 circumstances of superabundance of food, 

 such as clover, roots, v.'aste vegetables, large 

 crop of corn, a few might occasionally be 

 fed over and above the necessary supply for 

 family use; in like manner, sometimes it 

 might be proper to fatten one or rnoi*e steers; 

 while in the main, it would be more profit- 



