i8o8. 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



541 



of their use, and to intimate that the /"arming 

 lands of New England are enjoying the full ad- 

 vantage of thorough draining, is as preposterous 

 as it would be to say that because the Bible has 

 been translated into the dialect of Hindostan, 

 and a few missionaries have been established in 

 the peninsular, therefore the Hindoos are enjoy- 

 ing all the advantages that Christianity is capa- 

 ble of affording them. Our neat stock has been 

 "regenerated," by "the pick and pride of foreign 

 herds," to a much greater extent than our lands 

 have been improved by drainage, but very much 

 yet remains to be done even in this department. 

 In all the departments of agriculture, I believe 

 that the "results are" fully "commensurate with 

 the means" actually applied. More than this, it 

 would be absurd to expect. 



But were it true that New England farmers 

 had availed themselves of the "advances in agri- 

 cultural science, and the improved means and 

 modes of farming," that thorough draining, im- 

 proved farm implements, and natural and artifi- 

 cial fertilizers, were universally employed — that 

 regenerated neat stock, and Morgans and Black 

 Hawks filled our stalls, and agricultural journals 

 and hand books were upon every farmer's table, 

 would not this prove that farming, so far from be- 

 ing deteriorated,was going forward, upon the "full 

 tide of successful experiment ?" Were this hy- 

 pothesis an actuality, we should want no further 

 witness to convict of falsehood the assertion that 

 farming is deteriorating in New England. So 

 far as it is an actuality, it proves that farming is 

 advancing towards its true ends and aims. 



If "the life of the New England farmer" ever 

 has been, and still is so "widely diff"erent from 

 what it might be and ought to be," how is it that 

 "in the quiet evening hours," "visions of the old 

 homestead" and the pleasant associations of early 

 life come to the "successful merchant," the "pro- 

 fessional men" and the "author," to "all minds 

 that can apprehend life's true enjoyments," draped 

 in such a costume of "rural beauty" that "the 

 heart will breathe a sigh, and the eye drop a tear, 

 and the voice say," "it were better so ?" If even 

 "the imagination weave the picture," the stern 

 experiences of the past which drove them from 

 that life, "which had nothing attractive and beau- 

 tiful and good in it" — that "mean and contemp- 

 tible life" all whose "economies, associations and 

 objects were i-epulsive," would correct the hand 

 of the artist, and would interweave with the warp 

 which he had laid, a woof of dark and sombre 

 hue, drawn from the life of the man who had 

 there "become a beast of burden." If to the best 

 minds in the city, in their best hours, there come 

 such visions, accompanied with longings and re- 

 solves that "by-and-bye, in some golden hour, 

 that life shall be enjoyed," if to such minds, there 

 is ever present the thought, that "the farm is 

 nearer Heaven than the street," can it be possi- 

 ble that the memories of the old homestead, which 

 form the basis of such visions, are made up of 

 scenes, and actors, and employments and motives, 

 which have the direct tendency to depress the in- 

 tellect, blunt the sensibilities, and animalize the 

 man ? Are these the memories of a life which is 

 a "pestilent perversion," "a sale of the soul to 

 the body," a life whose "natural and inevitable 

 result is mental and physical deterioration ?" The 

 writer, with some vague idea of a good that has 



"survived the fall," attempts to account for the 

 fact that such longings for rural life, and such 

 visions of "the quiet scenes of nature," visit the 

 men of the city, by referring to a "reminiscence 

 of the first estate when man was lord of Eden." 

 But when the Indian forms visions of a future 

 paradise, the poet tells us, that he "dreams of 

 abundant game, and that his faithful dog shall 

 bear him company." He does not dream of "gor- 

 geous palaces," nor of the luxuries or refinements 

 of civilized life, but his imagination weaves into 

 his web the scenes and the pleasures with which 

 he is most familiar, and to which his heart is 

 most strongly alive, and so it is ever, "as face 

 answereth to face in water, so the heart of man 

 to man." If farm life and rural scenes in New 

 England were not remembered with pleasure, if 

 these scenes were not peopled with loved and 

 lovable friends, this life and these scenes would 

 not constitute the prominent objects, the fore- 

 ground in the pictures woven by the imagination, 

 when disgusted by the monotony and frivolity of 

 city life. 



i will not attempt to follow this writer through 

 all his vagaries. He assumes as a fact, that farm 

 life in New England, has deteriorated, and is de- 

 teriorating, and that the cultivators in New Eng- 

 land are undergoing a process of "both physical 

 and mental deterioration." This state of things, 

 which a more extended acquaintance with his 

 subject would convince him is absolutely false 

 and groundless, he attempts to account for, and 

 it is not surprising that he is compelled to draw 

 upon his imagination for facts and illustrations 

 to sustain his position. He introduces the con- 

 trast between the two extremes of Irish life, as 

 the basis of an illustration of the difference be- 

 tween farm life and city life. Had he told us in 

 a bold and honest manner, what are the "other 

 obvious causes" which "have had something to 

 do" in producing this "contrast," instead of leav- 

 ing us to infer that the chief causes are continued 

 labor, and "the difference in food," he might have 

 more satisfactorily accounted for it. The account 

 of the farmer and the farmer's home, I must re- 

 serve for a future occasion. 



For the New England Parmer. 

 BEEF VS. COKN". 



Mk. Editor : — I have been a constant and in- 

 terested reader of the Farmer for seven years, 

 and I scarcely know how I could get along with- 

 out it; but from the views of some of its corres- 

 pondents, I respectfully differ. I think the arti- 

 cle by W. A. Alcott, in the Farmer of Septem- 

 ber 25, entitled "Corn versus Beef," does not 

 present a fair view of the subject in all its con- 

 nections, and that it would not be good economy 

 for the farmers of New England, at least, to fol- 

 low its teachings. 



Domestic animals form the basis of all farm 

 improvement, and there is a close connection be- 

 tween the animals a man keeps, and the crops he 

 raises ; but it would not pay to keep them sim- 

 ply to change food into manure, throwing the 

 carcass away, because this or that dietetic re- 

 former says meat is unfit for food. 



The Doctor quotes a writer who says it re- 

 quires ten pounds of corn to produce a pound of 



