172 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



Fur the Neio England Farmer. 



FARM BUILDIN^GS. 



?tlii. Edttoh : In your number of April 13, vre 

 observed a selected aitiilc, whicli treats of the merits 

 of the difiercat nwitcrwls iised in tlic construction of 

 farm biiildings. The writer enumei-atcs the advan- 

 tages chiimcd for wood, by its advocates — "its 

 cheapness, beauty, the facility of obtaining it, and 

 the readiness with which it can be repaired ; " and 

 asks wlicthcr they can be sustained. As to cheap- 

 ness, he says he believes that " most fanners, who 

 have their farms and buildings in decent condition, 

 spend as much in repairing the structures for a term 

 of years, as would pay the interest upon good stone 

 ones." This is given as a mere ojjinion, unsup- 

 ported by any ascertained and stated facts. Upon a 

 (juestion of this kind we should be pleased to sec the 

 tigurcs upon which the calculation is based — what 

 the supposed amount of repairing upon a wooden 

 building costing any given sum, for a term of years — 

 what the difference in cost between constructing a 

 building of the same dimensions, of wood, or of 

 stone — and what the difference in the expense of 

 repairing which each would require. Taking the 

 statement referred to to be correct, it admits that, in 

 the first instance, the cost of stone is much greater 

 than that of wood, and that farmers have a capital, 

 which they can well invest in the manner proposed ; 

 while the fact that the former requires repairs as well 

 as the latter, is entirely overlooked. The percentage 

 for repaus upon substantial wooden buildings, always 

 kept in decent condition, (and this will be the cheap- 

 est, ) for a series of years, according to my experience, 

 would form but a small capital to meet even the in- 

 terest upon the dijferciice in costs between those of 

 wood and those of stone, supposing the latter re- 

 quired no repairs. But much of those expenses hav- 

 ing been incurred for interior work, and roofs, doors, 

 windows, &c., Avould have been necessary, of which- 

 .soever of those materials the buildings had been 

 constructed. 



The writer referred to says, "AVhen a man sells 

 his farm with wooden buildings upo'.i it, such as are 

 generally found in New England, it brings no 

 higher price per acre, than if destitute of buildings 

 altogether ; '" that is to say, the buildings being wood, 

 they do not enhance the value of the estate. This is 

 absui-d. No single instance, we venture to say, can 

 be produced to corroborate this statement. Take two 

 farms of equal size and of equal goodness, the one 

 entirely destitute of every structure, and the other 

 having upon it such wooden buildings " as are gen- 

 erally found in New England,'' would any judicious 

 man, who is called upon to appraise the estates, ap- 

 praise them at the same value ? Would not any per- 

 son wishing to buy, be willing to pay more for the one 

 than the other ? Supposing a farm is offered for sale, 

 with good wooden buildings upon it, and a person 

 offers, and is willing to pay, what is considered, by 

 competent judges, its value, and pending the contract 

 those builcUngs should bo consumed by lire, would 

 he afterwards pay as much for the remainder of 

 the estate ? It is true, that farm buildings, whatever 

 may be the materials used, will seldom be estimated 

 and sell at their costs, llarely will a farm in good 

 condition bring the costs of its improvements, putting 

 the ordinary charges upon labor. Indeed, we know 

 of good farms, which it is said would not sell for 

 more than an amount sufficient to pay for the stone 

 fences constructed upon them, at such a computa- 

 tion. 



Then the liability of wooden buildings to take 

 fire is considered ; and this is regarded as a " serious 

 objection in the country," on account of the scarcity 

 of file-engines. Stone structures arc certainly more 



secure from fire from without, but not within ; and 

 where engines are scarce, it will rarely happen that 

 either "arc ever extinguished " when once well on 

 fire, Tlie advantage in favor of stone, if any, can 

 be ascertained by the difference in. the rates of in- 

 surance. 



Stone is then pronounced " emphatically the ma- 

 terial for us at the north." Tlie writer says, " Its 

 solidity, durability, strength, beautj", imperviousness 

 to moisture, its coolness in summer, and warmth in 

 winter, the facility with which it can bo obtained, 

 render it, take it all in all, the best." A part of 

 these qualities may be correctly claimed, but we do 

 not consider them advanta(jes. A stone building is 

 solid, but one of wood can bo constructed quite solid 

 enough for all u?cful purposes. A stone building 

 may or may not have greater strength than one of 

 wood ; this depends upon the labor expended, and 

 the quantity and quality of the materials used, in 

 erecting it. But supposing it has, — is not a well- 

 built wooden one strong enough? 



As to "beauty," we should prefer an ordinary 

 house of wood well painted, to one built, as su'^- 

 gested, of common pasture stone. Most of the stone 

 ordinarily used in the country to build cellar and 

 pasture walls is too large, heavy, and misshapen, 

 and too difficult to hammer, to build the outside 

 walls of farm buildings. There are some beautiful 

 stone structures in the country, but they are expen- 

 sive. In erecting farm buildings of that material, it 

 would not answer to pay much regard to ornament. 

 The '^beauty" part, especially if carried to tliat 

 extent which an improved taste is reaching, must be 

 of wood, to meet the condition of ordinary repub- 

 lican purses. 



As to the imperviousness of a stone building to 

 moisture, much also depends upon the kind or quality 

 of the stone and mortar used, and the care and skill 

 expended in erecting it. Where there is a deficiency 

 in either, it is difficult afterwards to apply a thorough, 

 remedy. Perviousncss to moisture is not a rare 

 complaint with regard to stone. Downing says, the 

 fault of dampness, which is generally fountl of stone 

 buildings, can be remedied by Avhat is technically 

 called furring off. This undoubtedly, to a partial 

 extent, avoids the difficulty, but docs not wholly 

 eradicate it. There is an atmosphere lilcc that of a 

 vault or cellar, in the rooms of stone buildings, in the 

 winter, which have not been heated for some days. 

 Many of our stone churches, which are not heated 

 but once a week in that season, are wholly unfit for 

 an invalid to attend. 



" Bad mortar," says Waistell, a celebrated English 

 writer, " is the main cause of the decay of all otcr 

 modern buildings, from the cottage to the palace." 

 And in connection with this subject he remarks, that 

 "lioman cement should be used in the foundation, 

 in exterior jointing, and frequently even plastering 

 in the interior in different proportions, according to 

 circumstances." This material is seldom here used 

 for such purposes, if for no other reason than for the 

 additional expense. We do not think that the mor- 

 tar ordinarily used here is superior to that used 

 elsewhere, while the frost, being more severe, acts 

 more freely, and produces a greater injury. 



Stone is certainly more durable than wood, but the 

 latter is more readily repaired. Whether the walls 

 of a house be of one or the other, the building is of 

 use so long as the doors, windows, and the interior 

 materials ajid work admit of its being kept in hab- 

 itable order. The old stone walls would be of little 

 value of themselves alone. If proper attention is 

 paid to repairs, the wooden house will fully realize 

 the wishes of the writer referred to, when once Avell 

 built ; " there it stands, to be transmitted to children, 

 and children's children, unto the third and fourth 

 generation," and longer if desirable. 



