234 



THE FARMERS' CABINET. 



VOL. I. 



attached to other pursuits, agriculture sup- 

 ports ALL AND PAYS ALL. Ilow important 

 then that its modes of operation he the best. 

 Let it further be borne, in mind, that a socie- 

 ty may promote many improvements, at a tri- 

 fling expense to the members, wluch would 

 be beyond the means of an individual. But 

 how can the usefulness of our society be in- 

 creased] I answer, in the first place by ob- 

 taining more members — by giving our mana- 

 gers the command of greater funds, and ena- 

 bling them, by offering more and larger pre- 

 miums, to excite a greater emulation among 

 us. Premiums are in an especial manner 

 necessary. A man may not be able to do a 

 thing the first time without loss, which ever 

 after he and all others may do with a profit. 

 Our government, by its Patent laws, has pro- 

 vided for the remuneration of the labors of 

 ingenious men, by the exclusive use of their 

 inventions. We ask them to communicate 

 their discoveries to the public, and take from 

 us such a reward for their labors as we can 

 afford to give them. But some may say, we 

 have the best land and the best mode of farm- 

 ing now ; the rest may copy after us. In- 

 deed ! — I should be sorry to shake any man's 

 good opinion of himself too rudely; but 1 

 would just say to such, if such there be, that 

 the best cultivated acre in Buftalo Valley, 

 would in Holland be thought slovenly and 

 unprofitable farming. I freely admit that 

 there are good farmers in Bufi'alo Valley ; but 

 the one half of what was a plantation fifteen 

 years ago, yields more profit now than the 

 whole did then. The time is approaching 

 when the half of this division of a plantation 

 will be a farm. It must tlien be better culti- 

 vated than it is now. It is a mistake to think 

 that any part of our country is cultivated in 

 the best possible manner. 



BOOK FARMING. 



But will any one say this book farming is 

 all nonsense 1 It answers no good purpose? — 

 How is a true thing the worse for being print- 

 ed? and how much easier it is to detect a 

 printed lie, than one than goes from mouth to 

 mouth, with instant variations. You have 

 the facts put down so that they cannot be 

 altered. And if it depends upon one man 

 telling his neigiibor, and he another, the 

 fourth man's story bears scarcely any resem- 

 blance to the first. It might, indeed, come 

 back to the first man as a piece of great news. 

 Carpenters, mill-wrights, and workers in met- 

 als, all study their books. Cloth dressers, 

 dyers and distillers have their books. A farm- 

 er will iiunt up an old newspaper to find 

 somebody's new way of curing hams; but if 

 he is asked to read in a book a way of increas- 

 ing his crops, his answer is, pshaw ! — don't I 

 know all about it! 



exhausted LAND. 



I would submit, whether, as a general prac- 

 tice, we do not farm too much land, and 

 whether the excess is not the greater the poor- 

 er the land is. I repeat, that the returns for la- 

 bor and capital, the profit, is what we all seek. 

 Is it not true, that much land is farmed with- 

 out profit, ahd much more without the profit 

 it ought to bring? In talking about profit, 

 every body understands that the investment 

 ought to be preserved safe, h' a man gets 

 the interest on his money for awhile, and 

 loses the principal, he does not talk of profit, 

 yhould a man get ten per cent, a year for ten 

 years, and then get no more, principal or 

 interest, would he talk of profit? !So I think 

 no farmer, whatever his apparent income 

 may be, ought to talk of profit, while he suf- 

 fers his land to become worse. This ought 

 not to be called farming. It is robbery of 

 those who come after us. There is an old 

 story of a man who had a goose that would 

 lay golden eggs. She did not lay them fast 

 enough to supply his wishes, and he killed the 

 goose. He got one egg and the supply ceas- 

 ed. It is so with those improvident farmers, 

 who push their land too hard. This principle 

 is therefore at the bottom of all good farming, 

 to wit, we must on no account, suffer our 

 land to grow worse. If this principle is 

 steadily adhered to, it will grow better. It is 

 almost impossible so to adjust our labor as 

 that our land shall not grow better or worse. 

 What we take ofl' must bear a proportion to 

 what we put on the land. Does any one 

 doubt the truth of all this? Is it sufficiently 

 considered in our country ! On the contrary, 

 is there not a very large proportion of farms 

 in our district which become annually more 

 and more exhausted? Does this deserve to 

 be called by the name of farming ? Is this 

 the course we should expect the owners of 

 land to pursue ? Onlhe contrary, is it not the 

 very course that squatters, tliose who sit 

 down to skin other people's land, would be 

 expected to pursue ! Is it not true, that eve- 

 ry man, who takes the strength out of land in 

 a few crops, really does kill the goose that 

 lays the golden eggs? Can any thing be 

 more improvident 1 While a country is new, 

 this may not be so much thought of; but our 

 country is no longer new, and this principle 

 presses itself upon our attention as one of first 

 rate importance. But why do men practice 

 on the contrary principle? Partly from imi- 

 tating bad examples, and partly from a habit 

 of making most of to-day, and letting to-mor- 

 row take care of itself It is one of the bene- 

 fits we expect to derive from our society, 

 that its members will set better examples, 

 and make all ashamed to follow such old and 

 injurious practices. 



