THE GE.'^ESEE FARMER. 



379 



Is the Genessc Farmer the " Oldest Asfricul- 

 tural Jfaper in America ? " 



TuK Cotintry Geidhman of November 5 lias the follow- 

 ivtr reiiuu'ka ou this subject, : 



"\V!iy does our friend Harris of the Genesee Farmer, 

 oiuiiiue to advertise his (laper as the'uklest agrienl- 

 tural i)a[)er in Amei-ica,' and to assert that it was -estab- 

 lished in 1831,' when he well knows both statements to be 

 iitt.i.M-lv destituie of any foundation lu fact? His Geneiee 

 Faniipr, as he very well knows, lias no mure connection- 

 witli the oriiiinal Genttsee Fanner established in 18:31, tlian 

 it, has with the original New Erigl<tnd Farmer, established 

 in I82li. The tacts are, as follows: The tirst Genesee 

 Fanner. tre<-H//, was established by Lutiikr Tucker in 

 I8;;l, and bv him continued until the close of 1839, when, 

 ou the death of Jud<;e HrELi., that paper was removed to 

 Albany, and united with the Cultivator, under the title of 

 ' The Ctiltivator, a comolidatioa of Buell's Cultivator and 

 the Gem-see Farmer,' under which title it was published 

 for some years, when the latter part of the tale was 

 dropped as unnecessary. On the removal of the Genesee 

 Fanner hom Rochester, a /;,««; paper was started there, 

 culled the 'New Ge'i-.see Farmer,' ai.d this is the origin of 

 the prexeut Genesee. Fu'-mer. So that instead of being 

 'established in LSol,' Mr. Haruis' pai)er was established 

 m 1S40, and instead of being the 'oldest agi-icultural pa- 

 per m America,' it is the junior of several others. 



•• The senior editor of this paper may be considered a 

 little sensitive on this subject; but having commeneed 

 Uis Genesee Far?ner in 18ol, when there was little demand 

 ior ^uch papers, and continued Ins labors in behalf of ag- 

 ricultural improvement from that day to this, he con- 

 fesses to a great dislike to having nine years of his labors 

 B4)i>ropriated by another concern." 



We may remark, in passing, that the present editor 

 and proprietor of the Genesee Farmer has not ihs least 

 personal feeling on this subject. So far as he is con- 

 cerned, it is of iro sort of consequence whether the Gene- 

 tee Farmer is, or is not, the oldest agricultural paper in 

 America. He regards it simply, first, as a question of 

 fact, and, second, a^ a matter of credit to the farmers of 

 Diis section. 



The Country Gentleman admits that the Genesse Farmer 

 was established in 18.31. There is no dispute on this 

 .point. The only question is whether the Genesee Farmer 

 has been continuously published since that time. Have 

 ik< farmers of Western, New York sustained an agricul- 

 tural paper since 1831 ; and is that paper the Genesee 

 Farmior? 



When Mr. Tockbr first started the Genese* Farmer it 

 wag 0. weekly paper; but he afterwards published it aS a 

 monthly journal, the matter being made up out of the 

 ^eetlv—just as the Cultivator is now made up from the 

 Country .Gentleman. In the fall of 1839 Mr. Tucker an- 

 nounced that, as the Monthly Genesee Farmer had at- 

 tained a much larger circulation than the Weekly Genesee 

 Farmer, the latter would be discontinued, and that the 

 Tolume for 1840 would be called " The Genesee larmer. 

 Vol. I. Second Series." 



When the present publisher of the Genesee Farmer 

 purchased the paper iu 1856, he found it beaded "Vol. 

 XVII. Second series." Had Mr. Tucker continued to 

 publish ;it, it would have been headed precisely in the 

 •tame way. If the heading is wrong, Mr. Harris did not 

 Miginate it. He has merely continued the heading from 

 itikat<time. 



After Mr. Tucker 'had announced that the Weekly Gen- 

 tsM Farmer would be given up and the monthly cowimxx^A 

 *8 » " new series," he concluded to remove to Albany and 



merge the Genesee Farm,er in the Cultivator. But certain 

 parties at Rochester continued it. We do not think they 

 had any right to do so ; but that is not the question. The 

 paper ivas continued. 



J. J. TuoMAs, who was one of the editors of the old 

 Genesee Farmer, assumed the chief editorship of the new 

 paper. 



The simple question is. Was the "New Genesee Farmei^' 

 a continuation ot the old Genesee Farmer? Was it so re- 

 garded at the time? Did Mr. Tucker himself so regard 

 it? We think it could be easily shown that he did — 

 otherwise there would have been no reason for his com- 

 plaint of ''injustice" and his strenuous opposition to the 

 paper. 



Turning to the first volume of the New Genesee Farmer 

 (1840) we find in the very first number an article in which 

 it is said : 



"The first establishment of the Genesee Farmer was an 

 e.xperiment of doubtful expediency, but its re tstahlisTi- 

 ment can not be considered as such," &c. 



In the same number the editors, in urging farmers to 

 subscribe early, say : 



" It may be remembered that those who subscribed late 

 last season could not obtain back numbers so as to make 

 their volumes complete." 



There is certainly in this sentence an implied connec- 

 tion between the two papers. 



In the next number the editors say : 

 " We are located in the midst of the greatest grain 

 producing country in America, if not in the world ; and 

 the Genesee Farmer is well known as the channel of 

 communication to thousands of men whose well-directed 

 labors and fertile soil supply millions with bread." 



Are we not justified in concluding from these remarks 

 that the editors considered the New Genesee Farmer a con- 

 tinuation of the old? 

 In the same number a correspondent says : 

 " I feel that the continuance of such a paper in this sec- 

 tion is of the utmost importance," <fec. 

 And aga'.n : 



"It is emphatically our own paper, located in the midst 

 of us and devoted to our interests— a native of our 

 climate and indigenous to our soil." 



And again, urging the importance of sustaining the 

 paper in Western New York, it is argued that to do so 

 " wilt say to the world that neither the farms nor the 

 farmers of Genesee are too poor to support what they 

 were first in the State to establish— a paper of their 

 own." 



Another correspondent in the same paper says ; 



"The Genesee Farmer had its birth and education 

 among us. We gave it our name, and regarded it as a 

 part of ourselves, which would remain with us during 

 life. We nourished it in infancy, and trained it up to 

 manhood ; taught it our habits, our wants, and our re- 

 sources, and prepared it for a glorious career of useful- 

 ness. When lo ! at the time of our greatest need— and 

 without our leave or consent— it forsook us for the sake 

 of promised gain ; and not only left us destitute, but be- 

 trayed our interests by exciting prejudice and suspicion 

 ao-ainst any successor which might be appointed to take 

 it's name and place. « * * I rejoice, however, that 

 our loss is made good— a successor has been appointed, 

 and that, too, not a 'spurious 'novice or a stranger, but a 

 real genuine New Genesee Farmer, brov^ht up and educated 

 among us. , It is assisted by the same friends," ic, &c. 



In the next number the editors ask their friends t« 

 continue their efforts on behalf of the paper, and say : 

 "We will soon show that the Genesee Country is not 



