1836.] 



FARMERS' REGISTER, 



665 



perty has been cimnged, whether by- patriotic 

 statesmen, or self-interesteil demaiijogues, the lu- 

 ture elt'ects on personal riiijhls and power were 

 oiii'y considered. There id no measure ol" our go- 

 vernment to which these general remarks apply, 

 more truly than to the destruction of entails and 

 the right ol' primogeniture, in Virginia. The 

 principal object of this measure, (and probably^ 

 the only effect (breseen by the great statesman and 

 pure patriot who proposed and carried it through,) 

 was to insure the preservation of the equal politi- 

 cal power ol the people, b}' puttin;^ down Ibrcver 

 the influence of the " landed, aristocracy," But 

 while the general, and repeated division of land 

 was producing its intended and legitimate object, 

 it has also been slowly and silentiy, but most ef- 

 fectually, assailing the agricultural prospcritj' ol' 

 Virginia. This opmion will meet with few avow- 

 ed advocates — indeed, not one, unless he is both 

 fearless of popular censure, and careless or hope- 

 less of popular applause. 



Passing by the most apparent political tenden- 

 cies and benefits of our existing legal policy 

 of distributing lands, as a measure of state, I 

 shall proceed to inquire into the incidental and 

 unnoticed operation of the system on asriculture ; 

 and, through agriculture, on the public wealth 

 and prosperity. It is not my intention to treat the 

 question, (though well it deserves such extended 

 examination,) as belonginij; to politics or govern- 

 ment, or morals — nor as aifecting the feeling.s. 

 prejudices, and happiness of individuals — but sim- 

 pl}- as a disputable point in |)olit!cal economy, par- 

 ticularly involving the interests of acrriculture. 



It has long been a subject for discussion, whe- 

 ther large or small farms are most profitable to 

 their owners, and consequently most conducive to 

 public wealth. In Britain, pariicularly, this discus- 

 sion has engaged the attention of every able mo- 

 dern writer on agriculture ; and every fact and ar- 

 gument have been adduced, which could be 

 brought to support either side. There, strong 

 reasons could be urged in favor of small farms, 

 (say of 30 to 200 acres) which would not apply 

 tons: as for exam|)!e — that the cultivated parts 

 of the island were already generally divided into 

 small farms, and that a great sacrifice of fixed 

 capital (in houses, fences, &c.) would be caused 

 by throwing 10 or 12 such farms info one : that 

 the laboreis on large farms were discouraged from 

 marrying, and in consequence, that Uw. increase of 

 population v/ould be obstructed, and the morals of 

 the laboring class thereby injured. But notwith- 

 standing these reasons, winch cannot apply to a 

 slaveholding country, and also other reasons, 

 which are of general application, it is the decision 

 of the most enlightened agriculturists of Enffland 

 and Scotland, that large farms arc most profitable 

 for the owner, the occupier, and also for the na- 

 tion. 



This deduction may be right, or wrong: and at 

 any rate, I do not advocate the adoption of such 

 opinions on mere authority, though supported by 

 such names as those of Young, Sinclair, Brown, 

 and Coke. But if their opinion is correct, that 

 email li\rms are least profitable, where land is rich, 

 and its product is sold for high prices — where the 

 system of landlord and tenant is almost universal 

 — where small farms were already general — 

 where the laborers were free, and the lirinners 

 themselves were accustomed to aid as well as to 



superintend the performance of every operation — 

 then much more certain must be this truth in this 

 country, where all these circumstances are found 

 reversed. But let us examine our situation in this 

 respect, without reli3rence to, or comparison with 

 other countries. 



Both large and small farms possess peculiar and 

 opposite advantages ; and the interests ol a coun- 

 try would be greatly injured, b}' its land being uni- 

 versally, or even very generally, kept in either very 

 large or very small divisions. Let me not there- 

 lore be misunderstood as supporting a state of 

 things equally absurd in theory and impossible 

 in practice, when I shall state the peculiar advan- 

 tages of either plan of division, or contend for the 

 superiority, in particular respects, of the one size 

 over the other. It is also requisite, in discussing 

 the respective advantages of large and small 

 farms, to dismiss from our minds every argument 

 built on the personal and peculiar characters of 

 different individuals. An industrious, economical, 

 and intelligent farmer, however inconveniently 

 situated, may derive more income frotn his capital 

 than his indolent and wastefiil neighbor, possess- 

 ing ten-fold advantages : and yet no such fact, nor 

 any number of them, will prove the situation in 

 which the former was placed, to be better than 

 that of the latter. 



The small farmer, who works only one or two 

 horses and three or four laborers, and who him- 

 self labors as well as directs, possesses the great 

 advantage of being able to exercise the most per- 

 fect economy and industry in the management of 

 his fiirm. If he drives, feeds and stables his own 

 horses, he can derive the utmost amount from 

 their labor, and they, the greatest benefit^fi-om his 

 care and attention. Almost nothing is lost by 

 waste or neglect, because the farmer can see, or 

 attend every thing. All the various little savings 

 from such sources, are sufficient to cause the pro- 

 visions, stock and labor of the small fiirmcr, to be 

 more efficient in the particular manner in ivhich 

 they are directed, than an equal amount of capital 

 employed as part of the expense of a large farm. 

 But the manner, or plan, of directing capital and 

 labor on small farms, is necessarily and greatly in- 

 fijrior to that on large flirms, for reasons that will 

 presently be offered. By making the best use of 

 the economical advantages just alluded to, many 

 of the small fiirmers of Augusta county are more 

 thriving than most of our richest landholders : and. 

 if most of our farms were as small, and all their 

 cultivators showed the same untiring industry and 

 frugality, no doubt there would be a great increase 

 of individual profit, and public wealth, in spite ol 

 all the disadvantages inseparable from small 

 farms. But unfortunately, such examples are 

 rare, because there are rarely found Itu'mers so ad- 

 mi. able for frugality and industry: and when the 

 owner is lazy, improvident, or drunken, all the 

 net income of a small farm will speedily vanish. 

 In every case, the personal habits of the cultivator, 

 whether rrood or bad, must more immediately af- 

 fect the net product of a small than a large farm. 



But notwithstanding the superior advantages 

 that small farms enjoy, in many respects, it is still 

 undeniable that on them the operations of agri- 

 culture can never be well performed, nor can the 

 greatest net products be derived, nor the most 

 valuable improved processes carried on, for want 

 of the skill which only a division of labor can pro- 



