^M 



FARMERS' REGISTER— AGRICULTURE IN PRINCE GEORGE. 



nerally thought too dear, would be highly profita- 

 ble. The least expense should be rejected, which 

 did not promise protit adequate to its reimb\irse- 

 ment ;■ bat permanent improvement cannot be pur- 

 chased too dearly, provide:d the increased profit 

 would more than pay the interest of the expendi- 

 ture. A farm -which would yield a regular annual 

 profit of 600 dollars, after paying all the expense 

 of cultivation, would be thought cheap at 10,000 

 dollars. But certainly it would be equally profita- 

 ble, to lay out 10,000 dollars on the imjirovcment 

 of land, already in possession , if from tliat improve- 

 ment, an additional clear profit of 000 dollais, cculd 

 be derived ; nor would the propriety of the mea- 

 sure be affected, whether the quantity of land thus 

 impr(.)ved, was 1000 acres, or only ten. This how- 

 ever, applies only to permanent improvement as 

 clearing, draining, and the application of earthy 

 manures which change the constitution of soils. — 

 Improvements which are temporary in their ef- 

 fects, such as more perfect tillage, or animal and 

 vegetable manures, to be profitable, must return 

 the principal, as well as the interest of the expen- 

 diture. 



The want of capital is considered an almost in- 

 superable obstacle to the improvement of agricul- 

 ture. None are now so listless, or so biggotted as 

 to consider it unnecessary, but their v.'ishes avail 

 nothing, because, " they have no surplus capital, 

 and their labor is ah'eady fully employed." It is 

 true indeed, that the capital of agriculture is small, 

 and its profits almost nothing; but we shall, not- 

 withstanding, endeavor to shew, that we have the 

 means for improvement fully within our reach, and 

 without the slightest diminution of our clear an- 

 nual profits. Capital cannot be increased at will, 

 although it is not long since the belief prevailed that 

 banking could effect that impossibility. — That opi- 

 nion however^ is no longer supported, and even our 

 legislatures have become almost convinced of their 

 mistake If our capital cannot l)e made equal to 

 our cultivation, at least our cultivation may be re- 

 duced, till the proper proportion is restored. This 

 reduction is required even by views of annua! profit, 

 and in the portion now unprofitably directed, abund- 

 ant means for improvement will be found. The 

 full amount of labor, time and fertility thus thrown 

 away, every one must estimate for himself; but 

 many processes are so general, that we cannot err 

 greatly in stating them. It would be both unne- 

 cessary and presuming in us to prescribe the pre- 

 cise means of improvement w hich shall be adopt- 

 ed; these must vary in different situations, and 

 our remarks are grounded on the supposition, 

 that every farmer knows sowie means by which he 

 might improve with profit, could he spare time and 

 labor for the purpose. 



The labor of a plantation is devoted about twen- 

 ty days in the year to repairing fences. — As those 

 on the dividing- lines of adjoining proprietors, are 

 made at their joint expense, the fences between the 

 several fields, require at least one half of this 

 time. By the discontinuance of division fences, avc 

 should save ten days' labor of every year, and by 

 so doing, protect all our fields from grazing, and 

 thus allow the land to improve itself during the 

 whole lime of its rest. We expect no wonderful 

 effects from merely enclosing, and none perliaps 

 would be perceived for several years. But its be- 

 nefits cannot on that account be questioned. En- 

 closing furnishes more vegetable matter to the 



earth, than could possibly be done in any other way, 

 (on our poor soils,) without any expense being in- 

 curred, and with the actual saving of ten days la- 

 bor. It is triie, that we lose the means of keeping 

 large stocks of poor cattle and sheep ; buf before 

 wc can admit this to be a loss of profit, it must be 

 j)r()ved that some profit is derived from keeping 

 stock in the usual mode. We are attempting to 

 shew in what manner our business may be render- 

 ed the most profitable, and not by w hat means we 

 may command most luxuries and conveniences ; 

 but even on this ground, a reduction of our stock 

 to one third their present number j would enable us 

 to derive from them as much gross product of wool, 

 meat and butter, and far more clear profit than now. 

 Al)out 45 days of the year, the whole of our la = 

 bor is employed in clearing land, of which a very 

 small proportion is rich enough to yield any clear 

 profit. Allowing 15 days for clearing enough for 

 firewood and other uses, there remains 30 which 

 may be saved without diminishing the nett product 

 of the farm. 



Much land is planted in corn, wJiich does not 

 produce more than one barrel per acre, and about 

 one iialf the arable land of the county, falls short 

 ef •2.V bbls. which has been stated as the least pro- 

 duct" that will defray the expense of cultivation. 

 One half of our land is cultivated, not only with- 

 out profit, but with certain and increasing loss; 

 and to this purpose, our labor is devoted ninety 

 days, the whole crop being supposed to require six 

 months. Every consideration of profit demands 

 tliat this portion of our soil should not be cultiva- 

 ted while in its present condition. This will save 

 of our whole labor new unprofitably employed 

 10 y^O >^90=130 tlays in every year, without di- 

 minishing, in the smallest degree, (he farmer's nett 

 profits. Every operation discontinued was a cer- 

 tain source of loss, nor is there any new employ- 

 ment for the labor on our farms, excepting their 

 improvement. If then the smallest clear profit 

 can be derived from the improvement of our soil, 

 the cliange of more than four months of loss, to 

 more than four months of gain, cannot fail to be 

 greatly and immediately beneficial. 



Your committee are aware that many trivial 

 and some real objections, (in certain situations,) 

 may be raised against th.e reduction of our culti- 

 vation to the extent recommended. We have al- 

 ready trespassed too much on your time, to shew 

 in detail, in how few cases such objections are so- 

 lid. Wiiatever may be the case under particular 

 circumstances, the general question of expediency 

 must turn on such statements as tlie preceding. If 

 we have made an incorrect report of our situation, 

 or if our estimates are false, let their fallacy be ex- 

 posed — but if they are correct, or even approach 

 correctness, it is scarcely possible for us to know 

 our situation, and yet not receive benefit from such 

 examinations of our own afi'airs. A complete change 

 of system on a farm cannot be effected at once ; 

 but no man can be fully sensible that he is regu- 

 larly throwing away one third, or even one sixth 

 of his laf)or and income, without quickly attempt- 

 ing to remove the defect. 



The obstacles to improvement, which have been 

 mentioned, serious as they are, may be removed 

 by our ow n exertions. There are others, of no 

 less magnitude, which are beyond our control — 

 evils which have been imposed on the agricultural 

 interest by government, which can only be remc- 



