proved woodland where the shrub-oak and the stunted? 

 pine have filled the place of the maple, the beech, the 

 birch, the ash, and the oak — if all the agricultural land 

 of Massachusetts were put at sale to-day at the price 

 which is asked for it, the proceeds would not be sufficient 

 to dig the stones and rebuild the stonewalls which fence 

 them. 



Again, we see that farming presents so few attractions 

 as a business, that all our young men are flocking to the 

 cities or engaging in commerce upon the seas, or seeking 

 adventures abroad, or homes in the Western uncultivated 

 lands. Anything rather than here pursue the occupation 

 of a farmer. If they farm at all, they go to the West, 

 to make themselves new homes there. And if you ask 

 the reason of this, you are told, '' who would spend his 

 time upon the sterile broken lands of Massachusetts 

 when he can have the rich prairies of Illinois and Kan- 

 sas, Avithout a stone, or a stump, or a hill, on which to 

 make his farm ! " Probably there was never a greater 

 fallacy than that farming can be made more profitable- 

 in the West than in New England. What crop will you 

 plant there of which you cannot raise more here than 

 there to the acre ? Is it corn ? Compare Massachusetts 

 in 1867, with Ohio and Texas, to see why our sons 

 should go either West or South to raise corn. In 1867, 

 corn here averaged 35 bushels to the acre ; in Ohio 28 

 bushels to the acre ; Texas 28 bushels to the acre. So 

 that, in fact, the average worth of an acre of corn in 

 Massachusetts was from $50 to $54; in Ohio, $20 to 

 $23, and in Texas, |17 to $22. Is it wheat? The 

 average yield of wheat in Massachusetts was 16 bushels 

 to the acre ; in Ohio, 15 ; in Texas, 9. While the wheat 



