72 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



Feb. 



For the New England Farmer. 

 FAjSTCY PAIlMII>rG, 



Mr. Editor : — Your Chelmsford correspondent 

 lias made use of an expression in his last commu- 

 nication, which I propose to make the text of a 

 few remarks. I have nothing to do with his no- 

 tions about the unprofitableness, the unhoalthful- 

 ness, or the demoralizing influence of New Eng- 

 land farming. 



He verj' kindly advises "the lawyers, the doc- 

 tors, the preachers, and the soft-hand gentry gen- 

 erally, to observe the familiar adage, 'Shoemaker, 

 stick to thy last.' " 



I think "he has intimated that farmers cannot 

 live by their legitimate occupation, but are obliged 

 to resort to trading, and other occupations, to eke 

 out a living. Now, v.hy may not men of other 

 vocations enjoy the same privilege. If they find 

 it a matter of necessity to resort to a little farm- 

 ing to eke out the deficiencies in their business, 

 why should the farmers complain ? And if they 

 should, at times, talk a little about their "little 

 farming," why should anybody object to this ? 

 Farming is a business in which an earnest, sim- 

 ple-hearted man may become very deeply interest- 

 ed, and if he should write his thoughts about it, 

 or seek to obtain more knowledge about it, why 

 should he be told to "mind his own business ?" 



The farmer, when he wishes to know anything 

 about law, or medicine, or theology, very natural- 

 ly consults the lawyer, the doctor, or the preacher, 

 and when they wish to know anything about farm- 

 ing, they very'naturally consult the farmer. Whom 

 else should they consult ? Does not friend Pink- 

 ham claim the right to know anything about law, 

 medicine or religion P Does he confine his atten- 

 tion exclusively to his farming ? Perhaps he has 

 done so, and this is the reason why he is so much 

 in advance of other men in agricultural knowledge. 

 But if he were prohibited from attending to law, 

 medicine, religion or politics, I think I am safe in 

 making the inference, from the spirit of indepen- 

 dence he shows, that he would be amon^ the first 

 to join "a tea-party" or even the "Continental ar- 

 my." The farmers are not bound to follow as au- 

 thority the crude speculations of inexperinced 

 men, and I trust they generally have discrimina- 

 tion enough to select the good, and cast the bad 

 away. But why other men have no right to inter- 

 est themselves in farming matters, I confess that 

 I, a New England man, cannot understand. The 

 attempt, in the same connection, to cast a slur 

 upon professional men, and diminish their influ- 

 ence by calling them "soft-hand gentry," is, to 

 say the best of it, indicative of a sad want of 

 taste. Why should he, of all men, reproach oth- 

 ers for not)» making their hands hard with labor, 

 when he is striving to show that laboring upon 

 the soil is both unprofitable and demoralizing ? 

 But seriously, who are the "soft-hand gentry" to 

 whom your correspondent refers ? Are they not, 

 for the most part, the sons of New England far- 

 mers, brought up upon the farm, and accustomed 

 to till the soil in their early days, and still bear- 

 ing in their hands the marks of youthful toil ? 

 DkI not many of them leave their paternal acres, 

 that younger brothers might occupy them ? Have 

 not many sought other occupations through the 

 influence of just such ideas as Mr. P. is advanc- 

 ing, \ii.: that farming is a hard and unprofitable 



business ? These are old ideas that have been re- 

 peated over and over. If any have sought other 

 occupations from such influences, it seems to mc 

 peculiarly unfair now to reproach them for being 

 soft-handed, which, I take it, means, not working 

 for their living. 



If there is any class of men in New England 

 who are hard-working men, it is the professional 

 men. They labor hard to acquire the prej^aration 

 for their professions, and they labor in the prac- 

 tice of them more hours than do fai'mers or me- 

 chanics, and their labor, too, is of a kind which is 

 more exhausting both to mind and body. From 

 various reasons, many professional men, as avcII as 

 mechanics and merchants, engage more or less in 

 agricultural pursuits. Some from want of suceess 

 in other pursuits ; others, because they find as 

 they advance in life, a taste for the pursuits of 

 their early youth reviving within them. But more, 

 because the cultivation of the soil is the natural 

 em])loyment of intelligent men, an employment in 

 which "thev can indulge their tastes and find an in- 

 nocent occupation, at the same time promotive of 

 health and enjoyment. Why should not such men 

 bring into exercise in their agricultural pursuits 

 the intelligence and the careful habits of observa- 

 tion Avhich they have acquired in their previous 

 occupations ? If any of them have acquired 

 wealth, and arc disposed to make experiments, and 

 see fit to pu])lish the results, Avhy should practical 

 farmers comjflain ? Are they injured by it ? 



j\Iay not the unfavorable result of an experi- 

 ment, made by some one who can afford the loss, 

 deter them from a ruinous expenditure ? All the 

 slang about "gentlemen farm'^rs," "soft-hand gen- 

 try," "book-fiirmers," and assertions that most of 

 the agricultural books and essays are written by 

 men who are not "practical," "mere theorists," is 

 simply contemptible. It is mostly used either by 

 very ignorant men, or by men who are very con- 

 ceited, and wish to set themselves up by pulling 

 down others. Some who have acquired a good 

 deal of information by conversing with scientific 

 men, vrith men who have read and thought much, 

 and given them the results of their studies, under- 

 take to ridicvile science and books. These men, 

 who have thus acquired all they know from books 

 at second-nand, who are really indebted to the re- 

 searches and experiments of science for all their 

 own success, ought to take a higher position, and 

 exert a better influence upon the rising genera- 

 tion of farmers. 



Who is the practical man ? Is no man practi- 

 cal except he who labors the whole time with his 

 own hands ? Is not he a practical man who tests 

 opinions and theories by experience ; who refuses 

 to accept theories until they have been confirmed 

 by experiments made by himself, or by otiiers on 

 whom he can rely ? May not a man be eminently 

 practical, and not labor Avith his hands at all ? 

 May he not have a practical mind, and be a care- 

 ful observer and a close thinker, and his opinions 

 and judgment be worth vastly more than those of 

 the mere routine laborer ? Some men learn noth- 

 ing by experience. They have not learned how to 

 learn. Other men by making the facts which they 

 observe the subject of thought and study, rapidly 

 acquire wisdom by experience. The experience of 

 a few years is worth more to them than the ex- 

 perience of a life-time is to others; and just in 

 proportion to their ability to draw accurate re- 



