68 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



March 



LETTER PROM MR. BROWN. 

 State House, Columbus, Ohio, Jan. 5, 1864. 



Gentlemen : — I wrote you from Buffalo, on 

 the 2d inst., in the midst of the great storm. I 

 was fearful that you might think my account of it 

 overwrought, but the papers of this morning show 

 that I did not then appreciate its magnitude. 

 The farther west I go the more terrible I find its 

 effects. 



I arrived here on Tuesday morning, at 2 o'clock, 

 in the midst of a snow storm which has kept along 

 with us most of the way from Buffalo. My object 

 in coming at so unpropitious a season, was to attend 

 a Wool Growers' Convention, in order to keep my- 

 self and your readers informed as to what might 

 transpire in regard to this great interest. 



The Legislature and the Ohio State Board of 

 Agriculture were in session, and I had the pleasure 

 of an introduction to the Governors of the out- 

 going and in-coming administrations, to the officers 

 and members of the State Board, and of a seat 

 for half an hour with the Speaker, while the 

 House was in session. 



The Wool-Growers' Convention. 



The object of the Wool Growers' Convention was 

 two- fold. 



1. To bring as many persons together as possi- 

 ble, who are engaged in the culture of sheep, to 

 discuss the advantages and disadvantages under 

 which they labor, and to devise some means 

 whereby a compact and intelligent 'power might 

 be established, that could be made influential 

 whenever their interests demanded it, — and, also, 

 that by a comparison of opinions as to the best 

 breeds, and practices in culture, each party might 

 be benefitted by knowledge gained from the other. 



2. To petition Congress so to amend the Inter- 

 nal Revenue Laws, as to impose a tax upon dogs ; 

 with a view of protecting Bheep, by the destruc- 

 tion of dogs. 



Discussion on Dogs. 



A long and spirited discussion took place upon 

 this proposition. It is not necessary for me to 

 give the names of all the speakers, or their precise 

 language, although I took quite full notes. Your 

 Vermont, N. Hampshire, Maine and Massachusetts 

 readers, who are interested in the subject, will be 

 especially desirous to know the opinions of their 

 western friends, who are so largely interested in 

 wool-growing. I shall aim, therefore, to give those 

 opinions, and if I can, something of the spiri. 

 with which they were advanced. The first speaker, 

 Mr. Montgomery, stated that the annual loss to 

 wool-growers in the State, in the destruction of 

 sheep by dogs, is $100,000. But this is not the 

 only loss. Hundreds of persons whose farms are 

 especially adapted to the culture of sheep, cannot 

 enter upon it on account of dogs, and are obliged 



to resort to crops unsuited to their lands. He 

 thought the loss in this particular $100,000 more 

 — making the annual loss to wool-growers $200,- 

 000 at least ! He had no doubt there were half a 

 million dogs in the State, while the returns re- 

 quired by law, show only about 175,000. Under 

 this state of things, the efforts of the wool-grower 

 are constantly checked, and this great national 

 interest retarded. Another speaker said that each 

 dog cost what would be required to raise a pig 

 worth $15, which would make an annual loss of 

 $2,025,000 ; and if the number of dogs were half 

 a million, as Mr. Montgomery thought there were, 

 the loss by dogs to the State, annually, would be 

 one hundred and thirty-Jive millions of dollars ! 

 [It seems to me that the speaker set the cost per 

 dog, $15, too high ; but if he had taken into ac- 

 count the loss of human life and property by 

 mad dogs, his estimate would have been far too 

 low.] 



Mr. McCleen, Jr., of Miami Co., said, dogs are 

 outlawed by the statute ; we have law enough, but 

 it is not enforced ; wool-growers are too modest ; 

 they do not protect themselves under the law. 

 He thought a tax imposed by the general govern- 

 ment would prove totally inoperative. We must 

 change public opinion. The wool interest must 

 exceed the dog interest, and this will be our only 

 remedy. 



Mr. Defore stated something of his experience 

 and observation in sheep culture : said the vast 

 prairies of the West, under proper protection, are 

 destined to be covered with immense flocks and 

 to become the seat of a happy and prosperous 

 industry. He thought this branch of enterprise 

 involved as many interests of mankind as any other 

 in our pursuits. We import 50,000,000 pounds 

 of wool annually. We have every facility for pro- 

 ducing ten times this amount, but for the destruc- 

 tion caused by dogs. He did not blame the 

 animals, but their owners ; they train them wrong ; 

 starve them into attacks upon sheep in order to 

 sustain life. 



Mr. E. II. Griswold, of Vermont, said that 

 dogs had been the gre.it stumbling block to suc- 

 cess in growing the Spanish Merino Sheep. He 

 had travelled all through the great North-western 

 States, and even beyond the Mississippi, looking 

 into the condition cf this interest, and this fact 

 holds good everywhere. Dogs are the bane of the 

 wool-grower. The remedy is to form a " canine 

 association," with the most stringent rules, binding 

 every man to act up to the very letter and spint of 

 the law which is intended to protect them. 



Your correspondent, being called upon by the 

 President of the Convention, spoke in general 

 terms of the magnitude of the interest, of the 

 attention necessary to successful culture in the 

 modes of housing and feeding, of the great tra- 



