INTRODUCTION. xliii 



no more was raised that year than in 1859, over seventy bushels in each one thousand produced. In 

 18G1 and 18G2 the exports were even still greater greater by far than ever before Unown, being 

 20,061,952 and 29,798,160 respectively falling down in 1863 to 1G,OG9,6G4 The closing of the 

 Mississippi, and the loss of the southern trade, caused by the rebellion, together with the comparative 

 failure of the wheat crop in Great Britain, accounts for this large increase in our foreign exports. 



There can be no doubt that the west, directly or indirectly, is the source of all the wheat that is 

 exported from the United States, and this in addition to supplying New England with breadstufFs. 

 Under these circumstances, or such as arc likely to exist, shall we continue to export wheat? 



This question has been raised both in Europe and in this country. The question is not whether 

 the western States can raise more than enough for home consumption. There can be no doubt on this 

 point. But New England and the middle States are increasing in population, while their production of 

 wheat is declining. Can the west supply this increased demand and growing deficiency of the New 

 England and middle States, besides supplying the rapidly increasing home demand, and have a surplus 

 left to export to foreign countries ? Had the country continued united and prosperous, had the west 

 continued to develop her rich agricultural resources with the rapidity of the last ten years, there can be 

 little doubt that we should have continued for a considerable time at least to export wheat; but, with 

 the increased demand caused by the war, with the abstraction of labor from agricultural pursuits, and 

 the stimulus given to manufactures, it is a question not so easily answered, whether we shall, for a few 

 years to come, continue to produce a surplus. Much depends on the middle States, to the productive 

 ness whereof very slight improvement in our system of agriculture would add greatly. 



There is no reason why the middle States should not raise wheat as abundantly as in past years. 

 While the aggregate production of wheat has greatly decreased, there are farmers in every county who, 

 by a judicious system of cultivation, raise as much wheat as at any former period. Let this improved 

 system of farming become general, and the middle States would soon become large exporters of wheat, 

 unless the stimulus given to manufactures shall greatly increase the home demand. Farmers are now 

 receiving better prices for their produce than at any former period, and this is favorable to the intro 

 duction of improved systems of cultivation. &quot;With prices as low as they have ruled from 1850 to 1860, 

 it was not clear whether farmers in the middle States could afford to underdraw, manure, and cultivate 

 their land to that extent which is necessary for the production of large crops. This has been done in 

 individual cases with much profit, but still the great majority of farmers could not see their way clear 

 in expending so much capital, and, indeed, it must be confessed that it is not easy to show how high 

 farming can be made profitable with low prices. All this for the present, however, is now changed. 

 Prices have increased to a figure never before reached in this country. Everything that the farmer 

 can raise, is in demand at rates which are highly remunerative. This demand and high prices cannot 

 fail to stimulate farmers to put forth every energy to increase their crops. A higher system of culture 

 will be introduced, and, when once adopted and found profitable, will be continued, even though prices 

 should fall to the old standard. 



There can be little doubt that the war is destined to make great changes in our agriculture. 

 Fanning never was so remunerative as at the present time. Hitherto, while the profits have been 

 generally steady and sure, they have not been large, and the best talent of the country found greater 

 attraction in other pursuits. 



As a people we have been distinguished for our material prosperity. &quot; Labor is wealth/ and this 

 has poured in upon us from every country in Europe. This labor, directed by men of superior educa 

 tion and enterprise, has developed the vast resources of the country to an extent without a parallel in 

 history. We had enjoyed a long period of peace. The expenses of the government were but little, 

 people were active, industrious, intelligent, and enterprising. No wonder we became wealthy. But 

 did our gains favor agricultural improvement ? We think not, materially. Being rich, with none of 

 those social distinctions which in Europe are kept up at such great cost, our wealth has been expended 

 in luxuries. The result was, that those who contributed to our pleasures and the gratification of our 



