PROFIT AND LOSS 



213 



try) a query from a subscriber as to profits in poultry 

 raising. It was based on a quotation (for which the in- 

 quirer vouched as correct) from " an official, in the De- 

 partment of Agriculture at Washington, D.C.," affirming 

 that said official knew of only one profitable poultry farm in 

 the country ! This created something of a stir in eastern 

 Massachusetts, where a pretty large percentage of the 

 people must be considered as either congenital idiots 

 or successful poultry raisers, because it is simply incon- 

 ceivable that they would remain in an occupation which 

 was in all cases unprofitable, and that through many 

 years, even to lifetimes ! 



The conservative editor to whom this query came pro- ' 

 nounced the statement "ridiculous," affirmed that it 

 emanated from a man who was not a poultryman, and 

 said: "I doubt whether there is a 'farm' anywhere in 

 the United States where poultry is given attention 

 enough to supply its necessities and the product handled 

 as it usually is on farms, where the poultry is not 

 profitable." I give this deliverance especially, because 

 this particular editor has never been known to put em- 

 phasis on the " rosy " side of poultry raising. He be- 

 lieves, however, that the poultry on most farms " might 

 be made more profitable than it is." This point might 

 be very easy to prove by figures. But poultry on most 

 farms necessarily has its relation to the other work of 

 the farm, and it often becomes a nice question as to 

 which is the most profitable to neglect. With some 

 workers, it would undoubtedly be the poultry, at times. 



A point made before the discussion noted was closed, 

 brings us again to the question of crowding, and nails 

 it as a source of loss. The editor favored the combina- 



