STATISTICS or WHEAT CULTUEE. 



247. 



value of the crop. I have heard it estimated that fvdl oue-third of all the wheat 

 shipped from Chicago was of this description. Chicago is their great wheat 

 depot. Several millions of bushels are shipped from this point, the contributions 

 from x^arts of three States, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Illinois ; and which con- 

 centration of their joint product at this new western city, or something else, 

 seems to have imparted to each and all these states the reputation of great 

 wheat-growing states, though they are, in fact, with the advantage of a virgin 

 soil, behind several of the western states, and two at least of the eastern or 

 Atlantic States. The geological explorations of the Hon, Robert Dale Owen, 

 undertaken under the authority of Congress, throws much light on the character 

 of the soil of Wisconsin and Iowa, and the description given undoubtedly cha- 

 racterizes much of that region of countiy. The specific gravity of the soil, Mr. 

 Owen states to be remarkably light ; but what he represents to be a "striking 

 feature in the character of the Iowa and Wisconsin soils, is the entire absence, 

 in the most of the sjiecimens of clay, and in a large proportion of sikx.'" Again, 

 he speaks of their being particularly adapted to the growth of the sugar-beet, 

 which he truly says, " flourishes best in a loose fertile mould.'^ Again, he de- 

 tected no phosphates ; but they might be there, as the virgin soil produced good 

 wheat. So does the virgin soil of most of the prairie land. — " The soil was 

 rich in geine," &c. But I submit that this does not describe a wheat soil, 

 hardly in any one particular. Liebig tells us, that " however great the proportion 

 of humus in a soil, it does not necessarily foUow it will produce wheat" — and 

 cites the country of Brazil. 



Again, he adds, " how does it happen that wheat does not flourish on a sandy 

 soil (which much of the soil of these states is described to be), and that a cal- 

 careous soil is also unsuitable to its growth, unless it be mixed with a consider- 

 able quantity of clay }" 



The late Mr. Colman, in his European Agriculture, states, that " the soil 

 preferred for wheat (in England) is a strong soil with a large proportion of 

 clay. But the question after all is, not whether these States cannot grow wheat, 

 and in comparatively large quantities, for we know that while their lands are 

 fresh, they can and do — but whether, considering the hazard of the crop from 

 winter-killing, the rust, the fly — the risk from the two former being equal to a 

 large per cent, premium of insurance, they are not likely to find their interest 

 in grazing, in raising and feeding stock, instead of attempting to extend their 

 wheat husbandry. Lord Brougham has said, that grazing countries are always 

 the most prosperous, and their population the most contented and happy. The 

 meat markets of Great Britain are likely to prove better and more stable for us, 

 than their grain markets. 



The Hon. Henry L. Ellsworth, a distinguished citizen, and large f-irmer of 

 Indiana — distinguished throughout the Union for his zeal in the cause of 

 agriculture — thus expresses himself on this subject : " After a fall consideration 

 of the subject, I am satisfied that stock-raising at the West is much more 

 profitable than raising grain. Indeed, an examination of the north-western 

 States shows a vast difference in the wealth of the grazier over those 

 who crop with grain. The profits of wheat appear well in expectation 

 on paper, but the prospect is blasted by a severe winter, appearance of insects, 

 bad weather in harvesting, in threshing, for there are but few barns at the 

 West, or transporting to market, or last, a fluctuation in the market itself." 



Such is the opinion of Mr. Ellsworth, the result of observation and experience, 

 himself largely interested in ascertaining the safest and surest course to be 

 pursued. The destiny he has indicated for this beautiful fertile region of 

 country, will undoubtedly be fulfilled ; it will become a great pastoral, stock- 

 raising, and stock-feeding country. 



Ohio stands now, as she did at the census of 1840, at the head of all the 

 wheat States, in the aggregate of production; her crop of 1848 being estimated 

 at 20,000,000, which is about equal to 10| bushels per head of her population. 

 The geological survey of this State, and the character of the soil, as described 

 in the Reports of the Board of Agriculture, in a large range of her counties, at 

 a " clayey soil," " clayey loam," " clay subsoil," &c., shows Ohio to possess a 

 fine natural wheat soil, if indeed, after thirty years of a generally successful 

 wheat husbandry, such additional testimony or confirmation was necessary. 



