THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
MARCH 7 
1 84 
Farm Politics. 
Here it is proposed to discuss with freedom and fairness, ques¬ 
tions of National or State policy that particularly concern farm¬ 
ers. The editors disclaim responsibility for the opinions of cor¬ 
respondents. The object is to develop a true and fair basis for 
organization among farmers. Let us think out just what we want 
and then strive for it. 
MISCELLANEA. 
Shall the Government Own the Railroads ?—I see 
there is a pretty wide diffusion of sentiment with regard 
to the government taking possession of all the mediums of 
communication, embracing railroads, canals, turnpikes, 
telegraphs and telephones. I am inclined to think the 
patronage of the government already great enough, for it 
would always be used for the political advantage of the 
party in power, and would be scarcely less a source of 
trouble in that direction than was the old United States 
Bank that fought Old Hickory as hard a fight as the 
Whig Party. Of course, all its employees would be of the 
same political sentiment and it would be a dangerous 
political “ monster ” to deal with. s. Y. R. 
Georgetown, Md. 
R N.-Y.—As the war of 1861-5 caused a suspension of specie 
payment in 1861 and the establishment of our national bank¬ 
ing system in 1864, so the war of 1812 caused a suspension of 
specie payments in 1814 and the establishment of the Bank 
of the United States in 1816. The latter aided in the 
prompt restoration of specie payment, and did other ex¬ 
cellent service in its day, and, on the whole, who shall say 
that the National Banks have not done excellent service in 
our day ? The National Bank charter of the United States 
Bank expired by limitation in 1836, and was not re¬ 
newed owing to the strenuous opposition of President 
Jackson and of the Democratic party behind him, and, 
chiefly owing to his withdrawal of the United States 
funds, it collapsed in 1839. Whether the national banks, 
too, have had their day, is a question admitting of a good 
deal of debate, but a majority of the farmers of the coun¬ 
try appear to think that they should “ go.” The Bank of 
the United States, being a single institution without 
branches, had little or no patronage at its disposal, and 
can not, therefore, be compared in this respect with the 
proposed government ownership of the railroads,—more¬ 
over, although the bank had a national charter and was 
the depository of the government funds, it was never 
owned by the government. Of its capital of $35,000,000 the 
government owned only $7,000,000, and private parties 
$28,000. 
Those who advocate the government ownership of 
the railroads as a final resort, would, for the most part, 
try government control of the railroads first, and govern¬ 
ment ownership only if this failed to give satisfaction. 
They are careful to provide for the entire divorce of the 
civil service from politics. They insist that the organiza¬ 
tion of the employees of nationalized or municipalized 
services should proceed, step by step, with the assumption 
of public control over them. As this subject is daily be¬ 
coming of greater public interest and importance, it may 
be well to give the views on it of Mr. Edward Bellamy, the 
chief apostle and spokesman of nationalism. In the 
Forum for October, 1890, he says: 
The manner of the organization of this industrial civil 
service is vital to the plan of nationalism, not only on ac¬ 
count of the rights it guarantees to employees, but by its 
effect to prevent their intimidation or control for political 
purposes by government. Upon the nationalizing or muni¬ 
cipalizing of a business, the employees in it would be taken 
bodily over into the public service. The force would then 
be strictly graded, and would be kept up exclusively by 
admissions to the lowest grade, with subsequent promo¬ 
tions. Admissions would be restricted to persons meeting 
certain prescribed conditions of fitness strictly adapted to 
the duties to be discharged, and selections for vacancies 
would be made from among competent candidates, not by 
appointment, but either by lot or in order of filed applica¬ 
tions. Promotions would be a matter of right, and not of 
favor, based upon merit as shown by record, combined with 
a certain length of service, and upon proof of qualifications 
for the higher rank. No employee would be dismissed ex¬ 
cept for cause, after a hearing before an impartial tribunal 
existing for the purpose. Suspension of subordinatespend¬ 
ing trial would, of course, be allowed to the management, 
with full control otherwise of the operations of the force. 
Support in case of accident, sickness and age would be 
guaranteed, to be forfeited only by bad conduct. It is pro¬ 
posed by nationalists that this radical and only effectual 
plan of civil service reform be immediately applied to all 
existing national, State and municipal services. 
Patent Taxation.— We are told that the patent is a 
tax. So is the school, the church and the State. Civil¬ 
ization costs something, and is it reasonable to expect, or 
honest, to secure the mighty benefits of invention for 
nothing ? Popular misinformation on the question, even 
among intelligent people, is amazing. Mr. Hall, however, 
on page 24, has shown rare good sense. Who among the 
world’s benefactors are so poorly paid as those toilers of 
mind whose only protection to what is justly their own is 
given by the Patent Office ? The worth of their services is 
not to be measured by so much per day, but by the value 
received. The intelligent person knows, and the honest 
man admits, that Mr. Edison has earned his wealth many 
times over. 
It is true there have been abuses under the patent laws, 
and from the grievous faults of the early system great 
prejudice has arisen. Inventors, too, are as anxious for 
further revision of the laws as any other class. But, mark 
you, the monopolistic plutocracy of America is altogether 
too busy in fostering the “infant industries” of iron 
manufacturing, food adulteration, etc., etc., to have an in¬ 
clination to do justice to the farmer or the inventor. 
Invention is certainly in the interest of the farmer. Tens 
of millions of dollars are annually saved to agriculturists 
by inventive genius. Increased facilities, multiplied con¬ 
veniences, more effective work, all come from it. Inven¬ 
tion is the very backbone of manufacture, not lessening 
the aggregate amount of labor, but opening new fields, 
developing resources and adding wealth. Invention is the 
mighty lever of industrial progress, the basis of modern 
civilization. 
Help for the professional inventor, as well as for the 
farmer, means help for all. The cross-road genius (1) who 
“ gits up an idee,” and if it be “ new and useful,” straight¬ 
way has it patented, is an occasional nuisance. But let it 
be understood that about half of all applications are re¬ 
jected. Also let us remember that in comparatively very 
few cases are patents at all oppressive, or the patentees 
justly rewarded. Occasionally there are grinding mo¬ 
nopolies, but the capitalists generally make the money. 
The Bell Telephone Co. is an illustration. From the 
“generic” (not “specific”) claims of the original Bell 
patent, it broadly covers all electrical means for trans¬ 
mitting articulate speech until ’93, securely barring all 
others. Some of the earliest and poorest instruments 
(including the Blake transmitter) are still used, and most 
of our best inventors are left out entirely. No chance has 
been given to them. In like manner, the gas companies 
would not adopt improvements until forced to do so. 
Bradford Co., Pa. HENRY G. NEWELL. 
Grumbling is Good.— In the “ Farm Politics ” column, 
January 24, W. B. Green expresses his “disgust” at the 
“ cringing helplessness displayed by some of the farmers 
through the country.” He says : “ I see the need of re¬ 
form and want a change as badly as any of my neighbor 
farmers, but my experience has been that it doesn’t do 
much good to try to reform anybody but myself.” Why 
this “ cringing helplessness 1 ” If he sees “the need of re¬ 
form” and “ wants a change,” why not demand his rights? 
He makes this apology for Jay Gould: “What if Jay 
Gould did make $3,000,000 in one week ? if I understand 
the matter he squeezed It out of his brother bond-holders.” 
He adds: “The fact is, we are a nation of squeezers.” 
We shouldn’t grumble though ; oh, no! We should bow 
in “cringing helplessness” to the will and interests of a 
few millionaires. We should spend less time thinking it 
over, “ work a little harder,” and read less. 
Should chicken thieves go weekly to Mr. Green’s coop 
and take a half dozen of the finest specimens, of course he 
would not “grumble;” he would cut down on his cigars and 
luxuries go “hunting,” less, and although he could see the 
need of reform he would accept the in j ury with grace and be 
thankful they had not “ squeezed ” all of his chickens. 
He will soon equal his ideal standard—the serf of Russia— 
who also would get “ up a little earlier” and “ work a lit¬ 
tle harder.” If 10 hours’ hard work In the field per day 
does not make a farmer successful and I were asked what 
would tend to make him so, I would say, take two of the 
10 hours for rest, recreation and reason. 
This man, “who would ask no odds of autocrat, pluto¬ 
crat, democrat, or any ’crat,” would not “grumble” if the 
“’crat” should “squeeze” from him his home, the accu¬ 
mulation of his life’s work, but would bow to the suc¬ 
cessful “’crat” and would “cringe” and be “very thank¬ 
ful” if said “’crat” would give him “ a place to work.” 
Would it not, after all, be well to “ grumble ” a little- 
just enough to open the eyes of some of our neighbors who 
vote and who work so many hours each day that they have 
no time or capacity to reason from cause to effect. Had 
the farmers earlier formed the habit of “ grumbling ” they 
would not now have so much class legislation to “grum¬ 
ble ” about. E. A. B. 
South Haven, Mich. 
R. N.-Y.—What great reform of abuses or misgovernment 
was ever accomplished without an antecedent growing 
rumble of public grumbling ? Discontent, grumbling and 
agitation, agitation, and again agitation, have always been, 
and probably always will be, the pioneers of reformation. 
Why is the Anglo-Saxon race everywhere in the forefront 
of progress ? Isn’t it because its members have always 
been grumblers par excellence, and have always had man¬ 
hood enough to make their grumbling persuasively heard 
by those in power ? Contentment and submissiveness 
may increase one’s chances of quiet happiness in the next 
world and this, but they certainly are not among the en¬ 
ergetic pioneers of reformation, prosperity and civilization. 
The Farmers Club. 
ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS. 
[Every query must be accompanied by the name and address 
of the writer to insure attention. Before asking a question, please 
see if it is not answered in our advertising columns. Ask only 
a few questions at one time. Put questions on a separate piece 
of paper.] 
Handling Corn Fodder. 
R. G. F., Ropes, N. C.—In eastern North Carolina corn 
fodder is used instead of hay. The blades or leaves are 
stripped from the stalks, made up into bundles, cured in 
the field and then housed ; the corn is gathered, the stalks 
are left in the field to be plowed under the next spring ; 
is this an economical way of getting the most out of the 
corn plant after raising it ? Would it pay to put the 
stalks through a cutter to be fed to my two cows or sheep ? 
My idea is that if the stalks are of no value as food, it 
might perhaps pay me to cut and use them for bedding 
to absorb the liquids. 
Ans. —No ; this is not “ an economical method of getting 
the most out of the corn plant.” You save just about 
one-third of the nutriment in the corn stalks by your plan. 
The R. N.-Y. has given the figures showing the loss in¬ 
curred in this system of “topping,” many times. For an 
elaborate review of the matter read the bulletin prepared 
by Prof. W. O. Henry, of the Wisconsin Experiment Sta¬ 
tion at Madison. The silo provides the most economical 
means of utilizing the corn crop. The next best is to cut 
up the corn in shocks just as the grain is glazing and let it 
cure in the field. If the grain alone is desired it may be 
husked and dried. The stalks can be fed whole or run 
through a cutter and fed to the stock in mangers. The 
“ orts ” or what is left by the stock may be used for bed¬ 
ding or as an absorbent. We believe the cost of the cut¬ 
ting wil be saved in the liquid manures absorbed by the 
chopped or crushed stalks. These are practices among the 
best farmers of the country. We know that many South¬ 
ern farmers defend their practice of “ topping” because of 
the expense of a cutting outfit and the trouble of curing 
in ba 1 seasons, but we believe a fair trial would show 
them their mistake. 
Root Growing In Illinois. 
F. C., Lewiston, III .—Will it pay to raise roots in Illinois 
for feed for cows ? If so, what varieties should be raised, 
and how ? 
ANSWERED BY PROF. G. E. MORROW. 
Large numbers of Illinois farmers have grown mangel- 
wurzels, sugar beets or turnips for feeding purposes. The 
growth'of these crops has been advocated more or less 
ever since I have read agricultural papers. Yet it is the 
rare exception that they are largely grown or grown con¬ 
tinuously by the same farmer. This is not conclusive evi¬ 
dence against the desirability of the practice, but is strong 
presumptive evidence against it. On the University Farms 
we have frequently grown a few tons of mangel-wurzel or 
some of the larger varieties of sugar beets; and will prob¬ 
ably continue to do so, but it is not probable wo will grow 
them largely. We can grow other good food more cheaply. 
Succulent food in winter is desirable, but not essential to 
the health and comfort of farm animals. Especially for 
northern Illinois corn ensilage ssems a cheaper food than 
roots. Still it is not a bad thing to do to grow a plot of 
roots. I would prefer some of the globe-shaped mangels, 
drilled In rows 24 to 30 inches apart, planted fairly early in 
spring. It is a slow process to plant them, and a slower 
process to keep them from weeds. It is rather troublesome 
to harvest and store them, and their feeding value is small 
in proportion to bulk. They are liked well by stock and 
help in keeping the animals in health and good condition. 
The great objection is that they cost too much relatively. 
Grain Hay : Care of Sod Ground. 
W.T. P., Fairmont, III.— 1. I have seen a statement that 
1% bushel of oats sown with half a bushel of barley per 
acre and cut when the grain was in the milk and put up 
like hay, would make excellent feed. What would be its 
value as food for work horses, and what else would be 
necessary to make a complete ration for a horse at work. 
What also for stock horses and colts; as well as for milch 
cows; and for fattening cattle? Are the above proportions 
properly mixed and would not a larger amount of seed 
yield a better return ? 2. If sod ground is continually 
stirred from the time corn begins to come up until it is 
six inches high, will the ravages of cut-worms be thereby 
hindered or checked ? If sod is plowed two inches deep 
now or as soon as It is in fit condition and plowed again in 
spring from six to eight inches deep and thoroughly har¬ 
rowed, will the difference in the improved condition of 
the ground pay for the extra labor above that needed for 
plowing it four or five inches deep as soon as it can be 
done? 
ANSWERED BY HENRY STEWART. 
1. As the main object in sowing grain in the way men¬ 
tioned is to get a large yield of slender fodder as a substi¬ 
tute for hay, the seeding should be much thicker than 
ordinary. At least 2% bushels of oats and of barley 
would be required for the purpose of fodder. The advant¬ 
age of sowing two kinds of seeds, in all such cases, is that 
different plants in association yield more bulk than either 
of them [separately, land generally the product is equal 
to the two crops sown separately on twice the area of 
ground. Barley is an excellent green fodder crop and is 
frequently sown with tares or vetches for this purpose, 
thus giving a much larger yield of more wholesome fodder 
than even green clover. If the oats and barley sown to¬ 
gether be cut when the blossom is just passed, the fodder 
will be more nutritious than hay; but for work horses 
some dry grain should be fed to neutralize the laxative 
effect of the green, succulent food. As peas and other 
leguminous fodders contain an excess of nitrogenous mat¬ 
ter, the addition of these to oats and barley makes a com¬ 
plete nutritive ratio, a? thus shown: 
COMPOSITION OF FODDER CUT IN BLOSSOM. 
Nitrogenous 
Carbo- 
Fat. 
Nutritive 
Matters. 
hydrates. 
Ratio 
Per Cent. 
Per Cent. 
Per Cent. 
Per Cent. 
Green oats. 
. 2 3 
8.3 
0.5 
1 to -.\i 
Peas . 
. 3.2 
7 6 
0.6 
1 to 86£ 
5.5 
15.9 
1.1 
2 toll 
(which is equal to 1 to 5k£, or a perfect ratio). 
Green barley ... 
. 8.6 
7.9 
0.5 
1 to 3% 
Tares. 
. 3.5 
6.6 
0.6 
1 to 3 
7 1 
14.5 
1.1 
2 to 6% 
It is seen that the barley with either tares or peas (both 
similar in character) make a highly nitrogenous ration ; 
but, being almost completely digestible on account of their 
succulence, this excess of nitrogen is in no wise hurtful. 
When fed with a small ration of corn this excess is neu¬ 
tralized and the ratio becomes normal: viz, 1 to 5)^. For 
milch cows nothing is required in addition to either of 
these fodders, but from the better results, as to milk yield, 
gained from peas, a mixture of oats and peas is prefer¬ 
able to any other. For fattening cattle the fodder should 
be left to ripen and be fed with the grain ; or if fed green, 
a large ration of corn meal with one-fourth cotton-seed 
meal would be desirable for profit. 2. Sod ground should 
never be disturbed so as to interfere with the half decayed 
matter or to bring the grass roots to the surface, which 
would give much trouble in keeping the corn crop clean. 
My own practice has been to plow sod as early as possible, 
turning the land so as to leave the furrows close and even. 
This leaves a layer of fresh soil and one of the green vege¬ 
table matter alternated all through the depth of the 
plowed soil. If the surface is then harrowed with a slop¬ 
ing-tooth harrow or one of the cutting or coulter harrows, 
lengthwise of the furrows and never across them, the sod 
is not disturbed but is covered with two inches, at least, 
