264 
APRIL 4 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
A FEW BRAIN BUDS. 
Peach buds are still sound in Central New York, the first 
time in nine years or more. 
Success with small fruits is, I think, much like success 
in other branches of farming. It depends, 1, on having a 
large variety of crops, so that the failure of one will not 
swamp one; 2, on raising only the best varieties and gen¬ 
erally the largest—nothing pays worse than small berries; 
3, in getting a good hired man; once secured the farmer 
should pay him .well and keep him. There is a terrible 
loss in swapping workers—loss due to ignorance, break¬ 
ages and blunders, and to one’s wastage of time in teach¬ 
ing, and, above all, a loss of peace and patience. I 
pay my man $35 per month the year around and let him 
board himself; and this custom is better than that of hav¬ 
ing raw hands each year for seven months at $20 per month 
and board. I always have the same extra hands in sum¬ 
mer, at solid wages, and it pays me. 
It is a curious fact that two of the most superb apples 
in Western New York are total failures here; the King and 
Gravenstein. It is all important in planting trees to find 
out all one can of local growers as to the sorts adapted to 
the locality. 
The Rural discusses dogs with discrimination. I would 
rather own a good breed of cats. Have two choice emascu¬ 
lated male kittens and they will do a vast amount of good 
and cause no expense. I have one large fellow “ Colonel,” 
which catches rabbits. As for dogs in a place like mine, 
they run through flower beds bury bones in the lettuce 
bed, and spoil my peace entirely. A well trained Collie, 
however, is not a dog; he is a person. 
Yes, indeed, good Rural, it is the town folks who get 
most gulled. I found a city friend last year who had been 
paying $5 apiece for pear trees worth 50 cents each; and 
another who had paid an agent $25 for two wonderful 
pears. I think from looking at them that they may have 
been Flemish Beauties. “ The fool and his money,” etc. 
What should be done with such dealers ? When I was 
pastor of a church in Adrian, Michigan, a velveteen-coated 
rogue sold rose bushes that bore three colored moss roses, 
monthly, to my parishioners for $3 each; and threw away 
other articles just as cheaply. I sent for him to my study, 
and said: “ Sir, you are a fraud; that, however, is your 
business. You are dealing fraudulently with my people. 
You will leave this city within 24 hours and not return, or 
I will prosecute you.” And he went. Of course, he swore 
at me, which, being natural, I did not resent. 
If you are setting out roses this spring as you should, 
be sure to have in your list, if not there now, Marshall P. 
Wilder, a grand rose; [Will Mr. Powell tell us wherin it dif¬ 
fers from Alfred Colomb ?—Eds.] also Dinsmore, a noble 
bloomer, very profuse and beautiful; also Gloire de Margot- 
tin ; also Sir Rowland Hill. The Dingee Conard Co. has 
selected in its catalogue one list of pure white roses, 
and another of very dark ones ; and the lists are good. 
They will help those who wish a contrast in a bed of roses. 
Remember you cannot overfeed roses with properly rotted 
manure; but lilies will rot if manured at all. 
Oneida Co., N. Y.__ E. P. powell. 
GOOD SOIL FS. GOOD MANURE AND CUL¬ 
TIVATION. 
Some Absurd Statements Corrected. 
I have just been reading an article in one of the Eastern 
agricultural papers, that is so misleading, that I want to 
correct some of its statements. The writer in speaking of 
the great value of a rich soil over one only moderately 
productive, says: 
“ If we buy an acre of good land, we buy with it at least 
20,000 pounds of nitrogen, 12,000 pounds of potash and6,000 
pounds of phosphoric acid, which plant foods if we were to 
purchase them in the form of commercial manures, would 
cost us no less than $2,000. Such soil wherever found is in it¬ 
self a mine. The purchaser can afford to pay $100 or $200, per 
acre for it, much better than $10 or $20, per acre for soil de¬ 
prived of most of its original store of plant foods. Suppose 
the land is bought at $200 an acre. It pays heavy interest 
from the very beginning, success begins with the first crop. 
To keep the soil permanently in a fine state of fertility and 
the owner on the road to prosperity, will require little ef¬ 
fort, and involve little expense. Let us compare results. 
Suppose we have an acre of rich, virgin soil. For the first 
five years it will produce 40 bushels of wheat, or its equiv¬ 
alent in some other crop, without any expense for fertili¬ 
zers. Afterward a srhall annual dre-sing, say of four to 
six dollars’ worth of plant foods, will be sufficient to keep 
the soil fertility right up to the 40 bushels ot-wheat mark. 
Twenty years’ cropping will thus give us 800 bushels of 
wheat or its equivalent, costing us not over $90 for plant 
food, and $160 for seed, labor and other expenses, or $250 
in all. The account then stands, approximately, thus: 
800 bushels wheat. 75cts.8600 00 
SO tons straw at $2.50. <5 00 
Total. 
EXPENSES. 
Manure 15 years at $6.00. 
Seed, labor and marketing. 
.8675 00 
8 90 00 
, 160 1)0 
Total.*.*250 00 
Net profit In twenty years upon the single acre, 8425, or $21.25 per year.” 
For nearly 40 years I have been a resident of Wisconsin ; 
still with all my admiration for the Northwest, I cannot 
help being annoyed whenever I see statements like the 
above. We have many splendid farmers in the North¬ 
west, but I have no hesitation in saying that there never 
has been one who ever has, or who can in the next 20 years 
produce such results as the above figures indicate by 
growing either wheat or any other of our farm crops— 
either hay or grain. I have in a few cases known of a 
yield of more than 40 bushels of wheat per acre; but to 
make an average of that amount, or its equal in value of 
other grains, for a term of 20 years, is something that it is 
safe to say has never teen done in the United States, and 
never will be done until the science of grain growing is 
better understood than it ever has been or is at present. 
The writer then goes on with another showing of figures 
to prove that land that is not fairly rich, can be cultivated 
only at a loss for a series of years, and even after being 
fertilized, can only be made moderately productive, and 
by no^meaDS profitable. This is another statement that is 
utterly at variance with what are well known to be 
demonstrated facts and which are supported by all good 
cultivators. 
For instance ; six years ago I purchased an addition to 
my garden. It was moderately good land, as we term 
soils in the West, and was covered with stumps and 
brush. I had them all taken out so thoroughly that a 
single span of horses with a good plow turned it over 
without being once stopped by roots or snags. It was 
planted with potatoes and well cultivated. The yield was 
less than 100 bushels per acre. This was the first time it 
had ever been plowed. Since then it has been heavily 
manured each year, either from my compost heap, 
or with other fertilizers, and has been well underdrained 
as well as surface-drained. It has been cultivated each 
year as well as I know how to cultivate land. In 1889 I 
planted a portion of it with potatoes. There were four 
acres in the plat and the yield, by exact weight, was 1,736 
bushels of tubers as beautiful as any I have ever seen. 
Last season I planted another portion of the same piece 
with potatoes, and the yield was just about 400 bushels 
per acre. I find such crops very profitable, although the 
fertilizers cost more than three times the sum named by 
the writer as the annual cost of keeping his first-class 
land in good condition. I should very much like to know 
where, and what kind of fertilizers the writer gets at the 
cost of only $6 per acre per year, that will keep his land 
up to 40 bushels of wheat, or its equivalent per acre. I 
should very much like to invest in such fertilizers. 
I am glad to say that I have never seen such misleading 
and impractical articles in the Rural New-Yorker, and 
trust that I never shall. Upon the one side such mis¬ 
statements are so far beyond the reach of present possi¬ 
bilities that they are only ridiculous, and upon the other 
they are contradicted, not only by the experience of nearly 
the whole of my own working life time, but by that of 
thousands and tens of thousands of good farmers, not only 
in the West, but in all parts of the United States, and in¬ 
deed of the rest of the world also. J. M. smith. 
Brown Co., Wis. 
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. 
WHAT’S THE MATTER WITH GREEN ? 
Some of You Thinkers Tell Him. 
Here's his history; should he “grumble?" shall he curse 
the “ ’ crats f ” Is he “all right?" 
Since reading E. A. B.’s review of my contribution to 
the Farm Politics column with the editorial comment 
thereon on page 184, I have been thinking that perhaps I 
am in danger of becoming an “ Ideal Russian Serf ” by 
not “ demanding my rights; ” but not being the Seventh 
Son of a Seventh Son, I am not possessed of second sight, 
and knowing the disposition of the average St. Lawrence 
Co. farmer to reach for whatever is in sight, I might make 
the mistake of demanding some other fellow’s rights; so 
before I commence to grumble I would like some one 
“ well read ” to tell me “ what’s the matter with Green,” 
and that he may fully understand my situation, I will 
make the following statement: 
In the fall of 1882 I landed on the banks of the St. Law¬ 
rence River an entire stranger, with money enough to buy 
16 acres of worn-out land (price $3,000) on which there were 
a good brick house three times too large, a poor stable, a 
young orchard and no fences. I chose market gardening 
as my occupation, contrary to the advice of my neighbors, 
and as the business was new to me I made some failures, 
but I kept on readinq and working (the former owner had 
followed E. A. B.’s plan of reading and resting) 
paying very little attention to legislation, class or 
otherwise; but I kept hustling into town with my loads of 
vegetables quite often, having to pick my way through re¬ 
form shriekers that were holding down salt barrels in front 
of the groceries, before I could make a sale. Any leisure 
time I had I used in repairing my buildings until 1887, 
when I sold my “garden farm” for $6,000 cash, and at 
once reinvested the amount in 50 acres two miles nearer 
market with splendid buildings of all kinds, including 
greenhouses, for which I paid $7,000, giving for the de¬ 
ferred payment a mortgage drawing six per cent interest. I 
kept three men all last summer and two in the winter, be¬ 
sides what “ extras ” I needed in the busy season. 
I kept eight Jersey cows and had about 10 acres in vege¬ 
tables, from which my total sales were $2,478.79. I kept no 
account of my expenses. My taxes have averaged less than 
$35 per year since ’87, besides the road work. I have not 
quite as many tools as neighbor Terry, of Ohio (I call him 
neighbor, as I spent most of my life within 40 miles of his 
place); but I would not blush to have him look at them, 
and he would see a road-cart belonging to Mrs. G., that I 
did not notice in his display. No doubt we are behind 
the average Michigander in our reading matter, but we 
manage to get along by taking the New York Tribune, 
New York World, Rural New-Yorker, Farm Journal, 
Farm and Fireside, Ladies’ Home Journal, Sunday School 
Times, Youth’s Companion, World-Wide Mission, Heathen 
Woman’s Friend, North East Pennsylvania Advertiser, 
Modern Queen, Ingall’s Home and Art Magazine, and the 
Ogdenburgh Daily Journal. 
I have the right to vote for any man I choose to fill any 
office, and my vote is counted just as I cast it. Nearly 
every man does just as he agrees to by me, but I see to it 
that he agrees to about what I want him to, before I trade 
with him. I have the right to ask any price I see fit for 
my cream and vegetables, but I do not have the wrong to 
ask my customers to pay me 10 cents for a cabbage when 
they can get just as good for eight cents of ^my^neighbor. 
My plan of dealing with chicken thieves is not what E. 
A. B. supposed it to be. When I first came here they made 
raids on my orchard and hen roost as they had been in 
the habit of doing on those of my predecessor, but I did 
not “accept the injury with grace ; ” nor did I spend any 
time in grumbling to my neighbors; but I did spend a 
few nights within close range of my hen house, and the 
rascals have never troubled me since. 
Now, the question arises: What have I to grumble 
about ? It won’t do to grumble at the man who holds the 
mortgage on my farm ; for I agreed to pay a certain 
amount each year and the interest, and I have paid only 
the interest. It won’t do to try to “agitate” him out of 
his money, as that is a part of “ the accumulation of his 
life’s work,” and he would have nothing to live on if he 
lost it. It won’t do to grumble at my grocer who gives 
me 14)^ pounds granulated sugar for $1, as I never bought it 
so cheap before. A soulless corporation is running a line 
of boats from here up the Lakes, and they will bring me 
corn from Chicago for 4>£ cents per bushel above the cost 
price there. It won’t do to grumble at them, or they 
might quit the business, and then I would have to raise 
my own corn at a much greater cost per bushel. The 
New York Central Railroad is about to build a branch 
road to the St. Lawrence River, and all the river towns 
are doing their level best to secure the terminus. It 
won’t do to grumble at the railroad folks now, as we 
want them to come, and it would be “bad form”—would 
it not ?—to grumble at them after they had come on our 
invitation ? It might cause them to say: “ Don’t worry 
about us, Mr. Green; just keep right along as though we 
were not here.” 
It won’t do to grumble at our manufacturers, as they are 
paying our oldest boys good wages, and a good many of 
their employees buy vegetables of me. No doubt the 
“ antecedent growing rumble of public grumbling” is a 
good thing : but if The R. N.-Y. means the same kind it 
has been sending to Kansas of late, we can’t use It up 
here in St. Lawrence County, as our credit is gilt-edged 
and we don’t care to disturb it. 
Again, I ask: “ What’s the matter with Green ?” 
St. Lawrence County, N. Y. vr. B. green. 
R. N.-Y.—So far as we can see, nothing is the matter 
with Green. “ He’s all right.” He doesn’t appear to have 
any grievances and, therefore, has nothing to complain of. 
Nothing in his environment seems to need reformation, 
and, therefore, he has no reason to join the grand army of 
grumblers whose circumstances and surroundings are 
not so fortunate. Once more, “ the growing rumble of 
public grumbling,” antecedent to all “ great reforms of 
abuses,” referred only to public abuses of a widespread 
and grievous character, and the truth of the statement is 
not even shaken because it isn’t applicable to friend 
Green’s halcyon condition. Then again, agitation to right 
a public wrong should not be confounded with agitation 
to wrong a private right._ 
MISCELLANEA. 
Farmer Lawmakers. —I am a farmer and think it a 
good calling; but to hold that the farmer is fit, above all 
others, for every office is unjust and unreasonable. If 
farmers get to the head, have they the ability to stay 
there ? I am afraid not. Executive ability is wanting in 
our class. I have lately seen farmers get to the head who 
could not put a motion properly, and had to call for assist¬ 
ance, and they were not old fogies either. Help any 
farmer who will make a good officer forward if you choose ; 
but don’t make lawmakers of the whole class; you ^till 
surely have to drop them if you do. Make farmers think 
that they are all right, and make them pay their debts, in¬ 
stead of grumbling, and they will be all right as a class. 
Look at the Kansas farmers; last year they wanted more 
railroads to ship their corn. Now they want more corn 
very much worse. s. D. hartwell. 
Walworth Co., Wis. 
R. N.-Y.—Railroad building is very likely to be sus¬ 
pended for some time in Kansas on account of the multi¬ 
tude of anti-railroad laws proposed in the legislature: 
according to the latest account those now before the Lower 
House number 38. Some are doubtless commendable; but 
it is to be feared that the batch will, temporarily at least, 
frighten away capital, which is proverbially timid. 
One Thing at a Time. —Probably one of the worst laws 
which we have in regard to taxation is that one which per¬ 
mits a person to deduct his debts from his personal prop¬ 
erty and pay taxes only on the remainder. Merchants buy 
a portion of their goods “ on time,” and thus evade taxa¬ 
tion on their whole stock. This law does not include mort¬ 
gages, so the farmer does not share the benefits thus ob¬ 
tained unless he is wealthy enough to have money to lend, 
when he often belies his claims to honesty by lending his 
money or notes to a wealthy neighbor who loans him an 
equal sum. Each gives his note of hand and each keeps 
his name off the assessment roll by pleading indebtedness 
to the other. H. W. Gough of Spencerport, Secretary of the 
New York State Grange, brought this pernicious law be¬ 
fore the late session of that body, urging that efforts to¬ 
wards its repeal be made by the Grange this winter. 
He called attention to the numerous petitions and bills 
which have been annually sent to the legislature since 
farmers began a hand to-hand fight for their rights in re¬ 
gard to assessment and taxation. Each of these petitions 
has failed to accomplish its mission, partly because it asked 
too much. Mr. Goff urged the advisability of asking just 
one thing at a time and then insisting that the request be 
granted. No doubt our first need is that all property 
should be taxed according to its value, and if the farmers 
of New York demand it as one man, they will not be re¬ 
fused. There must be concentration upon one point. It is 
time that the farmers of the Empire State should learn 
concerted action. Can we not agree upon some one law 
which we feel we must have and work together until suc¬ 
cess crowns our efforts ? s. A. l. 
