324 
APRIL 25 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
pear tree or graft it till it has borne. Have I ever got 
good fruit ? Come and see. 
Blackberries —One of The Rural correspondents 
objects to my methods of growing blackberries. If he does 
better I am glad. I have tried all sorts of ways with these 
hooked fellows—high bush and low bush; cultivating in 
rows and leaving them to occupy the ground and take 
care of themselves. I have settled on the last plan. From 
a strip one rod by three I picked and sold $40 worth of Sny¬ 
ders. Can any one do better on any other plan ? The 
blackberry is a wild affair and likes wild ways. Left to 
itself after two years of culture, it fills the whole ground 
and keeps out all weeds. Then it shades the soil and 
mulches it with its own leaves, after its natural wild 
fashion. But blackberries must have a moist place in a 
good soil to be reasonably profitable. I also prefer to cut 
them back but once a year and to leave the canes five or 
six feet high. 
The English Sparrow.— I am glad to chronicle the dis¬ 
appearance of the English sparrow. I have seen but one 
this winter about my barns; and not one in the village 
streets. There are next to none in the streets of Utica. A 
small hawk, some say it is the American shrike, is killing 
them. This bird, whatever it is, is about the size of a 
blackbird, and singling a sparrow pursues it to the death. 
Let us hear from other parts of the country. 
Grape Fruit. —I am surprised to find that so few peo¬ 
ple use as yet any grape fruit. I buy it at two dollars a- 
box, sending to Orlando, Florida, for it, and consider it 
the finest winter fruit we can get. Eat half of one or less 
on rising in the morning, and see. 
Oneida Co , N. Y. E. P. POWELL. 
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. 
A SON OF VERMONT VISITS HOME. 
Shall He Leave His Wisconsin Farm and “ Go 
East?” 
Last summer I went down to Boston to attend the 
National Encampment of the G. A. R. and have a good 
time with the old comrades. Afterwards I visited my 
childhood’s home in Vermont. My father moved from 
there with his family to Wisconsin about 45 years ago. I 
was a boy 11 years old then. I naturally wanted to visit 
the old home. Now, I had been reading in the papers of 
late about the cheap abandoned farms of Vermont. I 
have a very good farm here in Wisconsin. I have made it 
from the wilderness. My children were born and have 
been raised here, and it is home to them and to mother 
and me. But—well, when we settled here we had neigh¬ 
bors who could speak the English language; there was a 
bond of sympathy and union among us; we had schools 
and churches where the teaching and preaching were in 
the same language. Now our old neighbors are all gone. 
Some have gone West; some went to the war and never 
returned ; others died. Their places are all filled by for¬ 
eigners. We have no church services in the English lan¬ 
guage ; that language is still taught in our schools, but 
the foreign-born politicians at Madison have repealed the 
law requiring the children of the State to be taught in it. 
So in going to Vermont I thought that perhaps I might 
find a place for which we would be willing to exchange 
the old home in the West—not that I expected to find a 
better home, but that I might find one in which the sur¬ 
roundings would be more agreeable. 
What I found were friends who had been children with 
me, the immemorial mountains and hills, the valleys, the 
brooks in which i had fished, the springs, the rocks and 
ledges, the winding roads among green trees, the old 
orchards, and the old house in which I was born. I 
climbed up and sat down on a big granite rock upon 
which I had often played when a child, and I felt glad to 
have been born in Vermont. I found the old sugar house 
where I had eaten warm maple sugar waxed on the snow ; 
but, after all, it did not seem like home to me now. 
I found some “abandoned” farms, if rocky hill-sides 
grown up to brakes,golden rod, Canada Thistles and other 
interesting plants can be called farms. I should not know 
how to make a home and a living out of one of them. 1 
found good farms upon which the owners lived and pros¬ 
pered. Upon others the owners barely lived. The inter¬ 
vale farms are considered the best. I visited one place of 
this kind. The owner kept a dairy, hay being the main 
crop. He also raised grain and potatoes. His men were 
harvesting a crop of oats by mowing with a machine and 
raking together with a horse rake; more than half the 
crop was kale or wild mustard and Canada Thistles. He 
would possibly get 10 or 12 bushels of oats to the acre. 
This on land valued at $1C0 per acrel On a piece of upland 
which had been heavily manured and planted to potatoes 
the pig weeds and thistles were as high as my head ; but 
the potatoes were not very large. The owner had much 
trouble to secure good help; the only men to be had were 
Canadians and Irish who came and went about as they 
pleased. On Sundays they had to go up to B-to church, 
and frequently came home drunk. They were not very 
reliable milkers. At another farm which I visited, the 
owner was anxious to make and use all the manure he 
could. He also bought and used some commercial 
fertilizers. He was harvesting spring wheat and barley 
by mowing and raking as above. I asked him why he 
did not cradle and bind his grain ; his reply was: “ Too 
many thistles.” The thistles were in the majority. Why 
a Vermont farmer should sow wheat is a mystery to me. 
On another farm the hired man was mowing ripe thistles 
and putting them into a low, wet place in the barn-yard. 
I remonstrated with the farmer. He said a few thistle 
seeds more or less would make no difference. I told him 
that in Wisconsin we had a law making it a crime for a 
man to let thistles or other noxious weeds go to seed on 
his premises. My friend thought it would be a hard mat¬ 
ter to enforce such a law In Vermont. While I was in the 
village store a man came in and bought some tea, salera- 
tus and a pound of plug “ tobarker;” then he produced a 
bottle, which the store keeper filled, going behind a screen 
across which was the sign, “ Town Agency.” I could not 
tell what was put into the bottle. The man said that 
Western competition was ruining the Eastern farmers. 
The maple sugar orchards were the most promising part 
of the hill farms, although the prices of sugar and syrup 
were low to the producer—about one-half what I obtain here 
in Wisconsin. In fact I found many kinds of farm produce 
selling cheaper there than here. Butter in September was 
bringing the producer only from 13 to 15 cents per pound, 
clear. It mostly goes to Boston to be sold by commission 
men, they fixing the price by the quotations which they 
also fix from week to week. We were selling butter here 
to customers for 25 cents at the same time. The towns 
there being small, farmers have scarcely any local markets. 
Chicago dressed beef is sold in all the larger towns and 
summer hotels. If a farmer has a fat steer or pig he can 
hardly sell it at any price. I saw very few flocks of sheep. 
I asked a farmer why more sheep were not kept. He said 
the dogs were one reason, and another the fences : it was 
only fun for the sheep to go over the stone walls with which 
the hill farms were fenced. Timber was getting scarce and 
it was expensive to build other than stone fences. Another 
thing—many of the pastures have become so infested with 
worthless weeds that they produce but very little feed that 
even sheep will eat. The pastures being steep and rocky, 
it is impossible to kill out the weeds by cultivation. 
I learned but little about the Swedes and other foreign¬ 
ers whom the State officials are importing. A friend with 
whom I talked on the subject seemed to think that if the 
State would hold out the same inducements to the native- 
born that it does to the foreigner, it might be just as well 
for the State and for the citizen. One thing more—I 
noticed several “deserted” churches and empty school- 
houses. Children seemed to be getting scarce. 
Now, under all the circumstances, shall I sell my farm 
and home in Wisconsin, that I have spent the best part of 
a lifetime in making, and go to Vermont, thinking to 
make a new home and try to adapt myself to the different 
ways of farming and of living? 
Since writing the foregoing I have read the article on 
page 131 of The Rural, entitled, “ The Farmers’ Changed 
Condition.” It describes the condition of things here in 
Wisconsin exactly. And I can remember when the home 
and the farm produced almost everything required or 
used by the farmer and his family, not only in Vermont 
but in Wisconsin, 45 and 50 years ago. JOHN rusticus. 
Outagamie Co., Wis. 
“WHAT’S THE MATTER WITH GREEN?” 
Well, let’s see : He says: ‘ ‘ Knowing the disposition of the 
average St. Lawrence County farmer to reach for whatever 
is in sight, I might make the mistake of demanding some 
other fellow’s rights.” Why should Green “grumble” about 
the Kansas farmer; for he only demands “ whatever is in 
sight ? ” He should not object to applying to Kansas the 
rule which is good enough for St. Lawrence County. In 
answer to his question, “ What is the matter with Green ? ” 
it is my opinion that he is “locoed.” His case may be 
entirely moral, and I recommend him to read well the 
Sunday School Times and the Heathen Woman’s Friend. 
He may, after getting out of that morbid condition, get 
rid of the “ disposition ” to “ reach for whatever is in 
sight.” 
[He never did that; that was a peculiarity of the neigh¬ 
bors only. Eds.] 
He seems to have made a living by working hard, and 
that is more than many have done. He “ landed ” with 
$3,000, which he invested in a farm which doubled in value 
in five years, when he sold it for $6,000. He then bought 
another for $7,000, giving a mortgage for deferred pay¬ 
ment, supposably for $1,000. His capital seems to have 
earned $3,000 in nine years, besides a livelihood for himself 
and family. Suppose Mr. Green’s farm had depreciated 30 
per cent, instead of appreciating 100 per cent. What would 
have been the measure of his prosperity then ? He says, 
“Nearly every man does just as he agrees to by me,” and 
a little further on he tells us that he doesn’t always do as 
he agrees to by others, for he tells us that though he agreed 
to pay a certain proportion of his mortgage indebtedness 
every year, and the interest, he has actually paid only the 
latter. He says his credit is “ gilt-edged.” In Michigan a 
man loses credit if he does not honor his obligations. 
Many would be glad to leave Michigan and go to a place 
where a man can have a “ gilt-edged ” credit and not pay 
his debts as he agrees to. [A reperusal of Green’s article 
will show that it was the credit of St. Lawrence County 
folks which was reported to be “gilt-edged.” His own 
would be included, of course; but not singled out as any¬ 
thing remarkable. Those who hold mortgages on good 
property are generally quite willing that payments need 
not be made, even according to agreement, provided the 
interest is punctually paid. Eds ] 
General Washington was not only a “ grumbler,” but a 
fighter; so, also, was John Brown: and the rest of the anti¬ 
slavery agitators were noble “ grumblers.” Now Mr. 
Green, “honest Injun!” don’t you “grumble” sometimes? 
Don’t you “ grumble ” a little about the corrupt methods 
of Tammany ? Don’t you grumble occasionally at the cor¬ 
ruption and rascality of the “other party ?” Don’t you 
grumble at the manufacturers of bogus fertilizers, when you 
buy their product at $30 per ton, and find it worth but $3? 
Don’t you “grumble” about the “paupers of Europe” 
selling things so cheap in this glorious country? You can 
grumble at all of these without affecting the profit of your 
vegetable business, or your “boys’ good wages.” I say 
“ grumble ” at the manufacturers if they do you a wrong. 
Don’t say: “ It won’t pay.” Don’t be afraid. 
So you get “ 14>£ pounds of granulated sugar for $1.” 
You’re locoed sure, or you would not have mentioned 
sugar at this time. Suppose you watch the price of the 
article for a while, and see how the “ foreigner ” has been 
“paying the tariff.” Don’t “grumble” though, if you 
find that some of the good politicians lied to you about it, 
and you, confidingly, voted as they wanted you to do. 
About those railroads, it might not be “ bad form ” to 
“grumble” at them, after “inviting them to come.” 
When we invite them to come, we suppose they will deal 
fairly with us; and they usually promise to do so till they 
have secured all we will give them in money and privi¬ 
leges. I lived where we were charged $80 per car-load 
more to Chicago than were those who lived 200 miles 
further away. When we asked to have the injustice reme¬ 
died we were told, in substance: “ Don’t worry about us, 
good friends, just keep right along as though we were not 
here.” But, we did not bow in “ cringing helplessness.” 
We “grumbled” and petitioned, and sent a man to Con¬ 
gress to grumble. The Grangers of Iowa were “grumb¬ 
ling,” too ; and they sent some “ grumblers ” to the legis¬ 
lature, who passed a law to limit railroad robberies. 
They also sent some “ grumblers” to the bar of justice to 
present their claims, and they were sustained. The 
Grangers there and elsewhere sent some “grumblers” to 
Congress and their “ grumbling ” was thought to be so 
reasonable by a majority of that body that they passed the 
Inter-State Commerce Law. We invite the railroads to 
come our way, but not to rob us. We give them special 
privileges, with the understanding that they must deal 
fairly with us. If they do not they may forfeit their char¬ 
ters. What the Grangers did was to get within “close 
range” of their “hen-house” and collar the “thieves,” 
so they are a good deal like Mr. Green after all. Come 
“West,” Mr. Green, and take a broad view of our country. 
It is a big one. E. A. B. 
So. Haven, Mich._ 
THE SINGLE TAX. 
George C. Mott says in The Rural for March 28: “ We 
have generally supposed that a Supreme Creator was ours 
and we His, and that the community as a whole never cre¬ 
ated the land. We supposed that the latter could regulate 
its parceling out de novo and there rest.” 
I accept the former supposition, but take exceptions to 
the latter. “ A Supreme Creator is ours.” We are all the 
children of one Father. The land is the work of the Lord. 
He gave it to man that by his labor he might live. The 
right to life implies the right to land. If we are all equally 
His children, then we are all entitled to an equal interest 
in His gift—the land. Now then, in regard to the latter 
supposition, does anyone now believe that equality or any 
approach to it can be maintained by “ parceling out ” land 
after the plan in vogue in this country now and in ‘years 
past? It used to be sung, “ Uncle Sam is rich enough 
to give us all a farm.” Bdt now how matters are 
changed ! 
Yesterday I read that some railroad land in Wisconsin 
was to be thrown open for settlement, and that the police 
had to give up the attempt to keep men from forming a 
line at the land office 15 days before filings could be made. 
They expect 500 men to wait there two weeks to get a grab 
at free landl How can we maintain any resemblance to 
equality for the next generation? 
“ Ricardo’s Law of Rent ” which is a recognized author¬ 
ity is: “ The rent of land is determined by the excess of Its 
produce over that which the same application can secure 
from the least productive laud in use.” If this rent be taken 
by a “single tax ” and used for the common good, then we 
are all equal sharers in God’s gift. Then we will “all be 
equally landlords, and all equally tenants ” “I am not 
one who thinks the world will fall apart because we tear a 
parchment more or less.” However the beauty of the 
single tax idea is that no parchment need be torn. 
Dakota County, Minn. A. c. carpenter. 
r. N.-Y.—Farmers and other landowners have paid for 
their land. They have, as a rule, invested money and 
labor in its improvement. Other classes in the commu¬ 
nity have done nothing of the kind. The impression Is 
therefore quite widespread ajnong farmers who have 
thought about the matter that the adoption In practice of 
the single-tax theory would be equivalent to a confiscation 
of their property in land for the benefit of the community 
at large. Their land would go into a general taxable pool; 
what equivalent would the rest of the community put into 
it ? Farmers generally believe that if the nation wants 
to adopt this novel system, it should pay them for their 
land, and then, being the owner of the whole of it, let it 
at whatever rent or tax might be adequate to meet the 
public burthens. A large proportion of the advocates of 
the single-tax theory do not believe in the allotment of 
land in severalty or otherwise by the Lord. Many of them 
hardly believe in the Lord at all, except for the purpose 
of pushing their doctrine. Probably the bulk of them 
believe that if the Lord had any such design He would 
have found means to carry it into execution ages ago. 
This is an economic question : wouldn’t it be advisable, 
therefore, to discuss it on economic principles, without 
any references to the supposed intention of the Creator in 
the matter ? There seems to be no small danger of irrev¬ 
erence in the knowledge thus assumed of the designs of 
the Creator at the outset. 
“ When we find a paper that has hack-bone 
enough to tell the truth, let us have back¬ 
bone enough to help it along.” —l. w. lightly. 
