344 
MAY 2 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
only average skill and management, to make farming pay 
on unproductive soil. • 
The following quotation from an exchange I found in¬ 
dorsed by the agricultural editor of The N. Y. Tribune : 
“ Nine times out of ten it is more profitable to buy a rich 
farm and sell 1 ♦ s products to pav for it, than to buy a poor 
one at a small price and bring it into a high state of culti¬ 
vation.” This might be made much stronger and still be 
true On rich soil the average farmer, with fair average 
skill and management, can make farming pay; he can not 
do it on worn out soil. Plant foods can seldom be bought 
more cheaply than when already mixed with tillable soil. 
To furnish them to the crops by application is costly ; and 
when all the plant foods that a crop of wheat needs must 
be purchased in the form of commercial fertilizers (stable 
manure included,) we will find the grain will cost us more 
than it will bring in marke 1- . 
Had Mr. Smith studied the terrible condition in which 
thousands of farmers in this part of the country and else¬ 
where find themselves, slaves of unproductive soil, bound 
to it by strong mortgage chains, working and worrying 
and wasting their lives in vain efforts to free themselves 
and make both ends meet, he would have hesitated to 
weaken a much-needed lesson hy haggling over figures 
which were in some measure hypothetical. For the sake 
of letting the lesson take full effect it would have been 
wiser to overlook even some exaggeration Certainly I 
have tried to use strong examples and striking compari¬ 
sons. Rich, virgin soil, that will produce 40 bushels of 
wheat per acre for five years without fertilizers, it is true, 
is not found everywhere. But such instances are known, 
and I have come across them in various places. As a 
single instance I will name some rich bottom lands south 
of Canandaigua Lake, where some of the first wheat yields 
reached as high as 60 bushels per acre, and where, even 
now, after a generation or two of constant cropping, and 
perhaps less liberal treatment than indicated by my figures 
occasional crops of 45 bushels of wheat aud over are grown. 
I found similar instances elsewhere in this and other 
States. On the other hand, I know that some virgin soils 
are thin and unprofitable to work from the very start. 
This only proves the need of all the greater care and dis¬ 
cretion in selecting land for purchase. 
Mr. Smith’s hobby (a most excellent one) is “ good culti¬ 
vation.” His skill and means would enable him to make 
farming pay even on poor soil, and under all the adverse 
circumstances that distress and often swamp other farm¬ 
ers He pooh poohs the idea that the farmer has any¬ 
thing to complain of except his own poor management, 
and claims that “ farming pays.” So does the stage and 
lecturing, and book-writing and inventing. Alvary and 
Lillie Lehman receive $500 or $600 for one evening’s sing¬ 
ing ; Mrs. Langtry is a millionaire; Henry Stanley’s re¬ 
muneration for one lecture is $1,000 ; General Grant’s book 
has brought his widow $500,000, etc. But we cannot all be 
Alvarys, or Lillie Lehmans, or Lillie Langtrys, or Htnr/ 
Stanleys, nor Grants; or can we farmers all be J. M. Smiths, 
or T. B. Terrys, etc. We have to reckon with the fact 
that the average farmer’s farming will always be inferior. 
Mr. Smith should not get out of patience because his 
brother farmer is not as smart or as good a manager as 
himself. The average farmer’s salvation has to come 
largely from el-ewhere. I think the most urgent thing to 
do is to abandon the cultivation of poor soils, and to re¬ 
strict oneself to the cultivation of lands with plant foods 
enough for the production of remunerative crops. This is 
as necessary as an improvement in methods of cultivation 
and in management, and in other unfavorable conditions, 
political or otherwise. It is not right to pacify the farmer, 
and discourage him in his efforts towards a betterment of 
a distie 3 sed situation, by laying all the stress on good cul¬ 
tivation and management. Such men as Mr. Smith and 
T. B Terry and other good cultivators of the soil have a 
great influence,and they should help and try to show to their 
less fortunate brethren all the unfavorable conditions that 
they are suffering under, conditions which can be bettered, 
and which farmers would willingly undertake to better, 
when they see all these things in their true light. 
Niagara Co., N. Y._ T. greiner. 
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 FINANCIAL FACT AND SPECULATIVE 
SUGGESTION. 
Young vigorous America has already taught the world 
some wholesome truths. Are we not in a position now to 
teach and demonstrate it to be a fact that money is a 
measure of values and as such should circulate at places 
other than the pawn-brokers ? In other words, that to 
be a measure of values it need not itself be intrinsically 
valuable ? 
We found our measure on gold. It fluctuates, and is 
capable of being manipulated to the interests of the few. 
Debts are doubled. Fortunes are made in a day. Now 
are we not in acondition to issue ‘‘fiat money,” and make 
it pay every debt, public and private, in this vast and 
wealthy country ? 
It pays taxes; it pays duties; it pays debts. What more 
can money do? It will soon find its purchasing power, 
and our government will be relieved of a load of which 
we have little conception. 
[How can “ fiat money ” pay either debts or taxes in this 
country when there is none in existence here ? Paper 
money issued on a gold or even silver basis, and redeem¬ 
able in gold or silver—the only kind we have,—is not “ fiat 
money.” “ Flat money ” would be paper money issued on 
the security of the nation’s word and credit, and redeem¬ 
able in paper money. Once this cime into vogue, “specie 
payment” would no doubt be soon again suspended, and 
there would be no gold or silver in which the paper could 
be redeemed We do not wish to discuss flat money here 
ourselves, or to venture an opinion with regard to its 
merits or demerits; we merely desire to correct a mistaken 
intimation with regard to its nature. Eds ] 
Recently in repairing our old house built of gray lime¬ 
stone about 1795, a Spanish coin about the weight of a 25- 
cent piece was picked from the rubbish, the date showing 
it to be 135 years old. Money in small sums in Kentucky 
during this period has been worth 10 per cent on an aver¬ 
age. Ten per cent on 25 cents, compound interest for 135 
years, will be found to be approxim itely $65 536. Many 
of us expect our esuntry to be only In the zenith of its 
glory in say 1,000 years. Compound interest at five per 
cent on an intrinsically valuable measure of 25 cents for 
1,000 years would be approximately $1,657,260,157,818,571,136. 
Can we expect our country to furnish us an intrinsically 
valuable medium of exchange at a cost that may be the 
secret of collapseot many mighty nations of the past ? 
“Come, let us reason together.” j A. m 
Kingsville, Ky. _ 
“SPECIAL PRIVILEGES TO NONE.” 
As a brief contribution to the literature of the farmers’ 
movement, I will offer the following facts. The farmers 
at the West seem to be calling loudly for government 
help—national land loans at two per cent interest seeming 
the favorite remedy—while they are denouncing men in 
other lines of business. I wonder what these men will 
have to say about the following case: 
In my neighborhood lives a man who used to do business 
in the city. He had some little money and a good many 
friends who thought his judgment good, were ready 
to let him invest their little savings for them. He 
saw a chance to buy a lot of stock in a paper collar factory 
at a low price. It looked like a good chance to make some 
money. Everybody wore paper collars; linen collars were 
far too high in price for the public ; there seemed no resson- 
able chance that they could be made cheap enough to com¬ 
pete with paper, and the factory held a valuable patent; 
so this man went to his friends and borrowed their money 
and put all he could get into paper-collar stock. He 
worked hard and faithfully to make the business pay, 
and it would have paid well but for an invention. Fashion 
decided that paper collars were “ low tone.” Somebody 
devised a plan for making linen collars so good and so 
cheap that they drove the paper article out of the market. 
The money was all lost, the stock was not worth its 
weight In blank paper, its value vanished for good. Our 
friend became a bankrupt through no fault of his own. 
Near him lives a farmer with a mortgage on his farm so 
heavy that the soil is too tired to work. This is in New 
Jersey, mind you, a State more at the mercy of railroads 
and corporations than Kansas ever dreamed of being. 
Fifteen years ago this farmer paid a big price for his land 
expecting to sell it in a few years for double its cost as 
building lots. It was close to New York; towns were 
building out towards his farm ; it seemed surely right in 
the path of high prices. He therefore paid a big price and 
assumed a big mortgage expecting to pay the mortgage 
and line his pocket with a nice profit out of the rise in 
value. What happened ? The city people never came, im¬ 
provement branched off in another direction ; the farm is 
now worth only about half as much as it was 15 years ago, 
while the mortgage aud the interest are just as big. The 
farm has failed in strength and productive capacity. The 
system of transporting Southern and Western farm pro¬ 
ducts into his former market has been developed. In 
short, this farmer made a speculation and failed through 
no fault of his The former value of his farm has vanished. 
Now, what I want to ask the advocates of land loans 
from the government is this: Why has the mortgaged 
farmer any more right to government aid than the paper 
collar man? Both are the victims of “vanished value.” 
Will it not be “class legislation” to aid one and let the 
other “lump it ? ” jerseyman. 
FARMERS’ NEEDS. 
The Rural’s “Farm Politics” page is a very useful, if 
rather risky enterprise. Heretofore partisan politics has 
been so bitter that the men of one party have been indis¬ 
posed to take any paper willing to give other sides a fair 
show, or to allow that there might be something to be said 
on more tnan one side of any political question, and even 
now when so many are breaking away from the old par¬ 
ties, men seem to be in many cases equally intolerant to¬ 
wards any other political convictions than such as they 
now hold, however recently adopted. 
But politics is not an exact science yet; and the sensible 
citizen is not only willing but anxious to hear and read 
what can be said on all sides, and to judge for himself. 
Blind political bigotry seems to be slowly passing away, 
and I have hopes that the better class of farmers, such as 
rally around Tiis Rural’s standard, will look fairly over 
the political field, avoiding everything discordant with 
the established principles upon which the rights of Amer¬ 
ican citizenship are founded, aud seeking only the peace¬ 
ful reform of abuses by the safest and best means. 
Farmers are supposed to be, and for the most part are, 
practical men. They have to deal daily wich the stub¬ 
born facts of human existence, and their thoughts natu¬ 
rally seek for themselves a practical channel. It is for 
this reason that they are the safeguard of the nation. 
They have never been appealed to in vain in any general 
emergency, and they have always proved themselves ade¬ 
quate to the demands made upon them. 
The new civilization, manifesting itself in the wonderful 
changes in human conditions that will forever.mark the 
nineteenth century, has loosened and deranged the struc¬ 
ture of society. Nothing in human affairs is, or ever can 
be as it was. and as it had long con’inued prior to the es¬ 
tablishment of oar nationality. Wny science and politics 
should both have undergone and produced such startling 
changes in a before almost unchanging world I leave others 
to say; but men la every line of life are alike subject to 
these changes, and must adapt themselves to them, whether 
they will or not. 
In the midst of the present excitement among working 
men generally, every one has a chance to be heard, and the 
loudest talkers will get the public ear first. But these 
talkers are talking to a greit jury, before which they 
must soundly justify their theories and plans. In many 
particulars I think the verdict is almost ready to be de- 
liverei, aid that the loudest talkers are not going to 
carry the day. Impracticable plans are proving themselves 
such, and quietly being put aside. We are coming down 
to business, and the outcome will be satisfactory. So far 
as the farmers are concerned, they are recognizing their 
needs, and intelligently bsnt on providing for them. De¬ 
cidedly their greatest need is more and fuller knowledge 
of their art. Larger crops at less co3t are a more direct 
and smoother roa l to success on the farm than any scheme 
for getting hold of more money, and paying off mortgages 
by hocus-pocus. The first and greatest demand is for 
knowledge of our art, and of the way to pursue it with cer¬ 
tainty to a financial succes3. Better and more practical 
schools for the young, better practice for those now in the 
field, constitute the flrat great need of American farmers. 
To this end we need less rather than more party politics. 
That party is best for us which will help in all practical 
reforms, such as we can all join in supporting. Talk is 
cheap; the people want results. 
With the development of all resources of knowledge and 
the consequent improvement therefrom, we must seek and 
secure rigid justice, as between public corporations and 
the people. If we cannot secure this with reasonable 
promptitude, then we must abolish the corporations. Our 
railroads, replacing the public highways, must be con¬ 
trolled in the interest of the whole people. The State 
must secure this to us without farther delay. Corpora¬ 
tions must no longer be allowed to take to themselves 
undue tolls upon intelligent industry. If the industry is 
really intelligent, they can not do so long. I believe that 
within 10 years all the “ water ” can be squeezed out of 
our iron highways, and no more than a fair toll, based on 
actual cost, will be taken; while their facilities will be for 
all, without discrimination, and under constant and 
steady improvement. A like course must also betaken 
with our common roads. Improv. msnt in all that aids 
cheap transportation of our products, and brings pro¬ 
ducer and consumer together with the least expense, are 
in the straight line towards general prosperity. All our 
main roads from our farms to our local centers of business 
must be constructed and maintained by the best engineer¬ 
ing talent, and no longer left as now, to local inexperience 
and inefficiency. The State that pushes this reform 
furthest will be the one where farming will pay best. 
Our present highways are a discredit to our good sense 
and civilization. 
•None of these good things can be had without a vast 
expenditure of intelligent effort. Are the farmers capa¬ 
ble of it ? They have but to put out their hands to grasp 
these advantages. But they must cease to follow politi¬ 
cal phantoms, and they must begin as they never have yet 
to cooperate for the severest practical ends. They must 
realize how they are now being misled and robbed by men 
smarter than themselves, because better trained. We 
want to bring true education, true discipline of all our 
powers, to work for our interests, with the like energy 
and directness that now work against these interests. 
Chase no more after “iridescent” soap bubbles. Soberly 
follow (in the best sense) the “ main chance.” 
BUCEPHALUS BROWN. 
In The R. N.-Y. of February 23 is an article on the “ Illi¬ 
nois School Issue,” in which the writer says, “ the com¬ 
pulsory law is supported in a great measure by heavy tax¬ 
payers who hope by the opposition to it to make the pub¬ 
lic system odious, and so to secure its repeal, and free 
themselves from its burden.” Possibly there are some 
such persons in our State, but I cannot believe that there 
are many who are as shortsighted as this statement would 
indicate. Ignorance is the greatest of all sources of crime 
and misery and brings far greater burdens upon us than 
the school tax. However disagreeable the fact may be, 
every intelligent person, who has given the matter any at¬ 
tention must know that there are many parents, es¬ 
pecially in our towns and cities, who are indifferent re¬ 
garding the education of their children. Parents who re¬ 
fuse to work, or squander their earnings in saloons, and 
neglect to supply their children with suitable clothing and 
books and send them to school, are practically enemies 
rather than friends to their children. If it is right for the 
State to require justice between parent and child in other 
respects, why not in this ? If the child brought up in ig¬ 
norance would simply “ be a mule and do the work while 
others vote,” It would not matter so much to any one ex¬ 
cept himself; but those who cannot rise above that posi¬ 
tion are very likely to sink below it, and became criminals. 
They furnish the great mass of the recruits for the army 
of tramps and jail-birds that are constantly preying upon 
the intelligent and industrious citizens of our country. If 
it is right for the State to endeavor to prevent crime by 
punishing criminals, is it not also right for it to endeavor 
to prevent criminals by insisting on the education of the 
children ? I believe in personal liberty just as far as it can 
be exercised without interfering with the rights of others, 
but when it is used as an excuse for rank injustice towards 
others I feel like making a vigorous protest. JAMES D. 
Elmwood, Ill. 
