772 
NOV. |5 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
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. 
THE FARMERS AND THE ELECTIONS. 
Although it is too early yet to speak definitely of the 
results of the farmers’ efforts at last Tuesday’s elections, 
enough is already known to show that they have won sig¬ 
nal victories in some of the States in which their exertions 
were the greatest, while in others they have greatly upset 
the calculations of the old parties. On the whole, the 
Democrats appear to have been the chief gainers by the 
movement. In the South the farmers fought under the 
Democratic flag and in the West and Northwest their 
nominations appear to have seriously injured the Repub¬ 
licans and correspondingly benefited the Democrats. 
There is no doubt, however, that they have shown them¬ 
selves a strong force in politics even in the first fewmonths 
of their organization for political purposes, and if they 
maintain and perfect their organizations they must inev¬ 
itably become the controlling factor in a large majority of 
the States of the Union. The old party “war-horses” 
are already shouting that the Farmers’ Alliance and similar 
associations have failed ignobly in politics, because they 
have not accomplished all they desired; but in reality the 
wonder is that, in view of tneir hasty and often crude or¬ 
ganization, their lack of political experience, and the 
thorough organization and well equipped party machinery 
opposed to them, they have accomplished so much. 
Contrary to all expectations, the election in South Caro¬ 
lina was the quietest ever known. Not 50 per cent, of the 
full vote was cast. The Republicans, who put no State 
ticket in the field, were expected to vote for the “ Straight- 
outs,” but generally refrained from voting at all. The 
Tillmanite, or farmers’, ticket was elected by an over¬ 
whelming majority. The legislature will stand: Till- 
manites, 100; Anti-Tillmanites, 24. It will have to elect a 
United States Senator to succeed Wade Hampton, and as 
the latter has been opposed to the farmers’ movement, it 
is likely that he will not be reelected, in spite of his “ war 
record.” Six out of the seven Congressmen from the State 
are Tillmanites. In North Carolina the struggle within 
the Democratic party between the farmers and the old 
office holding faction has been as strenuous, though less 
bitter, than in South Carolina. The farmers have secured 
a decided majority in the legislature, and eight out of the 
nine Congressmen. Although Senator Vance has been op¬ 
posed to the Sub-Treasury scheme which has been strongly 
advocated by the farmers of the State, he will probably be 
reelected, as in other matters he has always favored legis¬ 
lation in the interest of .farmers. In Georgia, the Farmers’ 
Alliance, having gobbled up the Democratic party, has 
secured an overwhelming majority in the legislature, 
which is to elect a successor to United States Senator 
Brown. General Gordon, the most prominent candidate, 
is bitterly opposed by a majority of the Alliance, and is 
very likely to be defeated. The Alliance has elected nearly 
all its candidates for Congress. Though it is the “regular” 
Democratic organization, wherever there was a chance of de¬ 
feating its nominee, an Independent Democrat was put up, 
and, as a rule, he received the Republican support. In 
Tennessee, Buchanan, the farmer and Democratic candi¬ 
date for Governor, had virtually a walk over. At least 
seven Democratic Congressmen indorsed by the farmers 
have been elected. 
The dissatisfaction of the farmers elsewhere with the 
party usually dominant in their respective States, may be 
briefly summarized as follows: In Massachusetts, the 
Republicans who have been “ fooling ” the farmers for 
years with regard to anti-oleo legislation, have been 
snowed under, and a bright young lawyer, William E. 
Russell, the Democratic candidate, has been elected Gov¬ 
ernor. Farmers have caused the election of a Democratic 
Governor of Nebraska for the first time in its history, and 
secured the balance of power in the legislature! They 
have upset all calculations in Kansas, elected several Rep¬ 
resentatives to Congress, and a large number of members 
to the State legislature, and put the Republican State 
ticket in doubt, though it had a majority of 80,000 at the 
last election. In Michigan they have elected a fair propor¬ 
tion of the members of the legislature, and wiped out 
a Republican majority of fully 30,000. In Illinois their 
power has been grievously felt by the dominant party, 
though the returns hitherto received do not indicate what 
other advantages they have secured. They have greatly 
reduced the Republican majorities in the new States which 
were admitted, in part, to give the Republicans additional 
votes in Congress and the Electoral College. They have 
grievously “rattled ” both parties in Iowa, gained a large 
increase of followers in the State legislature and added 
greatly to their influence in public affairs. They have 
mixed things grievously up in Minnesota, have gained a 
fair representation in the State legislature and secured the 
election of some of their nominees for Congress. 
The returns from a number of other States in whose elec¬ 
tions they took a prominent part are as yet so incomplete 
or conflicting that it is impracticable to summarize the 
results of their action. By refusing to indorse objection¬ 
able State and National candidates, they have forced both 
the great old parties to make unusually good nominations, 
and by putting independent tickets in the field where there 
was a chance of success, they have greatly increased the 
number of their representatives in the State and National 
legislatures. Above all, perhaps, they have begun to loosen 
the grasp of the old parties on their opinions and affections 
and to learn to take an independent stand in the affairs of 
the nation. The Democrats of the South either fully ac¬ 
cepted the demands of the farmers, as in both Carolinas, 
Tennesse and Georgia, or did so partly, as in nearly all the 
other Southern States, and secured easy victories by in¬ 
creased majorities; the Republicans of the West and North¬ 
west either absolutely refused to make any concessions to 
the farmers, or grudgingly made very inadequate ones, 
and they have lost the control of the Lower House of Con¬ 
gress, in many cases the State legislatures, in several the 
Governorship and other State offices, and in all have been 
taught a lesson they are not likely soon to forget. 
NOTES. 
A Canadian subscriber asks us this poser: “ Why does 
the people’s government of the United States close their 
doors to Canadian commerce, while the government’s 
people are soliciting our trade ? ” If this was not answered 
by our friend, “ A Connecticut Farmer,” on this page last 
week, no doubt he will answer it. 
Many farmers’ meetings and organizations have “ re¬ 
solved ” in favor of the election of United States Senators 
by a direct vote of the poople. The Farmers’ Mutual 
Benefit Association of Illinois goes a step further and 
advocates the election of Vice President and United States 
Judges by the people. Why not ? The association also 
wants school books furnished at cost. They indorse the 
Australian ballot system, demand the reduction of pas¬ 
senger and freight railroad rates in Illinois, declare war 
upon all monopdlies, including the organized liquor traffic, 
and believe that it would be for the interest of the farmers 
and tax-payers of Illinois if the payment of taxes be made 
semi-annually as it is now done in Kansas. 
WE learn that the Judiciary Committee of the Missis¬ 
sippi Constitutional Convention recommends the follow¬ 
ing as the law of that State : “ Verdicts of juries in civil 
cases may bo rendered by the concurrence of ten members 
thereof who shall subscribe their names to the verdict. 
The legislature may repeal, change or modify this rule.” 
For a long time it has seemed evident that justice would 
be better served by placing the power of rendering a ver¬ 
dict in the hands of a majority of a jury rather than de¬ 
manding unanimous approval. In civil cases certainly 
this method would prove more satisfactory, and there is a 
strong probability that it would also be more satisfactory 
in criminal cases. 
If we may judge from the following extract from the 
Bangor Commercial, the farmers of Maine have a job before 
them, that will be found in almost all the States : “ The 
chief need of the Maine State College just now, is an 
urgent effort on the part of its friends to secure a board 
of trustees that will know at all times what is being dona 
there, and take sufficient interest to lift the institution 
into the position it ought to hold. It is about time for the 
college to cease running itself, and feel some strong, able 
hands at the helm.” The trouble with nine-tenths of our 
agricultural colleges and experiment stations is that the 
wrong men are put on the boards of control. Farmers’ or¬ 
ganizations should have the right of nominating good 
men for such positions. The Wisconsin Board is one of 
the best in the country. 
Vermont is an agricultural State if anything. There 
is hardly a State in the Union which has a greater propor¬ 
tion of its citizens engaged in agriculture. It is a little 
surprising therefore to the outside world to learn that the 
proposal to separate the A. and M. College from the Uni¬ 
versity and locate it where it can thrive and make use of 
the funds which rightfully belong to it, is in danger of 
being defeated. The professional men and “ gentlemen ” 
of the State are using all the influence they can bring to 
bear in favor of the University. Even Senator Morrill, 
the father of the agricultural college idea, defends the Uni¬ 
versity and goes out of his way to attack the Farmers’ 
League, stating that it is bound to break up the Republican 
party. A Vermont Democrat or “Independent” has 
about as small a chance for recognition as a South Carolina 
Republican. Senator Morrill knows this well and his 
argument against the Farmers’ League is consequently 
about as effective as he well could make it. It happens that 
the League contains members of both political parties. 
They do not seek to break up any party, but they do seek 
to break up the little “rings” or cliques of bosses with which 
most State governments seem cursed. The simple question 
is—shall the agricultural college funds be used to teach 
agriculture or shall the University continue to gobble them 
up for other purposes ? 
WHAT shall be done with the poor and criminal classes in 
our large cities ? This is a question which concerns the 
farmer as well as the city dweller. General Booth of the 
English Salvation Army, has just written a remarkable 
book entitled “In Darkest England.” Mr. Booth has for 
years studied the criminal classes of England, and there 
can be no doubt that he knows them thoroughly. The 
English people are startled to find that seven-tenths of the 
destitute and fallen in London are from the country. Mr. 
Booth says: “They represent, not the dregs of the 
country, but rather its brighter and more adventurous 
spirits, who have boldly tried to make their way in new 
and uncongenial spheres and have terribly come to grief.” 
He proposes to secure a large tract of land near London 
where he can send suitable men and boys who will be 
made to work on the land, drawing wages for themselves 
and producing food for their brethren in the city. This 
farm would be used as a training school and after serving 
on it awhile the workers would be sent to one of the 
English colonies where they would be settled in new 
homes. We have had considerable experience in trying to 
induce poor people in New York City to go to the country 
and work on farms, but never with permanent success. If 
this plan ever succeeds it will be because of the machinery 
of some organization, like the Salvation Army, which, for 
all that it may be criticised, reaches the poor people and 
secures their confidence. 
NOTES FROM THE RURAL GROUNDS. 
What Depth of Planting will give the most 
Profitable Yield of Potatoes? 
The trenches were dug two, four, six, eight and ten inches 
deep, and the fertilizer wassown at the rate of 1,000 pounds 
to the acre in the trenches after the seed pieces had received 
an inch covering of soil. The fertilizer used was the 
Mapes Potato analyzing as follows: Ammonia 4.50 per 
cent, phosphoric acid eight; potash six; the minimum quan¬ 
tities guaranteed. The soil of these plots, as has often 
been stated, but as it seems necessary to repeat from year 
to year, is naturally poor and thin—a loam inclining rat her 
to clay than to sand. It has never received any manure in 
so far as the writer has been able to learn—certainly not 
within the past 19 years. The season was v^et throughout. 
There were so few potato beetles that it was necessary to 
apply Paris-green but once. Then it was sifted upon the 
vines—pound to 200 pounds of plaster, thoroughly 
mixed together on a tight board floor. The mass of plaster 
was first spread over the floor about two inches in thickness. 
The poison was then as evenly as possible sifted over this. 
It was then mixed by the use of a steel rake, shoveled into 
a heap, spread out again and raked etc , until the distribu¬ 
tion of the poison seemed to be perfect, There were few 
flea beetles and no blight, though last year on this same 
land flaa beetles destroyed the vines several weeks before 
their time of maturity. The variety, as in all previous 
trials, was the Rural Blush. 
Bushels 
Bushels 
No. Inhes. 
pi r a - re- 
No. 
Inches. 
per acre. 
1. 
2 . 
_308. 
18. 
6 .... 
.267.66 
2. 
4 . 
19 
8 .... 
.227.33 
3. 
6 . 
....304.33 
20. 
10 .... 
.236.50 
4. 
8 . 
5. 
10 . 
....276.83 
21. 
2 .... 
.280.50 
22 
4 . 
.278.66 
5 
2 
219 
23 
6 .... 
7. 
4 . 
....287.83 
24. 
8 .... 
.300. 
8 
ft 
30' 50 
25. 
10 .... 
.240.16 
9. 
8 . 
....265.83 
10. 
10 . 
.287.83 
26. 
2 .... 
.242. 
27 
4 
293 
11 
2 
260 
28 
6 .... 
12. 
4 .... 
.238.33 
29. 
8 .... 
13. 
6 ... . 
30. 
10 .... 
.269.50 
14. 
8 ... 
.223.66 
15. 
10 ... 
31. 
2 .... 
....... 
.258.33 
33 
4 .... 
.284.17 
16. 
2 .... 
.260. 
33. 
6 .... 
.247.50 
17. 
4 .... 
.261.83 
34. 
8 .... 
.251.16 
Averages. 
Bushels. 
Two inches depth yielded p^r acre. 
Four “ 
it 
4 C ti 
U 
.277.26 
Six 
(( 
41 
(4 44 
44 
.281.56 
Eight “ 
44 
44 44 
41 
Ten 
44 
4 4 
44 4 * 
44 
The difference between the greatest yield—six inches’ 
depth—and the smallest yield—eight inches’depth—is 23 19 
bushels to the acre. The difference between the eight 
inches’ depth and the ten inches’ depth is but five bushels 
to the acre. Had the season been dry we should naturally 
have looked for a larger yield from the deeper trenches As 
it was the difference does not at all pay for the extra cost 
of a depth of planting beyond six inches. 
In 1 S88, 
which was an average season as to rainfall, the average 
results were as follows : 
Bushels. 
Four inches, per acre .371.55 
Eight “ “ “ .338.24 
Ten “ “ “ .311.05 
During that season two and six-inch trenches were not 
tried. 
In 1889, 
one of the wettest seasons known, the average results, 
much reduced by blight and the flea beetle, were as fol 
lows : . , 
Bushels. 
Two inches, per acre .22b 
Four “ “ “ 220 
Six “ “ “ >85 
Eight “ “ “ 177 
Ten “ “ “ 148 
Average of Total Results. 
Two inches, per acre. 
Four “ “ “ . 
Six “ “ “ . 
Eight “ " “ . 
Ten “ “ “ . 
Bushels. 
.245.70 
.289.60 
.233.27 
.257.86 
..2i0.8l 
It will be seen that the four inch trenches give the 
largest yield as the average of three years during which 
these experiments have been conducted on the same land. 
When it is considered that the eight-inch trenches give 
the next largest yield, we have evidence that the experi¬ 
ments have not been carried on long enough to warrant 
any positive generalizations. 
Is This the Champion Digger?—I have seen-several items 
recently about the number of bushels of potatoes that could 
be dug and picked up in a day, and feel inclined to add one. 
Many years ago when I was a lad—I am now 04—an ac¬ 
quaintance of mine named Davenport, in Bloomfield, Con¬ 
necticut, made a bet that he could dig, pick up and put 
in a cart 100 bushels of potatoes in one day between 
sunrise and sundown, and succeeded in doing it. The po¬ 
tatoes were raised on the farm of David W. Grant, and 
were of a variety called Rohan, then recently introduced, 
very large and very prolific and very poor in all respects, 
so poor that they were considered after trial not worth 
raising notwithstanding the enormous amount that could 
be raised on an acre. This feat was witnessed by several 
persons, a few of whom are now living, and will certify to 
the accuracy of the above statement. L. A. ROBERTS. 
Kings County, N. Y. 
R. N.-Y. Who can beat this record? It will stand until 
somebody brings along a better one. Are the young men 
of to-day so far behind? 
