1852 
45 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
in the inability to distinguish between these, that most 
foreigners offend and alienate us. 
Any candid observer who considers the circumstances 
of our farmers, must at once be struck with many con¬ 
ditions that differ so entirely from those formed in the 
long settled districts of Europe, as to bring us under the 
operation of an almost distinct set of laws. 
The immense extent of rich country still unsettled, 
where land may be bought for a mere trifle, and the con¬ 
sequent high price of labor, accounts for many of the 
imperfections in our farming. While broad unbroken 
forests invite the pioneer to enter, and let the sunlight 
upon the vegetable accumulations of centuries; while 
verdant prairies open out almost like the boundless sea, 
there is a strong temptation to cultivate only for the pre¬ 
sent hour, to take off crops with no labor beyond that 
of plowing, and when the produce begins to decrease, to 
move toward another untouched tract. In this way a 
rolling shifting tide of population advances, leaving the 
land behind them in a partially exhausted condition. 
Now it is all very well to say that this is wretched 
farming, and to declaim against our improvidence ; but 
the fact is, that any elaborate system of cultivation would 
not succeed at all in these new lands so remote from the 
sea-board. The farmer who attempted to cultivate his 
land according to the most improved modern systems, 
would not obtain enough, large though his crops might 
be, to pay more than half of his expenses, and this for 
the reason that the conditions of Europe are reversed: 
in place of cheap and abundant labor and dear food, we 
have cheap food with scarce and high priced labor. The 
farmer then in the extreme west, must simplify every 
process to the last possible degree, before he can make a 
profit. As we come east into the longer settled regions, 
the state of society, the value of land, and the abund¬ 
ance of labor, allow of a higher and higher style of cul¬ 
tivation. Still even in our oldest agricultural districts, 
I of course exclude market gardens, &lc., in the imme¬ 
diate vicinity of large towns, there are few T if any places 
where the highest style of English farming, with all its 
expense of implements, and elaborate finish of cultiva¬ 
tion, could be 'profitably carried on. 
This is one of the points in relation to which foreigners 
are often most obstinately prejudiced; they demand the 
same kind of perfection that they have seen at home, 
the same implements, the same character of stock. In 
this they make the identical mistake that they do in con¬ 
demning our laws and habits, simply because they differ 
from those to which they have been accustomed. Be¬ 
fore speaking, they should consider the force of circum¬ 
stances. 
My opinion is, that in this country a man is a good 
farmer, whose land is improving under cultivation from 
year to year, and at the same time yielding him a profit. 
Thousands of farms in this condition might be pointed 
out, and yet perhaps not more than one or two would 
elicit the approval of that class of foreigners described 
in the preceding paragraph; they do not consider that 
perfection is relative; a system of cultivation may be 
essentially as high as any in England, and yet the farmer 
not be able to afford those niceties of the art which dis¬ 
tinguish the best English and Scotch farms the result 
may be as good, while the system and appliances are 
cheaper and rougher. In short—while we would aim at 
the highest perfection, we must still compare ourselves 
with ourselves, and claim the right to decide what is the 
best farming on this side of the Atlantic, with only a 
secondary reference to foreign standards. "VVe would 
follow^ all that is profitable and advantageous in the 
practice of others, but will not submit to be tied to their 
criterion of excellence. 
It is my firm belief that some districts of this country, 
have improved as rapidly in their agriculture, during the 
last five years, as any that can be found in the world; 
but I perceive that it will be necessary to defer any fur¬ 
ther remarks upon this and other points, until my next 
letter. Yours truly, John P. Norton. 
Milch Cows. 
The American Agriculturist , in the number for Feb¬ 
ruary last, speaking of the u Oaks cow” and the 
“ Noursecow,” said —“ We can show r numerous instances 
of larger yielders, whether of milk of butter.” In ouf 
March number, we asked the Agriculturist to point us 
to these u numerous instances” claimed. In the Sep¬ 
tember number of that paper, (five months after w r e 
asked for the information,) there is an editorial article 
on the subject, in winch, in reference to its previous as¬ 
sertion, it is said— 
“ We had. an impression that many results were on 
record to verify this assertion, but on recurring to writ-, 
ten authorities, we found our convictions had been formed 
upon oral testimony, rather than the more formal and’ 
documentary.” 
The Agriculturist next calls our attention to u such 
brief authority,” in support of its original assertion, “ as 
on a moment’s investigation has presented itself.” Before 
proceeding to notice this u brief authority,” it is proper 
to say that w T e called for the information alluded to, 
simply in relation to the settlement of a fact, and not, 
as our cotemporary falsely charges, from u zeal for up¬ 
holding the natives A We gave the product of the Oaks 
cow r in butter for three years, as follows: 1814, 300 lbs.; 
1815, 400 lbs.; 1816,484^ lbs., and desired to know 
where we could find the proof in regard to the “ numer¬ 
ous instances of larger yielders from Short-horn herds.” 
We obtained the facts in regard to the produce of the 
Oaks cow from the Massachusetts Agricultural Reposi¬ 
tory and Journal , vol. IY, pp. 254, 255. It appears 
from the account, that the product put dow’n as for the 
latter year, embraced but a little over eight months, as 
follows: She calved April 5th, and suckled her calf till 
the 8th of May, when it was killed. While the calf was 
with her, she gave 17 lbs. of butter, and from the time 
the calf was killed, or May 8th to December 20tli, she 
gave 467-j lbs.—making a total of 484 : j lbs.—besides fat¬ 
tening her calf to the age of four weeks and five days. 
Now, the Agriculturist said it could 11 show numer- 
our instances” in which this product had been exceeded 
by (t Short-horn herds,” and w r e merely asked that the 
“ instances” be shown to us. It has not complied with 
this request, although it has given tw T 0 pages of what it 
calls “ brief authority.” We have carefully looked over 
all this, and still ask for evidence of the truth of the 
first assertion. 
