_Y
•__
L'\^
V
*><_
&K
?e*^* \y '____.        "~   " £"*_.  _r_     ~"-**«
.*.
_£S:
VOL. XXV.
*c
?J
INDIANAPOLIS, IND., NOV. 1, 1890.
NO. 44
Written for the Indiana Farmer.
*   Agronomics—No. 1.
UV JOHN M. KTAU1-.
(Juit. frequently one sees in a city pa-
' per, the editors of which are supposed to
be very learned and wise, a statement
something like this: "Farmers are not so
badly off as they would have it appear. It
is true tha. agricultural products are perhaps *__ per cent lower than they were 40
years ago, but the farmer is now provided
with bo much labor saving machinery that
one man can now produce twice as much
as a man could produce then, lleuce the
fanner Is paid 50 per cent more for his
labor now than he was then. The trouble
is not that the farmer is paid less, but that
he has adopted a more extravagant style
of living. But of course ho grumbles. It
has become a second nature to him."
Now In this statement there are several
errors which we will consider not in order.
First, it is probably not far wrong that
making full uso of labor saving appliances
the samo amount of manual labor will
produce twlco as much on the farm now
as it produced 40 or CO years ago; but it
does not follow that the bushel of wbeat
or corn, or pound of hay or beef.costs only
one-half as much now as then. Several
<■ mditions have so changed as to add
Bomewhat to the cost of farm products;
but tho_ we will not now notice. The
error' in the statement in the preceding
paragraph is that no account ls taken of
the increased expenditure of the farmer
for labor saving appliances. Labor saving
implements and machines cost money.
The average farmer spends 10 times as
mucli for farm machinery as his father did
40 years ago. There is less expense for labor, but far moro expense for farm machinery. Let the reader make a complete
inventory of his farm machinery, and I
venture to say that in 49 cases of each 50
he will be surprised at the cost. IIo has
no idea that it had cost so much. He will
see where a respectable fraction of his
money has gone. It will pay him well to
make such an inventory, for it will certainly lead him—if anything under the
sun can have such an effect—to be more
careful in the purchase of farm machinery
and to take better care of it aftor it has
been purchased.
It is impossible to compute exactly how
much less is the expense for labor and
how much greater is the expense for farm
Implements and machinery now than it
was 40 years ago, and what effect this has
had on the cost of producing a bushel or a
pound. Such computations as I have been
able to make lead me to conclude that on
an averago the cost of production is now
about *J0 per cent less than it was 40 to 50
years ago.
There is a marked fluctuation almost
every year in the prices of farm products.
To obtain a true result as to the relation of
the prices obtained by farmers at different
periods, one cannot compare a single year
with another year, or even one period of
three or four years with another like^pe-
riod. By so doing one can prove almost
anything; one can reach directly opposite
results, as the reader is aware if he has followed the comparisons of the prices of
farm products made by free traders and
protectionists in Congress and out. Using
the same figures, they produce opposite
effects. Again, a man taking the average
price for each year of the last 50, can show
that prices were both higher and lower
under either protective or low tariff policy,
by changing tho periods into which the 60
years are divided for the purpose of comparison. Hence before we decide that a
c.inparison of figures shows better for
the farmer now than 40 years ago,we must
be sure that tbe comparison Ls rightly
made.
I have some old account books kept by a
farmer, a country merchant, and a manu
facturer. They cover a period of about _
years—the forties and fifties. These books
show the price iu the market nearest the
farm of nearly every product of tbe farm
in Western Pennsylvania. I also have the
account books of a farmer in Western Illinois during the last _0 years. These books
show that from 1S70-1_*0 farm products
have brought the farmer a better price, on
a gold basis, in Illinois than they did the
farmer in Pennsylvania during 1M0-_('*_
I make this statement not to commend or
condemn any theory of system, but only
to show that when the city paper says
farm products bring the farmer less prices
than they did 40 to 50 years ago, it states
what is not true.
.   (Juiney, 111.
 .  ♦ .	
The Hunting Law.
Kditors Indiana Farmer.
I see that the Indiana Fakmkr and
other papers advise the farmers to post
their farms to keop hunters off. It may
be well enough to postour farms that hunters may have no excuse, but the law does
not require tbe owner or occupant of the
farm to post, to keep hunters off from it.
Section '..110 of the revised Statutes reads
as follows:
"Whoever hunts with dog or dogs, or
hunts or shoots with any kind of firearms,
on enclosed land, without having first obtained the consent of the owner or occupant thereof, shall upon conviction thereof, bo fined In any sum not more than $50,
nor less than five dollars." And Section
1SI41 makes It a misdemeanor for any
person to enter enclosed or unenclosed land when forbidden by owner or
occupant, or his agent or servant, and ho
may bo fined for such trespass, not loss
than five nor moro than f_. Now all that
tho farmers havo to do is to organize and
follow the hunters to the towns and cities,
and arrest and bring them before the
courts. But the town people aro not all
who annoy the farmers ami endanger tho
lives of their children and stock. We have
some men and boys in the country who
shoot recklessly, and it is no difference
whose gun and dog enters your farm, you
aro liable to bo injured in person or stock;
for every time your stock is disturbed it
Is a financial loss. And every fall _thero
is a number of teams caused to run away
by hunters in our cornfields while gathering corn; and moreover I would rather
have one live quail on my farm than a
dozen dead ones. I. N. C.
Trader's l'oint.
Our Washing-ton Letter.
From our Regular Correspondent.
Admiral Porter and the Historian,
George Bancroft, continue ill, and fears
are felt for the result in both cases. They
reside within a stone's throw of each other,
and their houses aro besieged by hundreds of anxiously enquiring callers every
day.
The work of the two Congressional campaign committees being about over, I paid
a visit to the headquarters of both the
democrats and republicans to day, in the
hope of obtaining some data upon which
to form an opinion as to which party will
control tho next House of Representatives.
I got left. They are doing no figuring or
prophecying, that is not for publication,
at either headquarters, and it required no
special powers of penetration to see in
both places that the result is considered to
be in doubt. Last summer tbe democrats
were claiming that they would control the
next House by a majority of at least 40,
and the republicans mado very faint attempts to refute the claim; now, the democrats are claiming nothing, and will be
glad to control the House by a majority
of one. What has brought about this
change. Organization. The republicans
are as well organizsd as if it was a Presidential campaign and their Congressional
committee has sent  out many  thousand
more documents than were distributed
when Mr. Harrison was elected, while the
democrats have scarcely made all they
might out of their opportunities.
The collection of campaign funds from
•.Iovernment employes in this city has
gone on to a limited extent this fall but it
has been greatly exaggerated by the sensational press. I am satisfied that not more
than $5,000 or $0,000 has been contributed
and that isn't 25 cents eaeh for the Govern-
ment clerks employed here.
Somehow or other, the idea seems to lie
generally accepted here that a member of
Mr. Harrison's Cabinet will sueceed the
late Justice Miller on tbe bench of the Supreme Court. The Attorney General is
rated as first choice, with Secretaries Noblo
and Tracy second and third, respectively.
Of course all 'thi _ may be changed when
the big politicians come back to town.
Our navy continues to grow. The Navy
Department has been notified that the
cruiser Concord is now ready for her trial
trip and next week has been set for the interesting event. Tho Concord is almost
an exact counterpart of tho Yorktown,
now in service.
Mr. Blaine has gone to Ohio to undertake the dllllcult task of making reciprocity speeches in the district of Representative McKinley, who ls an opponent to the
principlo of reciprocity. Mr. Blaine is a
man of expedients, and if anybody could
straighten this paradoxical crookedness,
he can.
Thore is very little extra session talk
this week and nobody now believes that
there will bo one.
Oct. I! 1th.
Cutting up Corn.
Kdlt.ni Indiana Farmer:
The cutting and shocking corn is now
ono of the most laborious, and perhaps the
most laborious work on the farm. This
fall I mado an entire chango on tho usual
mode. Instead of shocking tho corn in
the field, I hauled it up to tbe barn and
shocked it there ln large shocks, say as
much as fifteen ordinary shocks in one.
Tbe trucks I used aro about six feot wide
and about fourteen feet long. We cut two
rows at a time and never walk :i step to
get the fodder out of hand but dropped it
cross-wise in the row. In this way one
could cut about six rows in an hour. We
would then run along side tho corn and
load it on the truck, taking four rows at
n time.. We could haul in a load in :w or
40 minutes. One man could readily haul
in a load in an hour and a quarter or eight
loads in ten hours, which would betwenty-
two rows forty rods long. I allowed a
day's work for cutting forty-eight rows.
Paying a dollar a day would make tho cost
of hauling thirty-two shocks, one dollar
and sixty-six cents—about fivo cents a
shock. But a row forty rods long will
make more than a shock, so that tho cost
is less than five cents a shock, and the corn
is where you want it. The work is less to
haul it to the barn, in the way we are
doing it, than to put it In the shock in the
field; and now the field is bare and ready
for tho plow. But another advantage I
had was that I could use the cutaway
harrow to harrow in rye or wheat.
The rye planted in the corn in August
does not look as well as the rye harvested
ln September, after the corn was taken off.
Now that I have the corn so convenient
to the barn, other things come up for consideration. Tho feeding of corn fodder is
inconvenient on account of its length. To
get a fodder cutter and cut it up fine so as
to use the shovel or basket instead of the
fork, or carrying it in the arms, will perhaps be the best way to do away with the
inconvenience of feeding in the stalk.
Then the question is will the stock eat it
up clean, for in order to feed it without
loss lt should be fed from boxes that
would let it down as fast as  eaten and no
faster; which would compel stock to eat
it up clean; if it refused to eat it up clean
it would havo to be fed the old way.
If stock would eat it clean, what loss
would there be in feeding lt dry, instead
of feeding from the silo? or would there
be any loss? D.es the change it undergoes in the silo enable the stock to extract
more nutriment from the silage tban it
can extract from the dry fodder?
Then the next question is, which is the
best cutter? So far as I have looked at
them I think the "Tornado" the best mill.
Some of the farmors who have used tho
dit!_reut cutters give tlieir experience
with them in the columns of tho Farmer.
Sa.mi'ki, B. Hoefokn.
A Big Factory Left Our.
Editors Indiana Farmer:
In last week's issueof tho Farmkr, Samuel II. Hoefgen's articlo on "ltelief for tbo
masses" lacked one vory imj-ortant factor
—let him u _ his pencil a whilo on tho
cost io tho community and tax-payers of
the saloon. Abolish tbe saloon and an
immense stride towards tho goal ho aims
at is mk-ui_. A Sihscriiikr.
Sheibyville.
—You are quite correct. With an average of over $:'0,0_(<K_ a year worse than
wasted in tho State, it is a matter of surprise th it the prosperity of our people is
as great as it really is. If all this vast sum
of money wore turned into useful channels
of trade there-would be-a surprising in-
creasoinall that tends to tho happiness
and welfare of tho community. The liquor business must go.—Eds.
Pure Drinking Water.
Kditors Indiana Farmer:
One of tho great essentials to health and
happiness is good drinking water. To
procure this, in many localities, is no easy
matter. In the following articlo I give
directions how to make it possible to havo
good pure cistern water for drinking purposes. Tho roof from which the water is
drained should bo constructed of slate or
material that is as unchangeable as possible, and will not catch and hold any ellote
matter that may be blown or dropped upon it. Tho oive-spouts and conductors
should be galvanized. Havo two cisterns
dug, of equal size and sufficiently large to
hold the required amount of water, side
by side, a fow feet apart. Build the walls
of tho cisterns with brick in cement, and
cemented on the inside. While building
ram still clay solidly behind the walls to
make them more firm and impervious to
the water that may soak through the
ground. Lay a filtering pipe three feet
long and eight inches in diameter four
feet below tho surface, midway between
the cisterns and connect the ends of this
filter to the cisterns with two three inch
pipes. The filtering section should be
capped on each end and tho three inch
pipes screwed into these, the caps being
perforated between the filler and the
throe inch pipes. Beforo laying the filter,
fill each end with quite coarse gravel
the gravel growing finer toward the central where it is tolerably fine sand. Tho
whole mass of gravol and sand should be
firmly packed in tho filter. It will be
seen that the filtering pipe is placed near
tho top of the cisterns. The object of this
is to allow the water in cistern No. 1 to
settle before being filtered into cistern
No. 2. A largo Hat stono should be cemented over each cistern to prevent bugs,
etc., from getting into tho water.
The cold water of the winter rains and
sleets caught, filtered and saved in this
way, and drawn by a bucket pump, that
carries air down into tho depths of tho
water, render it possible for every family,
that lives In a country where the rainfall
is sullicient, to have good cistern water at
all seasons of the year. In countries
where there is no winter tho cisterns may
be dug sufficiently deep to compensate for
the loss. G. W. B.
Dearborn Co.