AGRICULTURE AS A RUINED INDUSTRY. [To THE EDITOR OP THE
"SFECTATOR.1
Sut,—The letter of Mr. Cooper (Spectator, August 15th), and your comments upon it, require some notice, and I would ask your indulgence if, in default of a better advocate, I attempt to answer your Conde;nnatiOn:Of -Our system of agriculture. .
In the first place, let me state that i have been from the beginning a thorough Vree-trader,—that is, a believer that free imports' benefit the country which imports in, if possible, a greater degree than that Which exports; alin,that duties should be levied for fiscal and revenue purposes alone, and not to benefit any particular or private-interest. Having, said this, let me come to Mr. Cooper. He has adopted the extraordinary fallacy that because a few enterprising indiViduals have fcrand a Market for flowers, fruit, and vegetablek therefore the *reef ftmiss of occupiers of the land would also find, a profit in . growing and selling the like. Certainly it is a fallacy behaved in. formerly by Mr. Gladstone. The very adoption of such a system of farming would bring its own discomfiture. Dien now the supply exceeds the demand in good seasons, and in bad seasons, such as the present, there is absolutely no fruit to sell. I have heard of a lady in Ireland who makes a good profit from four .acres of violets, which she sells for the London market ; but what if four thousand acres were grown? r know that in Lincolnshire there has sprung up a new industry in the growth of bulbs, daffodils, and others; but what extension of acreage of daffodils would be profitable to the grower? And as regards the country, whit loss to the food supply. would there be by the indiscriminate sub- stitution of fruit and flowers for corn, beef, and mutton. I am glad -to hear that in- the_neighbourhood of Kirton there is such a demand for farms of "fair average quality"; but what of those of inferior quality, like much of the land around me here,—land which the industry of farmers and landlord converted froni sheep- walk, growing heather, and bracken into farms where forty years ago the best samples of barley were grown, and where now grand crops of seeds, turnips, and mangold, aye, and corn too, provide fodder for floc::s ar.f.1 Lords of excLilout quality? • But I am mostly concerned in contending, in reply to your article, that our farmers, as a rule, do understand their business; and though you cannot expect a "model farm" in every homestead, the average production of food far ' exceeds that either on the Continent .of Europe or in America, per acre. The statistics are so constantly given in the public papers that I will only say that our farmers, on an average, produce something like eight bushels of wheat per acre more than our Continental rivals. If you turn to barley and oats, I think you will find similar results. It is hardly generous to throw in the farmer's teeth his "want of pence and want of sense." Of the former I admit that there is a deplorable de- ficiency, but of the latter I think the farmer has as much as the average of his neighbours. I have yet to learn that he "ploughs and reaps and threshes with the instruments used by his grandfather." On the contrary, steam cultivators, reapers, and threshing machines are in use on every farm with which I am acquainted. It is true that on a visit to the South of England I discovered an old-fashioned plough; but it is the exception which proves the rule. You say that "want of capital prevents him from paying his labourers proper wages"; but I would ask,—Is it usual in any business to pay wages out of capital and not out of profits? You talk Of restraints imposed by leases ; but I think you may be assured that in these times there is no restriction
• save that which is necessary to prevent impoverishment of the land.
• The question which "An Old Farmer" asks about rent is hardly pertinent to the subject. That is a landlord's question, and is a matter of demand and supply. The owners of land have suffered quite as much as, if not more than, the occupiers, and probably do not receive 2 per cent, on the value of the land and outlay on buildings. Knowing that your paper, which I have taken for many years, is read by many who have no knowledge of rural or agricultural subjects, I trust you will forgive ray attempt to place the position and industry of our farmers in a true light, and will give my letter a place in your next publication.
Osberton.
am, Sir, &c., FRANCIS J. SAVILE FOLJAMBE.
[We have great pleasure in publishing Mr. Foljambe's able letter, and do not doubt that when he speaks from his own experience he is accurate. We wish, however, he could see some of the farms in the South and West of England, and even within the thirty-mile radius from Charing Cross, whose occupiers are supposed to be ruined by our fiscal system. We doubt if he would still think our arraignment of British agriculture as practised by many of our farmers so very far from the mark.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
