Newspaper Page Text
E. E. Ewing, Proprietor. YOL. VII. Ordinary and High Farming. The farmers of Ilarfordcounty have a very interesting farmers club in the Deer Creek neighborhood, which is kept up with a good deal of spirit at the July meeting the questions discussed was as follows : Which is the easier, the more prof itable, and in which do we take the most pleasure—in making poor land good or in making good land rich?” The JEgi* furnishes us the follow ing report: Mr. R. Harris Archer argued that, it would be easier to make poor land good than good land rich. By good land he meant such as would produce from 12 to 15 bar iels of corn to the acre, and by rich land that which would yield from 20 or 25 barrels. A man could take a sedge field and in 15 yea's could make it produce from 12 to 20 barrels of corn, or fatten a bullock on 2 or 3 acres. This requires no peculiar skill, but to make good land produce 20 to 25 barrels of corn requires science and that is difficult is evident from the fact that Tew farmers accom plish it. When land has been lying idle for some time, half a ton of bone to the acre produces wonderful re sults, but the same amount of bone applied on land that will produce 15 or 15 barrels of corn per acre will increase the yield only a barrel or two. The fertilizer on the poor land must therefore pay better than on the good land. He thought, also, that the pleasure was greater in im proving poor land than in increasing the yield of good bind. S. N. Lee said he brought poor land to a tolerable state of fertility, but it takes a long time to make land produce 25 barrels of corn to the acre. It takes many years to exhaust really rich land with ordinary usage. He had see.i a piece of very rich land farmed for 50 years with only one dressing of fertilizer. Wm. Webster was of the opinion thet the pleasure and profit were both greater in mak ing good land produce fiom 20 to 25 barrels of corn than in making poor land yield 15 barrels. There is less labor in farming rich land than poor land. The reason why few farmers reach the high standard of 20 barrels is because when they get their bind to yield 15 barrels they are satisfied and make no effort at further im provement. Farmers make a mistake in farming too much land. The same fertilizer applied to one-half the num ber of acres would, with less labor, produce quite as much. Rich land can be worked at less expense than poor land and is more profitable. Geo. J. Finley thought it costs more and is more difficult to make good land produce 20 or 25 barrels of corn per acre than to make poor land bring 15 barrels. As for the pleasure he had never seen much fun in farming under any circumstances. J. Thos. Webster also thonght it easier to make poor land good than good land land rich. Land may be made to produce from 20 to 25 barrels of corn to the acre, but it is difficult to keep it up to that standard. There is more profit and much pleasure in seeing an old worn-out place improv ed and brought to yield 15 barrels of corn to the acre and good crops of and timothy than increasing the fertility of it beyond that point. James Lee thought there was more RISING SUN. CECIL COUNTY, Ml)., FRIDAY, AUGUST -28. ISSS. pleasure iu making good land rich than in improving poor land. He said that Mr. Wm. Woolscy’s profit from farming his rich land is as great as that of any other farmer on the Western Shore of Maryland. He raises 20 barrels of corn per acre and has lost as few crops as any farmer who raises 12 or 15 barrels. Thirty years ago his land was not as good as the average in his neighborhood. Now it is the best. R. John Rodgers said he regarded it as more difficult to make poor land good than to make good land rich. It requires a great effort and a great deal of fertilizer to get poor land to yield 12 to 15 barrels of corn to the acre. Commercial fertilizer alone will not do it. When land will yield 15 barrels of corn to the acre it is not so difficult to bring it up to 20 as it was at first to make it yield 15 bar rels. It is also more profitable to further improve the rich land, because you can then raise a large quantity of grass, which is the basis of all iin proveraent. There is. no doubt, a great satisfaction in improving poor land, but when you consider the in creased profit in working rich land the pleasure must be as great. It al so pays to fertilize more heavily when it is ricli than when it is poor If you do not see a large increasedyield of corn after fertilizing good land, you will see it in the grass following. Jacob II- Plowman said he had ha 1 but little experience in improving poor land, his farm being in good condition when he got it, and he is satisfied to keep up the improvement. Wm.B. Hopkins believed thatthere was much more pleasure and profit in making good land rich than in makihg poor land good. No good fanner should be willing to stop short of the largest yield. On the farm on which he resides Col. Wm. B. Steph enson had raised 22* barrels of corn to the acre, by plowing down a heavy sod and applying half a ton of bone to the acre. The profit on that crop was greater than it would have been from the same application on land that would yield 10 barrels of corn per acre B. 11. Barnes said he thought there was more pleasure in making good land rich, or in getting the greatest profit from the fewest acres. Harry D. Coal thought he would derive more pleasure from taking a poor piece of land and making it good than from making good land ricli. There is, more profit in work ing good land. Wm. F. Hays said he had had a hitch in making poor land good, but if he were going to buy’ a farm he would prefer to buy good land and try’ to make it rich. Five or six years ago he plowed a sedge field three times before putting a crop in it, and raised 41 bushels of wheat to the acre. He put on 400 lbs. of hones to the acre. There is a good stand of grass on it now. lie thought he would get this field rich at less ex pense, with less hard work and in a shorter time than it had taken to make it good •James W. Hanna regarded it as easier to make poor land good than to make good land rich. The reason so many fanners stop after getting poor land good, is that they have too much laud to make rich. George E. Silver said if he were [Entered at the Post Office in Rising Sun, Md., as Second-Class Matter.] going to buy a farm he would prefer ouying a good one even at §IOO an acre, although he had to go in debt, rather than a poor ODe, at $25 an acre,-if he had all the money to pay or it. There is he thought, a limit in point of cultivation beyond which land ceases to yield a profit for the fertilizers used and labor applied, and lie would place this limit at 2p barrels of corn to the acre- It costs but little more to work an acre of good land, producing 15 barrels of corn, than an acre of poor land which will produce no more than 5 barrels. There is no profit in the latter. The larger the yield this greater the profit. He thought the reason why farmers are not enriching their land more rapidly is because whin it begins to yield a revenue they indulge in luxuries which they did not when they were working poor land and had to econo mize. When land is thin the applica tion of fertilizers is seen more readily, but perhnps the same amount would do ricli land as much or more good, although the benefit might not be seen in the next crop. Johns 11. Janney said the results show that it mu-t be easier to make poor land good than to make good land rich. It requires science which few farmers understand to make good land ricli. Much depends on the natural quality of land. Some land can Dover be made to yield 20 barrels of corn to the acre. The profit per acre on the capital invested is great er in making poor land good. Edward 11. Hall thought, also that much depends on the soil. It is eas ier and more profitable to make Deer Creek soil produce 20 barrels of corn to the acre than to take his land, near Abingdon, and make it rich. John Moore thought that a man sees greater results from the applica tion of fertilizers lo poor land than to rich. Many farmers are qualified to take a poor farm and improve it, but few are competant to take good land and make it rich. If he were buying a farm he would rather buy a poor farm at, say S2O an acre, than a rich one at, say S6O. This year some poor farms are raising more wheat to the acre than the rich farms- With corn it is different. Here the rich land tells. It requires a great deal of skill and fertilizers to grow 20 barrels of corn to the acre, while almost any’ ordinary farmer can pro duce 10 or 12. It requires more manure to keep land producing 20 barrels of corn to the acre than to keep it producing 12 or 15. Thomas A. Hays said if he were buying poor land ho would like to have it where the surrounding farms were rich. There is a great deal of pleasure in making good land rich, but there is more profit in making poor land good. Wm. Munnikhuysen said he com menced 30 years ago to farm on as many acres of sedge as any man in the county, and in four or five years he had doubled his crops, but since he has never been able to double again, lie had also derived more pleasure in starting the improvement than in keeping it up. He concluded that it must be more difficult to make good land rich than in mak ing poor land good. There must be more profit in making land increase in yield from sto 10 barrels of corn than in bringing up the yield from 10 or 12 to 20 barrels. Judge Watters said t iat a certain amount of fertilizer would produce greater results on poor than on good land- On land producing three or four barrels of corn, fertilizers might increase the yield to 10 barrels. On good land the same amount might add olny four barrels. Where there is a limit to progress, the nearer you ap proach that limit the slower you get. Thus in training a trotting horse, it he is capable of speed, ic is easier to increase his speed 10 seconds than it is afterwards to increase it a quarter of a second more, hut it is the last quarter of a second that adds so much to the value of the horse. The same wav in farming. The same labor, and fertilizer will not produce as great vesubs on good as on poor land but what you get pays better. Flow ing. working and getting the crop m poor land c >st,s as much us on rich land, and until you raise a certain amount per acre there is no profit Ail that you raise over that gives a greater percentage of profit. The quality of land lias much to do wit its capacity for improvement. I t yon cannot by any’ means get over 10 barrels of corn to the acre, don’t spend money trying to get 20. Wm. C. Wilson said lie wmid rather endeavor to make good land rich than to try to make poor land good, but there is more profit in tin latter and more credit in the former. He had taken poor land and made i good, but it does not seem to get bet ter although he uses as much fertili zer us ever. Thomas Lochary thought that the fertilizer Mr Woolsey had put on his land since it would produce 20 barrels of corn to the acre, would have bought five or six farms that would yield 10 or 12 barrels per acre. The difference in the action of the fertilizers would overbalance the greater amount of labor on the farms. [lf we may be allowed a few com ments on the above, we would sug gest that these farmers, though good farmers, have not yet mastered the problem of “high farming.” They seem to see this state as through a glass darkly’ A primary point in the question is left out in their dis cussion, which is the number of con stituents that are required for a crop. Without the table of analysis, we believe there are 13 composing a crop of wheat and if any ono of these is lacking in whole or part, or not. in a soluble condition in the soil, the crop will inevitably be shortened notwith standing all the others may be sup plied in abundance. Any of the fer til zers in nsc supply but a limited number of these constituents, and there is but one mode by which the remainder can be secured that will make farming profitable; which is through the agency of grass and a thorough system of cultivation. “Cul ture is manure.” This maxim isthe base of all farming. Thorough cult ure is something very different from what, is generally practiced by eyen the best farmers, and this, with grass, green manuring is the only key’ which wi 1 unlock the problem and make high farming possible and profitable ] E. Armstrong, Esq., Waterloo, Cul peper Co , Ya., says he used Powell’s Fertilizer last fall. Wheat did as well as the fertilizer costing double. Will want ten tons this fall. These fertilizers are manufactured bv Brown Chemical Co., Baltimore, Md. One Dollar per Annum in Advance. Teaohers Association. i The Teacher's of the Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Districts will meet in the public school building in Port Depos it, on Sat. Sept - the oth, U. ; SS at P 30, P. M. The object of the meeting shall be to reorganize the Association which has been liehl there, from year to year. Officers will lie elected for the ensue ing year. The following program has been prepared for the meeting by “the executive committee” : Select Headers .Miss Emma -Brown, and Mr. B, B. Hanna; Essav hy Mr. J. J. Hanna; HeferedtoMr. J. JL. Crothers-lf Ihe sum of tlie angles of a polygon is 4Sright angles find the number of side°j To Miss Annie Quinn—“ What are Oranges worth a dozen, it' by buying 15 more for a dollar, the price would be lowered 4 cents a dozen; —to Mr. O. O. Saylor. “The Sun is nearer the earth in winter than in summer. Why is it not warmer;’’ Question for discussion —Would a compulsoiy .-ystem of edu cation be benefical to the public cshools of Cecil Co. ? Disputants : Rev. John Squier W. S. Quigley, J. J. IJanua, O. O. Sayler, and J. L. Crothers- We trust that every teacher who may be interested in the welfare an l progress of o.ir schools may turn out to ihis meeting. We wish to have an Association that shall be instructive tm its members, and at the same time ex cite a deeper imerest in the generous cause of education and em:mcipalion> from ignorance. REPORTER. CONOWINGO ITEMS. The Camp Meeting of Mt. Zion Col ored Church near tliis place, was large ly attended by a miscellaneous crowd of both colors, and the roting and drunkenness were worse than usual ni o ineroccasi n s .the b lief having been expressed, that, l ut tor the interposi tion of providence in sending a shower to stop proceedings some one would certainly have been murdered, as the alcliolic excitement was intense. At the railroad house the landlord wns at tacked hy a desperate character and the women and children who had taken refuge (here ftom the storm, were terj ribly frightened. As is usual on such occasions, there were no officers of the place within miles of the place. The Pilot Town 8. 8. held their an nual celebration in the grove lust Sat urday afternoon. After the usual treat of good things, the sch- lars engaged in play, and spent a pleasant after noon. In the match game of corner hall between the Misses Mabel Linnie Ritchie, Vennie Gifting ana Bell Alexander, Miss Amelia Fulton acted as umpire and awarded the hon ors ts Miss Prigg. Mr. William Knight of Port Deposit a stone cutter by trade committed sui cide at the Castleton hotel. Harford co. on Monday afternoon by shooting him self through the heart. The cause of the rash act is unknown. Mr. J 8. Dove who broke his collar bone a few weeks ago by falling through the hatchway of a wagott’shed is improving slowly but still carries his arm in a sling. Mrs. J. Armstrong of Pilot Town lost her valuable Jersey heifer, Daisy, last week supposed to have eaten some poisoned weed. NOBODY* ■ What a Baptist Minister Says. New Freeport, Pa., Aug. 4, 1883. G. Holstein ; —L have been affleted for a long time with liver complaint and constipation. I have tried many reme dies and several doctors, but they all failed. I have used three buttles of your Aromanna and find it the very thin <T I needed. I shall recomend it to O all who are suffering in the same way. JOHN WES T. Pastor Baptist Church. Sold by Dr. L. R. Kirk Rising Sun. NO. 46.