HOW I MAKE FARMING PAY.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXXI, Issue 5602, 31 August 1875, Page 1 (Supplement)

HOW I MAKE FARMING PAY.

To the Editor : Sir, — Sly remark* about Mr. Mechi's farming seems to have given offence to that great authority on agricultural matters, " Cincinnatus." I shall not imitate hit style of abusive writing, but limply hand him over to my authorities ; your readers will then be able to judge for themselves as to who is best informed on these subjects. With regard to Mr. Mechi, I send you an extract from the letter of a writer who signs himself "A Clay-land Farmer." The letter is a brief, but accurate digest of Mr. Mechi's lecture. After telling us about the purchase of Tiptree Farm, by which it appear* that Mr. Mechigcts 4 per cent., on his capital as landlord ; it teems that Mr. Mechi advises the tenant himself to invest £16 to £17 per acre to work the farm. We then have a large sum of money invested on the farm between the owner and the occupier. Let us now try and discover what the occupier does. I will not go through the various heads of the lecture, but come at once to the most interesting — viz. , Mi*. Mechi's balance-sheet, and there I read thus* : " The net surplus balance, available for rent, interest, and profit, after payment of every other expense has been as follows : On 170 acres (45 of it rented at £1 per acre). Then follow for years 1866 to 1874, both inclusive, the actual net surplus balance of each year. The net surplus balance for these nine years is about £5.600 ; out of this has to be paid rent, £295 (being 40s. an acre on 1*25 acres, and 20s an acre on 45 acres). Then comes inetrest on tenant's capital £2,S90, at 3 pel cent., about £144; leaving a balance to represent profit of £190, being about 22s. 4d. per acie." No doubt, Mr. Mechi produces a \eiy large amount of produce fiom his form. He confers a benefit on the consumer. Mr. Mechi is a very pltilantropic man, but the majority of the community are apt to look at home fiist. I trust Messrs. Arch, Holloway, and Co., may read Mr. Mechi's paper. It will give them an insight, which they seem to want, into the profits of farming, and lead them to the conclusion that if Mr. Meclti, with all his numerous advantages, is able to realise only the small profits he appears so boastful of, how aie other farmers without those advantages to make more than a bare living ? I do not find fault with Mr. iMechi; the only wonder is that lie gains anything at all by his farming hobby. I may as well inform " Cincinnati™," that I knew something about the high system of cultivation (now adopted by Mr. Mechi and others), for sometime befoie Mr. Mechi tried his hand at farming. His thoughts, at the period I speak of, must have been fully im ployed about his magic razor-strops, dressingcases, and the beautiful papier-mache things which were a treat to see in his shop. I happened to live near the farms, and was well acquainted with the gentleman who first introduced into England the system of high farming, adopted by Mr. Mechi. The system of stall-feeding stock, summer as well us winter, was not a knew idea ; for it was extensively practised on the Continent previous to the period that I allude to, which was about the year 1S38 or 1839. High cultivation and stall-feeding was in full operation in Dorsetshire, on the farm I speak of, up to the year 1851. I don't think thatany very great impiovements have been made in the shed and feeding system since that time. With regard to my strictures on tho words spoken by Lord Derby, " Cincinnatus " says, "That I foolishly rely \ipon something that I havo heard, and that my strictures show such gross ignorance that it becomes vexatious for him to put mt right ;" your readers must judi»e between us. I certainly rely on what | other people say, that is provided they understand their subject, and speak or write the truth, on what other people r say. I rely also on that principle of political If economy which says, " that the price of wm/K and the price of labour, determines what soiljr mayor may not be profitably cultivated." I also rtly a great deal on my own judgment in these matter-t. It is quite possible that the • production of grain may be indefinitely increased^ by an unlimited expenditure. It is quite an-s^ other question whether profitable production can be augmented in England, in the presence of foreign competition in such proportion as the E»rl of Derby speaks of. This question has been discussed by Mr. Caird in the Times »ewipaper; and as Mr. Caird is the highest authority that we can get on English agricultural affairs, I shall not trouble myself to bring forward any other authority to back my opinion. The poor lands in some backward parts of the country may, in Mr. Caird's judgment, be generally improved ; and possibly in some ca«es doubled in value as gracing grounds; but they will never pay for any but the roughest tillage while the rate of wages increase, and the supply of foreign corn is maintained. He then goes on to say that the average produce of wheat per acre, is 60 per cent., greater than in the corn growing countries which compete in the English market. It is twice as great as on the prairie farms of America, and yet it is at most only one-fourth more than it was a century ago, long bef or* the introduction of high-farming. And Mr Caird says that the maximum of produce, per acre, has not at all increased in the last twenty-fire years. The prices awarded by the Agricultural Society prove tliii. Mr. Caird, I suppose, may be called the agricultural editor of the London Timet. We all know that the Times procurer the best writer* that are to be got for money. Seeing that emigration, amongst the farm labourers, u only just begining, and that the price of labour will increace, and also that the supplies of grain imported into England will continue to inci ease. There seenw to be every chance of the inferior wheat-growing land* being turned into pasture. The high priee of meat is a great inducement for the farmer to grow beef and mutton in«te*d of corn. I think I have proved my case both as to Earl Derby and Mr. Meclii, notwithstanding "Cincinnatus*" opinions. I am satisfied m to tb« correctness of " A Clay-land FarmerV' «t»Uments; and I quite agree with Mr. Caird ■ views as to Earl Derby and the land question. " If one-fifth could eventually be added to th» average produce of the land in England i* would represent a national gain of more than «J millions a year ; and Mr. Caird leemi i to think that this result may possibly be .attained by high-farming." Tb,o profit* of high-fanning to

accomplish this oiid must |he larger thsin those thovrn on Mr. Mechi'sbnlnuco-.shcet. " A Clrt} - land Farmer" snys :— " If Mr. Mechi's management could be ovci looked for a fc\V weeks by a thoroughly pi.ictic.il mnn t should not bo surprised to hear at the end of the time that the reason a large not surplus of profit wasnot mado was because very unnecessary expense in labour w.u retorted to. If, however, there .is no such fault to be found, then I say " the game is not worth tho candle. "—I am, &c, In the New Zealand HemM, of August 2, " Cincinnatus. " treats of Mr. Meolu"» balance shecf : -

This will show, upoft examination of the detailed figures, th.it the interest and profits on tenantR* capital, after paying rent, has hocnlS per cent, pur nnmun,— on.i ten.int capit.il of £1"> per acre, it will l>o iemembeicd. IMi.oxi'H.

11 lie year W.0 tl „ 1M17 „ lbus „ 18H9 „ 15>7o 1871 „ 1S72 1S7.J 1S74 the net balance \vi\» 1 >• > „ (hailstorms) £ r >73 11 0 77:1 5 10 570 13 0 427 lfl 1 725 12 :l (IIIS 17 S 3(i!) 4 Ti 751 12 7 708 1 11