UNIVERSITY O 
 ILLINOiS JBRARY 
 "I URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 
 AGRICULTURE 
 
The person charging this material is re¬ 
 sponsible for its return to the library from 
 which it was withdrawn on or before the 
 Latest Date stamped below. 
 
 Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books are reasons 
 for disciplinary action and may result in dismissal from 
 
 the University. — -_^ 
 
 To renew call Telephone Cent ^fT333-84QO^ 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 
 
 
 JUL3 o 
 
 FEB 1 8 2)02. 
 
 1 "\ 
 
 \) 
 
 MAY 01 20 33 
 JAN 1 1 2(04 
 
 m 2 2 2 ( 06 
 
 986 
 
 
 L161—0-1096 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2019 with funding from 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 
 
 https://archive.org/details/historyofagriculOObidw 
 
History of Agriculture in the 
 
 Northern United States 
 
 1620-1860 
 
 BY 
 
 Percy Wells Bidwell, Ph. D. 
 
 ECONOMIST, UNITED STATES TARIFF COMMISSION 
 
 FORMERLY 
 
 ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS, YALE UNIVERSITY 
 
 AND 
 
 John I. Falconer, Ph. D. 
 
 PROFESSOR OF RURAL ECONOMY, OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY 
 
 Published by the Carnegie Institution of Washington 
 
 Washington, May, 1925 
 
 
UNIVERSITY of 
 ILLINOIS LIBRARY 
 
 M URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 
 
 agriculture 
 
History of Agriculture in the 
 Northern United States 
 
 162ft# 8. 
 
 ercy Wells Bidwell, Ph. D. 
 
 ECONOMIST, UNITED STATES TARIFF COMMISSION 
 
 FORMERLY 
 
 ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS, YALE UNIVERSITY 
 
 AND 
 
 John I. Falconer, Ph. D. 
 
 PROFESSOR OF RURAL ECONOMY, OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY 
 
 Published by the Carnegie Institution of Washington 
 
 Washington, May, 1925 
 
CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON 
 
 Publication No. 358 
 
 JSorb Qj^afftmor* (pteee 
 
 BALTIMORE, MD., U. S. A. 
 
UWWEHSITY OF (JLJJfitfT 
 K»RICULTU.\E l'IC.v-„\Y 
 
 j 
 
 6>10,<j73 
 
 B ^7-Ji 
 
 CAf>, 7 
 
 /y 
 
 CONTRIBUTIONS TO AMERICAN ECONOMIC HISTORY 
 
 BOARD OF RESEARCH ASSOCIATES 
 IN AMERICAN ECONOMIC HISTORY 
 
 Henry W. Farnam, Chairman 
 
 Victor S. Clark 
 John R. Commons 
 Davis R. Dewey 
 Henry B. Gardner 
 
 Emory R. Johnson 
 E. W. Parker 
 Henry C. Taylor 
 Walter F. Willcox 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
*■ 
 
INTRODUCTORY NOTE. 
 
 This volume forms a part of the Contributions to American Economic His¬ 
 tory projected by the Department of Economics and Sociology of the Car¬ 
 negie Institution of Washington in 1904, and is the fifth study to be published. 
 It has been preceded by the History of Domestic and Foreign Commerce by 
 Professor Johnson and colleagues, 1915; the History of Manufactures from 
 1607 to i860 by Dr. Victor S. Clark, 1916; the History of Transportation to 
 i860, prepared under the direction of Dr. B. H. Meyer, 1917; and the His¬ 
 tory of Labor by Professor John R. Commons and collaborators, 1918. 
 
 The direction of the Division of Agriculture was originally entrusted to 
 Dr. Kenyon L. Butterfield, then president of the Rhode Island College of 
 Agriculture, and later president of the Massachusetts Agricultural College. 
 He prepared a syllabus of the work, and arranged with a number of scholars 
 to treat the topics which he had outlined, but, owing to the many demands for 
 public service made upon his time, he was unable to carry the plan to comple¬ 
 tion. A considerable amount of preparatory work was, however, done, espe¬ 
 cially under Dr. Henry C. Taylor, then chairman of the Department of Agri¬ 
 cultural Economics of the University of Wisconsin. He projected the plan of 
 preparing the series of dot maps showing the expansion of American agri¬ 
 culture, selected much of the material, and supervised the preparation of the 
 text. He personally went through, page by page, the volumes of The Culti¬ 
 vator and The Country Gentleman from 1840 to 1865 and extracted such 
 excerpts as contributed toward the story as presented in this volume. During 
 the same time, J. L. Coulter and A. E. Cance, who were then graduate stu¬ 
 dents in the University of Wisconsin, gave considerable time to this task and 
 gathered from various sources much material which was subsequently used. 
 O. E. Baker and O. C. Stine also contributed in various ways to the collection 
 of material for this part of the volume. Owing to the many delays caused by 
 other tasks, special arrangements were made in the spring of 1913 with J. I. 
 Falconer, then a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin, to devote 
 his entire time to the gathering of additional material and to the preparation 
 of the manuscript for the period 1840-1860. In the present work Professor 
 Falconer contributes Part IV, The Period of Transformation (pages 259- 
 453). Professor Taylor also secured the preparation of an exhaustive study 
 of the southern plantation down to i860 by Dr. L. C. Gray. 
 
 Upon the discontinuance of the Department of Economics and Sociology 
 in 1916, and the reorganization of those who had been collaborating in its work 
 as the Board of Research Associates in American Economic History, Profes¬ 
 sor Taylor was asked to take charge of the History of Agriculture in the place 
 of President Butterfield, who desired to be relieved on account of the pressure 
 of other duties. A number of circumstances soon made it desirable to change 
 the general plan of the work. Professor Taylor was in 1919 appointed Chief 
 of the Office of Farm Management in the Department of Agriculture in 
 Washington, and subsequently Chief of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics. 
 This bureau has been gathering a large quantity of material regarding the 
 development of agriculture in the United States since i860, and has much 
 
 v 
 
VI 
 
 INTRODUCTORY NOTE 
 
 greater resources for this kind of work than could be commanded by a volun¬ 
 teer group. The material for the period prior to the Civil War is, however, 
 not so voluminous. Moreover, in more ways than one the Civil War and the 
 abolition of slavery marked, a turning point in the history of agriculture, as 
 in the whole economic life of the nation. Therefore it was decided to limit 
 the work of the Research Associates to the period prior to i860, and to treat 
 this period under the two natural divisions of the South and the North. 
 
 The history of southern agriculture was already well covered in manuscripl 
 by Dr. Gray in his History of the Southern Plantation. He was, accordingly, 
 asked to condense and revise this monograph, while Dr. Percy W. Bidwell, 
 then Assistant Professor of Economics at Yale, was invited to prepare the 
 History of Northern Agriculture to 1840 (Parts I-III, pages 1-257 the 
 present work). Dr. Bidwell was well qualified for his task by the work which 
 he had already done in the history of New England agriculture, and spent over 
 a year, from 1922 to 1923, in Washington working upon the material in the 
 Library of Congress and in the Department of Agriculture. He has since 
 edited the Falconer manuscript so as to merge the two studies into a consistent 
 history with continuous chapter numbers and has prepared the bibliography. 
 
 Although Dr. Bidwell did his work with great care, it was thought wise 
 to reduce possible inaccuracies to a minimum by having the references checked 
 independently by experts in the Department of Agriculture. This work was 
 done under the direction of Mr. Donald Jackson by Miss Esther K. Thompson 
 in the Division of Statistical and Historical Research of the Bureau of Agri¬ 
 cultural Economics. We are much indebted to these scholars for their 
 careful work, as well as to Dr. Taylor for undertaking the general direction 
 of the entire study. 
 
 Henry W. Farnam, 
 
 New Haven, Conn., May, 1925. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PART I.—AGRICULTURE IN THE EARLIEST SETTLEMENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Chapter I.— Field Husbandry. 5 
 
 Dependence on natural food resources, 5. The first houses, 6. Natural clear¬ 
 ings or openings, 6. Origin of clearings, 8. How the land was cleared, 8. 
 
 The first crops, 9. Indian management of maize, 10. Cultivation of maize 
 by English settlers, 11. European grains, 12. The wheat blast, 13. Rye, 
 barley, oats, 14. Flax, 14. Tobacco, 15. Vegetables, 16. Fruit, 16. 
 
 Chapter II.— Livestock . 18 
 
 Earliest importations, 18. The forage problem—native grasses unsatis¬ 
 factory. 19. Introduction of English grasses, 20. Management and care of 
 livestock, 21. Duties of the cow herd, 22. Opening the meadows—stinted 
 common. 22. Brands and earmarks, 23. The control of breeding, 23. The 
 neat cattle—their varied ancestry, 24. Care of livestock—shelter and winter 
 
 feed, 25. Relative importance of various kinds of stock, 26. Dairying and 
 beef production, 27. Sheep, 28. Draft animals—horses and oxen, 29. Swine, 
 
 31. Other livestock, 32. 
 
 Chapter III.— Farm Labor, Equipment and Land . 33 
 
 Labor scarce and wages high, 33. Group cooperation, 34. Farm equip¬ 
 ment—tools and implements, 34. Plows, 35. Carts, 36. Size of farms, 37. 
 
 Land utilization, 38. 
 
 Chapter —IV.— Trade in Agricultural Products. 40 
 
 Imports of food, 40. Purchases of corn from the natives, 41. Beginning 
 of regional specialization, 41. Trade with the West Indies, 42. Exports of 
 grains, provisions, and horses from New England, 43. Trade of the middle 
 colonies, 45. The market for agricultural products in the towns, 45. Mar¬ 
 kets and fairs, 46. 
 
 Chapter V.— Land Tenure . 49 
 
 The land system of New England, 49. Grants to individuals, 49. Grants to 
 communities, 49. Laying out the town: the home lots, 51. Division of up¬ 
 lands and meadows, 52. The rule of distribution, 52. Relative size of 
 allotments, 53. Tendency toward concentration of land holdings, 54. The 
 common fields—proprietors’ commons, 55. Town commons, 55. Commoners 
 and non-commoners, 56. The disadvantage of common fields, 57. The end of 
 the commons, 57. Origin of the New England village community, 58. Sig¬ 
 nificance of the New England land system, 58. The private law of real 
 property in New England, 58. Land tenure in the middle colonies, 60. 
 
 Terms of distribution of land in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 60. The 
 size of grants, 61. Quit rents, 62. Land tenure in New Netherlands and 
 New York, 62. Land tenure under the English governors, 63. Quit rents 
 in New York, 64. The methods of settlement in the middle colonies, 64. 
 
 Law of inheritance, 66. Summary, 66. 
 
 PART II.—RURAL ECONOMY IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 Chapter VI.— Pioneering in the Eighteenth Century . 69 
 
 The westward progress of settlement, 69. The causes of expansion on new 
 land, 7c. The rise of land values in the older communities, 70. Land policy 
 and emigration—New England, 71; in Pennsylvania, 72; in New York, 73. 
 
 Land policy after the Revolution, 74. Land speculation in New York, 74. 
 
 The wild lands of Maine, 75. Land policy summarized, 75. Other causes 
 of emigration to the frontier, 76. General description of pioneer farming, 
 
 76. Methods of clearing, 77. Pioneer crops and tillage, 78. Livestock—hay 
 and pasturage, 79. The importance of by-industries, potash and maple- 
 sugar, 79. The progress of pioneer communities—hardships of pioneering, 
 
 81. Summary—Pioneering as a process of capital-making, 82. 
 
 vii 
 
VIII 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 Chapter VII.— Farming in the Older Settlements. Crops and Tillage. 
 
 Contemporary criticism, 84. Crop management, 85. Fertilizers and soil 
 amendments, 87. Influence of the New York market, 89. Grain crops, 89. 
 Cultivation of maize in New England—varieties, 90. Maize in New Sweden, 
 92. Wheat—shift from old to new soils in New England, 92. Success of 
 wheat in the middle colonies, 93. Black-stem rust in New England—legis¬ 
 lation against barberries, 93. Seed selection—winter vs. spring wheat, 95. 
 The Hessian fly, its origin—effects of its ravages, 95. Tillage of wheat, 96. 
 Rye, 96. Minor grains—barley, oats, buckwheat, 97. Potatoes, 97. Flax, 98. 
 Tobacco, 98. Peas, 99. Garden vegetables, 99. Fruit, 99. Special crops— 
 hemp and silk, 100. Crop yields, 101. 
 
 Chapter VIII.— Grazing and Livestock. 
 
 Hay and pasturage, 102. Irrigation of meadows, 103. Cultivated grasses— 
 clover and timothy, 103. Number and kinds of livestock kept on typical 
 farms, 105. The care and management of livestock, 107. Neat cattle, 107. 
 Cattle raising and beef fattening, 108. Dairying, 109. Sheep, no, Swine, 
 in. Draft animals—oxen and horses, hi. The Narragansett pacers, 113. 
 Conestoga horses, 113. 
 
 Chapter IX.— Farm Management and Household Economy. 
 
 Economic characteristics of colonial agriculture, 115. Size of farms, 115. 
 Farm labor, 116. The Redemptioners, 117. Wages of farm labor, 117. 
 Slaves in New England, 118. Land utilization, 119. Farm improvements— 
 inclosures, 121. Farm buildings, 121. Barns of German settlers in Pennsyl¬ 
 vania, 122. Tools and implements, 123. Plows, 123. Harrows, 124. Har¬ 
 vesting, threshing, and cleaning grain, 125. Self-sufficient farming, 126. 
 The household textile industry, 127. The organization of the household 
 industries, 128. Construction and furnishing of farmhouses, 129. Pur¬ 
 chases and sales, 129. The farmer a jack of all trades, 130. Causes of his 
 versatility, 131. 
 
 Chapter X.— ; Agricultural Trade . 
 
 The lack of a home market, 132. Manufactures not differentiated from 
 agriculture, 132. The country store, 133. The export markets, 133. Exports 
 to Europe, 134. Exports to the West Indies, 135. Trade of Philadelphia 
 with the back country, 138. Trade of New York with the back country, 139. 
 Trade of New England ports, 140. The Boston market, 141. The coasting 
 trade, 142. Dependence of New England on foodstuffs from the southern 
 and middle colonies, 142. 
 
 PART III.—EXPANSION AND PROGRESS, 1800 - 1840 . 
 
 Chapter XI.— Pioneering West of the Alleghanies. 
 
 Westward movement of population and of agriculture, 147. How the gov¬ 
 ernment policy favored settlement—the federal land policy, 1785-1840, 151. 
 The credit system, 153. Land speculation, 154. Pre-emption acts, 154. Sig¬ 
 nificance of the recognition of pre-emption rights, 155. The factors deter¬ 
 mining agricultural development of the Ohio valley—character of the pioneer 
 population, 156. Physical features of the Ohio Valley, 156. Natural clearings 
 or treeless plains, 157. Woodland vs. prairie farming, 158. Native grasses, 
 159. Buffalo grass and buffalo clover, 160. 
 
 Chapter XII.— Pioneer Farming in the West—Economic Conditions. 
 
 Scarcity of capital goods, 162. Scarcity of farm labor, 163. Group coopera¬ 
 tion, 164. Self-sufficiency—the lack of markets, 164. Progress from pioneer¬ 
 ing to settled farming, 165. Livestock and its management, 166. Crops and 
 tillage, 168. Corn marketed in the forms of whisky and pork, 169. Wheat, a 
 cash crop, 169. Crop yields, 170. 
 
 Chapter XIII.— Development of Internal Trade and the Beginnings of Com¬ 
 mercial Agriculture in the West. 
 
 Products marketed from western New York, 171. The southern market for 
 western farm products, 172. Organization of marketing, 174. Defects of the 
 New Orleans market, 175. Prices of farm products in the west, 175. Eastern 
 markets for livestock, 177. Cattle grazing in eastern Ohio, 178. Importation 
 of improved English cattle, 179. Difficulties of overland transportation, 
 
 180. Opening of the Erie canal causes westward shift in wheat production, 
 
 181. Other commodities produced for sale—cheese, tobacco and wool, 182! 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 IX 
 
 Chapter XIV.— Organization and Education of Farmers. 
 
 The spirit of improvement, 184. The first agricultural societies, 184. Char¬ 
 acter of their membership, 185. What they accomplished, 186. Elkanah 
 Watson and the Berkshire Argicultural Society, 187. Rapid spread of socie¬ 
 ties on the Berkshire Plan, 188. The policy of state aid, 189. The climax of 
 rural organization, 189. The causes of the rise and decline of county 
 societies, 190. Relation of rural organization to general industrial condi¬ 
 tions, 191. Disregard of production costs in awarding premiums, 192. What 
 the county societies accomplished, 193. Revival of state aid—crop bounties— 
 agricultural surveys, 193. Agricultural periodicals, 193. Agricultural 
 schools, 194. 
 
 Chapter XV.— Foreign Trade and the Home Market. 
 
 Decline in relative importance of exports of farm products, 196. The home 
 market—its significance, 197. Increasing density of population in the east, 
 199. Urban concentration, 200. The influence of the home market, 200. 
 Improvements in New England, 202. Market influences more effective than 
 educational work, 202. Differentiating effect of the market, 203. 
 
 Chapter XVI.— Farm Labor and Labor-Saving Machinery. 
 
 Trend cityward aggravates farm labor problem, 204. Farm wages in 
 Chester County, Pennsylvania, 205. Trend of farm wages in Massachusetts, 
 206. Agricultural tools, 207. Agricultural machinery—improvements in the 
 plow, 208. Saving of labor effected by new plows, 210. Harrows and cul¬ 
 tivators, 210. Harvesting machinery, 212. Horse rakes, 213. Threshing 
 machines, 215. 
 
 Chapter XVII.— Livestock—Improvement and Specialization. 
 
 Commerical wool growing, 217. Introduction of Merino sheep, 217. Living¬ 
 ston’s description, 217. Rapid spread of Merinos, 218. End of the Merino 
 craze, 219. Importation of Saxony sheep, 220. Interest in mutton types— 
 New Leicester, 220. Summary of progress to 1830, 221. Climax of wool 
 growing in the East, 221. The importation of English cattle, 223. The native 
 cattle, 223. Beef production in the Connecticut Valley, 224. The Brighton 
 Cattle Market, 225. Beginning of market information service, 226. Western 
 cattle in eastern markets, 226. Cattle grass-fattened in Maine, 227. Cattle 
 fattening in Chester County, Pennsylvania, 227. Dairy products—cheese, 
 butter, milk, 227. Westward shift of dairying—developments in central New 
 York, 228. Output of dairy cows, 229. Swine show marked improvement, 
 229. Competition of western swine and pork, 230. Draft animals, 231. 
 
 Chapter XVIII.— Crops and Tillage. 
 
 Cropping systems, 232. Conservation of soil fertility, 232. Soil amend¬ 
 ments, 233. Grass land—hay and pasturage, 234. Growth of markets for 
 hay in cities, 235. Wheat—in New England, 236. Effects of western compe¬ 
 tition, 237. Enemies of the wheat crop, 238. Introduction of new varieties, 
 239. Wheat yields, 239. Corn, 240. Minor grains, 240. Potatoes and other 
 root crops, 241. Market gardening, 242. Orchards and vineyards, 243. 
 Special crops—hops, 243. Broom corn, and teasels, 245. Tobacco, 246. 
 
 Chapter XIX.— Transition from Self-Sufficient Economy to Commercial 
 
 Agriculture. Its Difficulties—Its Significance. 
 
 Capital and credit, 247. The organization of markets, 249. The decline of 
 household industries, 250. Significance of decline of household industries, 
 251. New employments for farm women, 252. By-industries, 253. Summary, 
 254 - 
 
 PART IV.—PERIOD OF TRANSFORMATION, 1840 - 1860 . 
 
 Chapter XX.— Northern Agriculture in 1840. 
 
 New England farming in 1840, 259. In eastern and central New York, 260. 
 In southeastern Pennsylvania, 261. The Pennsylvania barns, 262. Lack of 
 progress in Maryland and in Delaware, 262. The middle region—wheat 
 and its management, 262. The West, 263. Farming in Kentucky and Mis¬ 
 souri, 264. Corn and cattle fattening, 264. 
 
 Chapter XXI.— Influence of the Prairies on the Progress of Agriculture.. 
 The oak openings and small prairies, 267. Why had earlier settlers avoided 
 the prairies? 268. Conditions favoring settlement of prairies after 1840, 
 
 269. Pioneering on the prairies, 270. Cost of developing a prairie farm, 
 
 270. Buildings on prairie farms, 271. Fences, 271. Soil exploitation, 272. 
 The economic basis of western predatory agriculture, 272. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 184 
 
 196 
 
 204 
 
 217 
 
 232 
 
 247 
 
 259 
 
 266 
 
X 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Chapter XXII.— Agricultural Labor and Population. 274 
 
 Wages in the East and in the West, 274. Scarcity of labor on prairie farms, 
 
 275. Causes of increasing scarcity of labor, 276. Wages in 1857, 277. The 
 westward movement of population, 277. 
 
 Chapter XXIII.— Agricultural Machinery. 281 
 
 The improvement of the plow, 282. The introduction of steel plows, 283. 
 
 The invention of the reaper, 287. Comparison of Hussey’s and McCormick’s 
 inventions, 287. Improvements in the reaper, 288. Use of reapers in the 
 West, 1850, 290. Headers and self-rakers, 291. Geneva trials show defects 
 of reapers and mowers, 292. Victories of American reaper and thresher at 
 Paris, 292. Syracuse trials show striking improvements in reapers, 293. 
 Saving in labor effected by reapers, 293. Development of mowing machines, 
 
 294. Defects of early mowers, 295. The saving of labor effected by mowing 
 machines, 296. The horse rake, 296. Other haying machines, 297. Threshing 
 machines, 297. Seed drills, 299. Corn planters, 300. Cultivators, 302. Sum¬ 
 mary, 305. 
 
 Chapter XXIV.— Transportation and Markets . 306 
 
 The Erie Canal—canal building in the West, 306. Beginning of grain trade 
 on the Great Lakes, 307. Railroad building and its results, 307. Markets, 
 
 308. Competition of southern and eastern markets for western produce, 
 
 308. Western products exported from southern ports, 309. Growth of the 
 grain trade of Buffalo and Chicago, 310. The eastern market for western 
 products, 311. Export markets, 312. Prices—explanation of wide geographic 
 variations, 312. 
 
 Chapter XXV.— Diffusion of Information . 316 
 
 Periodicals, 316. Federal aid to agriculture, 317. Agricultural societies, 317. 
 Agricultural leadership—John Johnson, 318. Science and agriculture—agri¬ 
 cultural chemistry, 319. Liebig’s mineral theory, 319. The interest in agri¬ 
 cultural education—Michigan Agricultural College, 320. 
 
 Chapter XXVI.— Wheat . 321 
 
 The decade from 1840 to 1850, 321. Wheat in New England, 322. State 
 bounties, 324. Causes of decline of wheat growing in New England, 324. 
 Wheat and the cropping system in New York, 325. A justification of sum¬ 
 mer fallow, 325. Decline of wheat growing in Hudson and Mohawk valleys, 
 
 326. Wheat in Pennsylvania, 327. Ohio’s leadership, 1839 and 1849, 327. 
 
 The methods of. cultivation, 328. Wheat in the west, 1840, 329. Increase in 
 wheat production, 1840-1850, 329. Specialization in Wisconsin and northern 
 Illinois, 330. Causes of crop failures on prairie farms, 330. Systems of 
 wheat cropping on the prairies, 331. Enemies of the wheat crop, 332. Wheat 
 production, 1850-1860, 333. Ravages of the midge in New York and New 
 England, 333. Other causes of decline in wheat crops in the East, 334. 
 Progress resulting from crop failures—land drainage and soil improvement, 
 
 334. Declining wheat yield in Ohio, 335. The preeminence of the West, 
 1850-1860, 336. Use of machinery in seeding and cultivating, 337. Reapers 
 and threshers, 337. 
 
 Chapter XXVII.— Corn . 339 
 
 Better tillage and fertilization increases corn crop in the East, 339. In¬ 
 creasing corn production in New England, 1840-1850, 340. Management and 
 harvesting of corn in the East, 342. Corn in Kentucky, 342. Planting and 
 tillage methods, 342. In the Miami and Scioto valleys in Ohio, 342. Growing 
 corn on wheat farms in eastern Ohio, 344. Corn as a first crop on prairie 
 farms, 345. Methods of planting and cultivating, 345. Difficulties of grow¬ 
 ing corn on the prairies, 347. Harvesting practices, 347. The decade 1850- 
 
 1860, 347- 
 
 Chapter XXVIII.— The Minor Cereals . 350 
 
 Oats, 350. Rye, 353. Barley, 356. 
 
 Chapter XXIX.— Flax and Hemp . 359 
 
 Flax grown for seed rather than for oil, 359. Local markets for seed and 
 fibre, 361. Decrease in fibre and increase in seed, 1850-1860, 363. Hemp 
 production in 1840, 363. Methods of cultivation and harvesting, 364. 
 Attempts to produce water-retted hemp, 364. 
 
CONTENTS XI 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Chapter XXX.— Hay . 366 
 
 Importance of the hay crop in the East, 366. In New York—hay on uplands 
 and meadows, 368. In New England, 369. In eastern Pennsylvania, 369. 
 
 In Kentucky, 369. Lack of success with cultivated grasses on the prairies, 
 
 369. Hay more of a cash crop in the East after 1850, 370. Increased atten¬ 
 tion to cultivated grasses in the West, 371. Hay proves a successful crop 
 on prairie farms, 371. Marketing of western hay, 371. More intensive 
 methods in the East, 372. 
 
 Chapter XXXI.— Potatoes and Roots . 373 
 
 Markets for New England potatoes, 374. The appearance of the potato 
 disease—its ravages, 374. Decline of potato production shown in Census of 
 1850, 376. Higher prices for potatoes cause better cultivation, 377. Root 
 crops—carrots, turnips, etc., 379. 
 
 Chapter XXXII.— Fruits and Minor Crops . 380 
 
 Increased planting of orchards after 1840, 380. Peach orchards in Delaware 
 and Maryland, 380. Vineyards in the Ohio and Missouri Valleys, 381. 
 Special crops, 382. Tobacco in New England and New York, 382. Hops, 
 
 384. 
 
 Chapter XXXIII.— Beef Production . 387 
 
 The centers of cattle raising in 1840, 387. Beef cattle in the West, 388. 
 Method of feeding cattle in the Scioto Valley, 390. Various groups inter¬ 
 ested in the fattening of western cattle, 391. Grazing in northern Ohio, 391. 
 
 Cattle grazing on the open prairies, 392. Winter feeding in the prairie 
 region, 392. Beginnings of cattle fattening in the Corn Belt, 393. Packing 
 of western grass-fed beef in Chicago, 393. Cattle in Wisconsin and 
 Michigan, 393. Effect of the California migration, 394. The eastern cattle 
 feeding industry, 394. In Chester County, Pennsylvania, 395. In New York, 
 southern and eastern counties, 395. In New England, 396. Description of the 
 Brighton market, 397. Westward shift of cattle feeding, 398. Effect of 
 railroad transportation on New England cattle feeding, 399. Westward 
 extension of railroads ends cattle fattening in the Scioto Valley, 399. West¬ 
 ward movement of cattle feeding and grazing, 400. Beginning of cattle 
 driving from Texas, 400. Types of native cattle found in Kentucky and 
 Ohio, 401. Importation of improved English cattle, 401. Oxen vs. horses 
 as draft animals, 403. Horses replacing oxen in the East—reasons for the 
 change, 404. 
 
 Chapter XXXIV.— Sheep . 406 
 
 Westward movement of wool-growing, 1850-1860, 407. Further decline of 
 wool growing in New England and New York—causes, 408. In New York, 
 
 410. Medium and coarse-wooled mutton breeds gain in the East, 410. In 
 Pennsylvania, 412. Increase of wool-growing in the West, 412. Wool¬ 
 growing on the prairies, 413. Driving sheep westward, 414. Sheep driving 
 from central Ohio to Chicago in 1843, 414. Eastern sheep farmers move 
 westward, 415. Shelter and feeding of sheep in the East and in the West, 
 
 416. Management of sheep on the prairies, 417. Sheep driving from Illinois 
 to Texas in i860, 419. Wheat displaces sheep on the prairies 1850-1860, 
 
 420. In Iowa, 420. 
 
 Chapter XXXV.— Dairying . 421 
 
 Growing importance of dairy industry in New England, 421. Dairying in 
 the Hudson and Mohawk valleys, 422. Expansion in central New York, 
 
 422. Methods of making butter and cheese, 424. Butter making in Orange 
 County (N. Y.), 425. Dairying in southeastern Pennsylvania, 427. Feeding 
 methods in the East, 427. Cheese production in the Western Reserve, 427. 
 
 Wheat vs. dairying west of Ohio, 428. Butter and market milk displacing 
 cheese, 1850-1860, 429. Attempts to establish cheese factories in the Western 
 Reserve, 429. Origin of the associated dairy system, 430. Production records 
 of dairy cows, 431. Introduction of new breeds of dairy cattle, 432. 
 
XII 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Chapter XXXVI.— Swine . 435 
 
 Hog raising on dairy farms in the East, 435. Cheap pork production in the 
 West, 435. Hog raising in the Corn Belt, 437. Decline of swine raising 
 in the East, 437. Pork packing at Cincinnati, 439. Corn and hogs in the 
 
 West, 440. Types of hogs, 440. The common hog in the West, 441. Chang¬ 
 ing standards for hog-breeding, 441. 
 
 Chapter XXXVII. —Poultry . 442 
 
 Chapter XXXVIII.— Horses and Mules . 443 
 
 Types of horses raised in New England, in Ohio and in Kentucky, 443. 
 Conflicting standards in breeding—speed vs. strength, 446. Raising horses 
 on the Illinois prairies, 447. Mule breeding in Kentucky and Missouri, 447. 
 
 Chapter XXXIX.— Northern Agriculture in i860— A Summary . 448 
 
 The causes of westward migration, 448. Tenancy in the eastern states, 449. 
 
 The characteristics of western farming in i860, 449. The transformation 
 of eastern agriculture, 450. Changes in selection of farm enterprises more 
 important than changes in cultural methods, 451. 
 
 CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Bibliographical aids, 454. General collections of sources, 454. General 
 secondary works, 456. Material on agriculture of earliest settlements, 
 sources, 456; secondary works, 457. Eighteenth century agriculture, sources, 
 458; secondary material, 461. Westward expansion, sources, 462; secondary 
 material, 463. Agricultural progress in the East, sources, 464, secondary 
 material, 465. The Period of Transformation, sources, 467; secondary 
 
 material, 472. 
 
 Alphabetical Index of Authors. 474 
 
 Statistical Appendix . 493 
 
A History of Northern Agriculture 
 
 1620 to 1840 
 
 BY 
 
 Percy Wells Bidwell, Ph. D. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Part I 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN THE EARLIEST 
 
 SETTLEMENTS 
 
 \ 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
Chapter I. —Field Husbandry in the Earliest 
 
 Settlements. 
 
 DEPENDENCE ON NATURAL FOOD RESOURCES. 
 
 The earliest efforts of the colonists to get a living in the New World could 
 hardly be classed as agriculture. They resembled rather the activities of 
 primitive tribes on the hunting or collection stage of societal evolution. In 
 all the earliest settlements, and particularly in the ill-equipped Plymouth 
 Colony, the indigenous plants and the wild animals were largely relied upon 
 as food resources until the first crops could be harvested. The natural food 
 resources of the Atlantic Coastal Plain were varied and abundant. Berries of 
 many kinds flourished in profusion; blackberries, raspberries, huckleberries, 
 gooseberries, cranberries, and, perhaps most acceptable of all, wild straw¬ 
 berries. Roger Williams remarked that the wild strawberries were the best 
 of all natural fruits in Rhode Island, adding: “In some parts where the 
 Natives have planted, I have many times seen as many as would fill a good 
 ship within a few miles compasse 1 
 
 In June they were so plentiful, says Denton , 2 “ that the Fields and Woods 
 are died red.” Wild cherries and wild grapes and crabapples were to be had 
 for the picking, not very appetizing according to our present ideas, but 
 evidently acceptable to the hungry settlers. In the woods they found nuts 
 and roots; in New England the so-called groundnuts, the tubers on the roots 
 of the Apios tuberosa, are frequently mentioned; in New Jersey and Delaware 
 some use was made of the tuckahoe, a large, globular, underground food 
 plant. 
 
 But the earliest settlers were not restricted to a vegetarian diet; the woods 
 and waters abounded with a variety of game and fish. There were partridges, 
 turkeys, and pigeons, the latter often in incredible numbers. Van der Donck 3 
 refers to the astonishing plenty of wild pigeons: 
 
 “ Those are most numerous in the spring and fall of the year, when they are seen 
 in such numbers in flocks that they resemble the clouds in the heavens, and obstruct 
 the rays of the sun. Many of those birds are shot in the spring and fall, on the wing, 
 and from the dry trees whereon they prefer to alight, and will sit in great numbers to 
 see around them, from which they are easily shot. Many are also shot on the ground, 
 and it is not uncommon to kill twenty-five or more at a time.” 
 
 Wild geese and ducks were plentiful, and often by killing a deer a supply 
 of red meat was procured. The fish taken from the ocean and streams were 
 supplemented by shellfish, particularly clams and oysters. 
 
 But in the midst of this seeming plenty the colonists were often on the 
 verge of starvation. Reversion to a stage of civilization which the race had 
 outgrown a thousand years ago was not easy. They were too “ civilized ” to 
 get a living from the woods, the shore, and the streams with as little effort 
 
 1 Key to the Indian Language, in R. I. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 90. 
 
 2 Brief Description of New York (1670), p. 4. 
 
 3 In N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 173. 
 
 5 
 
6 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 as the Indians. Moreover, it is probable that a prejudice against fish and 
 game diet prevented the colonists making use of the wild food until actually 
 starved into it; and besides, they were not skilled woodsmen. As Channing 4 
 remarks of the Pilgrims: 
 
 “ In those days, middle class Englishmen knew little of sport. In England and in 
 Holland, not one of them probably had ever gone in pursuit of a wild animal, and few, 
 if any had ever caught a fish.” 5 
 
 THE FIRST HOUSES. 
 
 Before much attention could be given to clearing and tilling fields there 
 had to be provided some kind of temporary shelter. The original farm dwell¬ 
 ings in America were not the log houses so familiar in pioneer tales, but tents 
 and dugouts. Log houses could not be erected at once by unskilled woodsmen, 
 and meanwhile temporary shelters were formed by digging into a bank and 
 erecting a sort of roof over the open end of the cave . 6 Van Tienhoven 7 wrote: 
 
 “ Those in New Netherland and especially in New England, who have no means to 
 build farm houses at first according to their wishes, dig a square pit in the ground, 
 cellar fashion, 6 or 7 feet deep, as long and as broad as they think proper, case the 
 earth inside with wood all round the wall, and line the wood with the bark of trees or 
 something else to prevent the caving in of the earth; floor this cellar with plank and 
 wainscot it overhead for a ceiling, raise a roof of spars clear up and cover the spars with 
 bark or green sods, so that they can live dry and warm in these houses with their entire 
 families for two, three and four years, it being understood that partitions are run 
 through those cellars which are adapted to the size of the family. The wealthy and 
 principal men in New England, in the beginning of the Colonies, commenced their first 
 dwelling houses in this fashion for two reasons; firstly, in order not to waste time 
 building and not to want food the next season; secondly, in order not to discourage 
 poorer laboring people whom they brought over in numbers from Fatherland. In the 
 course of 3 @ 4 years, when the country became adapted to agriculture, they built 
 themselves handsome houses, spending on them several thousands.” 
 
 NATURAL CLEARINGS OR OPENINGS. 
 
 The first task of pioneer agriculture was the preparation of the land for 
 planting. It has often been asserted that all the regions in North America 
 first occupied by European peoples were covered by dense forests . 8 This how- 
 
 4 United States, I, 310. 
 
 5 Some of the sources which mention the reliance of the colonists on natural food 
 
 resources are: Graves, I.etter sent from New England, in Young’s Chronicles, 
 264-266; Bradford, Plymouth Plantation, 149; Higginson, New England Plantation, 
 in Young’s Chronicles, 252; Hubbard General History of New England, in Mass. 
 Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d Series, V, 23; Johnson, Wonder Working Providence, 77, 
 83; Josselyn, Two Voyages to New England, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 
 3d Series, III, 259; Clarke, Four Chiefest Plantations, 30; Representation of New 
 Netherland, in Jameson’s Narratives, 295; Megapolensis, Short Account of the 
 Mohawk Indians, in Jameson’s Narratives, 168; Scot, Model of the Government 
 of East New Jersey, in N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 279, 299. The accuracy of 
 the source accounts has been checked by Goodale in his article, New England Plants 
 Seen by the Earliest Colonists, in Publ. Col. Soc. Mass. Transactions, III, 189-194. 
 Lists of indigenous plants known by the American Indians are given by Holmes in 
 Bailey’s Cyclopedia, IV, 26, and by Palmer in U. S. Dept. Agric. Annual Report, 
 1870, pp. 404-428. 
 
 6 Such dugouts are described by Johnson, Wonder Working Providence, 65, 113; by 
 
 Stiles, Ancient Windsor, I. 33; Letter of John Jones (from Pennsylvania), in 
 Myers’s Narratives, 457. Cellar dwellers are mentioned in the New Haven Colony 
 Records, 70. 
 
 7 In O’Callaghan’s Documentary History of New York, IV, 31. 
 
 8 E. g., Shaler, Physiography of North America, in Winsor’s America, IV, p. xiv. 
 
FIELD HUSBANDRY 
 
 7 
 
 ever is far from true. The earliest settlers found numerous “ natural ” 
 clearings or openings along the Coastal Plain, most frequently along the banks 
 of rivers and small streams. The author of The Planters Plea (1630) 9 wrote 
 regarding New England: 
 
 “ The Land affords void ground enough to receive more people then this State can 
 spare, and that not onely wood grounds, and others, which are unfit for present use: 
 but, in many places, much cleared ground for tillage, and large marshes for hay and 
 feeding of cattle, which comes to passe by the desolatio hapning through a three yeeres 
 Plague, about twelve or sixteene yeeres past, which swept away most of the Inhabitants 
 all along the Sea coast, and in some places utterly consumed man, woman & childe, so 
 that there is no person left to lay claime to the soyle which they possessed; ” 
 
 Another letter describing conditions in the same region speaks of “ Open 
 plains, in some places five hundred acres, some places more, some less, not 
 much troublesome for to clear for the plough to go in ; . . . 10 The earliest 
 
 settlers in the Connecticut valley found much meadow land free from trees 
 at Hartford and farther north. In Whately (Mass.) : 
 
 “Both the east and west side settlers found the meadows and adjacent uplands ready 
 for grazing and tillage. There was needed no preliminary work of clearing off the 
 forests. They began to plant corn, and sow wheat and flax, and mow the grass the 
 first season.” * 11 
 
 In the region around the mouth of the Hudson River and southward to 
 the Delaware such openings were more frequent. On David De Vries’s plan¬ 
 tation on North River there were 31 morgens (about 60 acres) of “ maize- 
 land, where there were no trees to remove; and hay-land lying all together, 
 sufficient for two hundred cattle, . . . .” 12 Van der Donck emphasized the 
 presence of clearings in his Description of Nezv Netherlands (1656) : 13 
 
 “ Near the rivers and water sides there are large extensive plains containing several 
 hundred morgens; in one place more and in another less, which are very convenient for 
 plantations, villages and towns. There also are brooklands and fresh and salt meadows; 
 some so extensive that the eye cannot oversee the same. Those are good for pasturage 
 and hay, although the same are overflowed by the spring tides, particularly near the 
 
 seaboard.We also find meadow grounds far inland, which are all fresh and 
 
 make good hayland.” 
 
 In Pennsylvania an early settler found similar conditions: 14 
 
 “ And one thing more I shall tell you. I know a man together with two or three 
 more, that have happened upon a piece of Land of some Hundred Acres, that is all 
 cleare, without Trees, Bushes, stumps, that may be Plowed without let, the farther a 
 man goes in the Country the more such Land they find. There is also good Land, full 
 of Large and small Trees, and some good Land, but few Trees on it.” 
 
 A pioneer colonist of East New Jersey wrote home shortly after his arrival 
 (1685). 15 
 
 “ I am settled here in a very pleasant place, upon the side of a brave plain (almost free 
 of woods) and near the water side, so that I might yoke a Plough where I please.” 
 
 9 In Force, Tracts, II, 14. 
 
 10 Thomas Graves, Letter sent from New England (1629), in Young’s Chronicles, 265. 
 
 11 Temple, Whately, 13; see also Judd, Hadley, 97; Love, Colonial Hartford, 136. 
 
 12 De Vries in Jameson’s Narratives, 205. 
 
 13 In N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d Series, I, 148. 
 
 14 Letter of Thomas Paschall (1683) in Myers’s Narratives, 254. 
 
 15 N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 326. Other references to clearings are frequent in 
 
 the source materials reprinted in Myers’s Narratives of Early Pennsylvania and 
 Jameson’s Narratives of New Netherland. 
 
8 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 ORIGIN OF CLEARINGS. 
 
 The origin of the cleared spaces is not altogether certain. We know that 
 many such openings were abandoned corn fields of the Indians. Plymouth and 
 many other New England towns were built on open spaces formerly cultivated 
 by the Indians 16 and in New Netherland the old maize fields were an often- 
 described feature of the landscape. 17 The periodical burning of the woods by 
 the Indians in order to facilitate the pursuit of game was undoubtedly largely 
 responsible for the existence of clearings. 
 
 “ From early times the Indians had been accustomed to burn over the whole country 
 annually in November, after the leaves had fallen and the grass had become dry, which 
 kept the meadows clean, and prevented any growth of underbrush on the uplands. One 
 by one the older trees would give way, and thus many cleared fields, or tracts with only 
 here and there a tree, would abound, where the sod would be friable, ready for the plow; 
 or be already well covered with grass, ready for pasturage. The meadow lands thus 
 burnt over, threw out an early and rich growth of nutritious grasses, which, if let alone, 
 grew ‘up to a man’s face.’ ” 18 
 
 Whatever their origin, there is no doubt of the saving of labor which such 
 open spaces presented to the earliest settlers. 
 
 HOW THE LAND WAS CLEARED. 
 
 The task of clearing heavily wooded land was especially formidable to the 
 European immigrants, unskilled in woodcraft. The open places were un¬ 
 doubtedly utilized often for raising the first season’s crops, but they were 
 limited in extent and their fertility had been depleted by the Indians. Con¬ 
 sequently the clearing of wooded lands must have begun very soon. There 
 were two essential objects in clearing new land: (i) to admit sunlight to the 
 soil by removing the foliage which shaded it; (2) to remove the obstructions 
 to the tillage of the soil, the stumps and roots of the trees. The first of these 
 objects was the prime essential and was accomplished by the Indians by gird¬ 
 ling the trees. An incision was made through the bark all around the trunk 
 and the trees were left to die standing. 19 The colonists borrowed the practice 
 of girdling, as well as the custom of burning the woods and meadows, from 
 the Indians. It was a labor-saving process, but it had certain defects: the 
 dead trees fell eventually, endangering the lives of the colonists and their 
 cattle, and then the dead timber obstructed cultivation until it was removed. 
 Nevertheless girdling persisted as a method of clearing for the first two 
 centuries of northern agriculture. 20 
 
 A method more satisfactory in the long run was to cut down the trees and 
 burn all the timber not wanted for building or fencing purposes. Van Tien- 
 hoven advised new settlers to arrive in the spring, in April at the latest, so 
 as to employ the whole summer in clearing land and building houses. 
 
 16 Adams, in Essex Institute Historical Collections, XIX, 155. 
 
 17 See Jogues in Jamesons’ Narratives, 261; Van Tienhoven in O’Callaghan’s Doc. Hist. 
 
 N. Y., IV, 28. 
 
 18 Temple, Whately, 13. 
 
 19 This operation was described by Capt. John Smith. See Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 
 
 3d Series, III, 38. Also by Belknap, New Hampshire, III, 131. 
 
 20 See the description of clearing at Concord, N. H. (ca. 1800), by Dwight, Travels 
 
 (edition of 1823), II, 114. 
 
FIELD HUSBANDRY 
 
 9 
 
 “ All then who arrive in New Netherland must immediately set about preparing the 
 soil, so as to be able, if possible to plant some winter grain, and to proceed the next 
 winter to cut and clear the timber. The trees are usually felled from the stump, cut up 
 and burnt in the field, unless such as are suitable for building, for palisades, posts and 
 rails.” 21 
 
 In New England as well as in New Netherland the first settlers seem to 
 have been reluctant to adopt the primitive hoe-culture of the aborigines. They 
 could not believe that a crop could be raised on new land until it had first 
 been “ stubbed,” i. e., until all the roots of small trees and shrubs had been 
 dug out. John Pynchon, of Springfield, Massachusetts, recorded in his account 
 books (1668-1680), many agreements with men who were to stub, clear and 
 plow new land. “ They were to girdle large trees, cut down and clear off 
 smaller trees, and grub up the roots of the little trees and bushes.” 22 Jared 
 Eliot 23 commented on this fact as follows : 
 
 “Their [the first settlers’] unacquaintedness with the Country, led them to make choice 
 of the worst Land for their Improvement, and the most expensive and chargeable 
 Methods of Cultivation: They tho’t themselves obliged to stubb all Staddle, and cut 
 down or lop all great Trees; in which they expended much Cost and Time, to the 
 prejudice of the Crop and impoverishing the Land.” 
 
 THE FIRST CROPS. 
 
 The chief grain crop in the North Atlantic colonies from the beginning 
 was the Indian corn or maize. Although unknown to Europeans before the 
 discovery of the New World, it had so many advantages as a pioneering crop 
 that it took precedence immediately over the cereals with which they were 
 familiar and the seed of which they had brought with them. 
 
 Among the inventories of 50 estates in Essex County, Massachusetts, 
 there are 16 in which crops are mentioned, either in the field or in the barn. 
 Altogether 666 bushels of 6 different sorts of grain were inventoried. On 
 practically every farm which reported any grain, Indian corn was mentioned 
 and in amounts exceeding those of other cereals. Some indication of the rela¬ 
 tive importance of corn, wheat, and other cereals may be obtained from 
 table 1. 
 
 Table i. 
 
 Crop. 
 
 Times 
 
 mentioned. 
 
 Quantity. 
 
 Indian corn . 
 
 15 
 
 bushels. 
 
 275 
 
 Wheat . 
 
 12 
 
 152 
 
 Barley . 
 
 7 
 
 7*i 
 
 Peas . 
 
 4 
 
 
 Oats . 
 
 2 
 
 60 
 
 Rye . 
 
 6 
 
 5i 
 
 Flax . 
 
 3 
 
 
 Hay . 
 
 4 
 
 
 Hemp . 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 
 21 In O’Callaghan’s Doc. Hist, of N. Y., IV, 30. 
 
 22 Judd, Hadley, 432. 
 
 23 Field Husbandry (edition of 1760), 1. Schoepf has similar remarks regarding the 
 
 first residents of Pennsylvania. Travels, I, 264. 
 
10 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The inventories of 17 Connecticut estates probated 1639-1648 24 show In¬ 
 dian corn the predominant cereal, but with wheat a stronger competitor than 
 in Essex County. Peas, rye, barley, and oats follow in approximately the 
 order named. 
 
 The following extracts from inventories give a picture of the grain crops 
 raised on specific farms: 
 
 Estate Henry Roffe, Newbury: 12 bushels Indian Corn; 9 bushels wheat; 2 bushels 
 pease. 
 
 Estate Hugh Churchman, Lynn: 20 bushels wheat; 4 bushels Indian corn; 2 bushels 
 barley; corn on the ground. 
 
 Estate John Talbey, Salem: 20 bushels Indian corn; 3 pecks oats. 
 
 Estate John Goffe, Newbury: 7 bushels Indian corn; 1 bushel English wheat; 1 bushel 
 mault; 1 bushel meal. 
 
 Estate T. Nowell, Windsor: 7 bushels rye; 3 bushels malt; 20 bushels pease; 22 bushels 
 wheat; 10 bushels Indian corn. 
 
 Estate R. Myman, Hartford: 1 acre meslin; 1 acre summer wheat; 1 acre oats; 3 roods 
 pease and barley; 5 acres Indian corn. 
 
 Estate T. Dewy, Hartford: 5 acres of corn upon the ground; 7 other acres of corn 
 upon the ground; hemp and flax. 
 
 The predominance of maize over other cereals in New England from the 
 beginning is clearly indicated by the contemporary account of the food of 
 the early settlers. With stewed pumpkins and bean or pea porridge, Indian 
 meal or samp was the staple article of diet. Maize yielded more food per 
 acre than the European grains; its yield was more uniform, being less de¬ 
 pendent on the changes of seasons; it ripened early, being ready for harvest in 
 four months from the time of planting, and in some respects it was a labor- 
 saving crop. When planted in the Indian fashion among the stumps or the 
 trunks of girdled trees, it required much less preparation of the soil than 
 the colonists deemed necessary for other cereals. 
 
 INDIAN MANAGEMENT OF MAIZE. 
 
 The Indian management of maize was described by a contemporary ob¬ 
 server as follows: 25 
 
 “ It is Planted between the middle of March and the beginning of June. But most com¬ 
 monly from the middle of April to middle of May. Some of the Indians take the 
 time of the coming up of a Fish, called Aloofes, into the Rivers. Others of the budding 
 of some Trees. 26 
 
 “ In the pure Northerly parts, they have a peculiar kind called Mohauks Corn, which 
 though planted in June, will be ripe in season. The stalks of this kind are shorter, 
 and the Ears grow nearer the bottom of the stalk, and are generally of divers colours. 
 
 “ The manner of Planting is in Rows, at equal distance every way, about 5. or 6. feet. 
 They open the Earth with the Howe, taking away the surface 3. or 4. inches deep, and 
 the bredth of the Howe, and so throw in 4. or 5. Granes, a little distant one from 
 another, and cover them with Earth. If two or three grow, it may do well. For some 
 of them are usually destroyed by Birds, or Mouse-Squirrels. 
 
 “ The Corn grown up an hands length, they cut up the weeds, and loosen the Earth, 
 about it, with a broad Howe; repeating this labour, as the Weeds grow. When the 
 
 24 Conn. Colony Public Records, I. 
 
 25 Letter of Governor John Winthrop, jr., of Connecticut, Published in Philosophical 
 
 Transactions of the Royal Society of London, XII (1678), 1065. 
 
 26 Belknap says: “Yet, their judgment of the proper season for planting, cannot be 
 
 amended. It was when the leaves of the white oak are as big as the ear of a mouse.” 
 New Hampshire, III, 93. 
 
FIELD HUSBANDRY 
 
 11 
 
 Stalk begins to grow high, they draw a little Earth about it: and upon the putting forth 
 of the Eare, so much, as to make a little Hill, like Hop-Hill. After this, they have no 
 other business about it, till Harvest. . . . 
 
 “ The Natives commonly Thresh it as they gather it, dry it well on Mats in the Sun, 
 and then bestow it in holes in the Ground (which are their Barns) well lined with 
 withered Grass and Matts, and then covered with the like, and over all with Earth: 
 and so its kept very well, till they use it. . . . 
 
 “ Where the Ground is bad or worn out, the Indians used to put two or three of the 
 forementioned Fishes, under or adjacent to each Corn-hill, whereby they had many 
 times a Crop double to what the Ground would otherwise have produced. 
 
 “ The English have learned the like Husbandry, where these Aloofes come up in 
 great plenty, or where they are near the Fishing-stages; having there the Heads and 
 Garbage of Cod-fish in abundance, at no charge but the fetching. . . . 
 
 “ The Indians, and some English (especially in good Ground, and well fished) at 
 every Corn-hill, plant with the Corn, a kind of French or Twr&cy-Beans: The Stalks 
 of the Corn serving instead of Poles for the Beans to climb up with. And in the 
 vacant places between the Hills they will Plant squashes and Pompions; loading the 
 Ground with as much as it will bear." 
 
 The Dutch settlers followed the Indian methods closely: 
 
 “ When the timber has been removed, and the brush burnt up, then we take a broad 
 hoe, and cut out hills about six feet apart, and plant five or six grains in a hill, with 
 which some persons also plant Turkey beans [as before noticed]. After the grain 
 shoots up and grows, it requires two dressings. The weeding and cleaning is done with 
 a broad adze, without breaking up the ground, and is not very laborious work. The 
 weeds and trash in the first dressing, are cut off and placed in a row between the hills. 
 The second dressing is easier. Then the weeds and sprouts are cut off around the hills, 
 and the weeds and rubbish of the first cleaning, are drawn round the corn-hills, which 
 afterwards grow high and tall, and smother all the weeds, stumps, and trash, and kill 
 all other vegetation except pumpkins; those will grow among the maize.” 27 
 
 CULTIVATION OF MAIZE BY ENGLISH SETTLERS. 
 
 The English settlers in Connecticut before 1678 had introduced the use of 
 the plough in cultivating maize. Winthrop added to his description of In¬ 
 dian agriculture: 
 
 “ The English have now taken to a better way of Planting by the help of the Plough; 
 in this manner; in the Planting time they Plough single Furrows through the whole 
 Field, about 6 feet distant, more or less, as they see convenient. To these, they Plough 
 others a cross at the same distance. Where these meet they throw in the Corn, and cover 
 it either with the Howe, or by running another Furrow with the Plough. When the 
 Weeds begin to overtop the Corn, then they Plough over the rest of the field between 
 the Planted Furrows, and so turn in the Weeds. This is repeated once, when they 
 begin to Hill the Corn with the Howe; and so the Ground is better loosened than with 
 the Howe, and the Roots of the Corn have more liberty to spread. Where any Weeds 
 escape the Plough, they use the Howe.” 28 
 
 Among the hills of the corn were planted beans 29 and pumpkins, after the 
 multiple-cropping system of the Indians. The stalks served as poles for the 
 beans to climb upon. The importance of corn is shown by its early acceptance 
 as a payment in kind for taxes. 30 Corn seems to have served in all the col- 
 
 27 Van der Donck, in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 158. 
 
 28 Winthrop, Royal Society of London Philosophical Transactions, XII, 1066. Ploughs 
 
 were used in the cultivation of Indian corn in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, as 
 early as 1687. See Report of a French Protestant Refugee, 34. 
 
 29 Phaseolus vulgaris, known to the colonists as French or Turkey beans. 
 
 30 New Haven Colonial Records (1641), 60. 
 
12 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 onies as a preliminary crop before other grains. An English writer of 1670 31 
 says of New England that the ground must first be planted with Indian corn 
 before it will be fit for English seed, and Pastorius writes from Pennsylvania 
 in 1700: “ Also one cannot, the first year, plant either wheat or rye in such 
 new land, but only Indian .... corn, . . . . ” 32 The hoeing of the 
 corn killed out the weeds and cleaned the land for the succeeding less thrifty 
 crop. 
 
 EUROPEAN GRAINS. 
 
 Among the European grains grown in the earliest settlements we find the 
 following most frequently mentioned: wheat, rye, barley, oats, buckwheat, and 
 peas. Wheat was the most highly esteemed if not the most widely consumed 
 European breadstuff, and it was natural that the newcomers should make 
 especial efforts to introduce it in their new homes. The earliest attempts to 
 raise wheat in Plymouth in 1621, so Bradford informs us, proved a failure, 
 and it seems not to have become an important crop there until at least a 
 generation later. 33 Meanwhile it had become important enough in some New 
 England towns, at least, to be receivable for taxes as early as 1640. 34 In 
 the fertile alluvial soil of the Connecticut Valley wheat showed early promise 
 of successful cultivation. We find it mentioned in inventories of estates of 
 Hartford settlers as early as 1641, 35 and during the remainder of the seven¬ 
 teenth century this valley was the best grain-producing region in New Eng¬ 
 land. In Northampton, Hadley, and Hatfield, says Judd, 36 every farmer raised 
 wheat, and wheaten bread was common. Large quantities of wheat were 
 shipped from this region to Boston. The account book of John Pynchon, a 
 trader of Springfield, 37 shows shipments of wheat amounting to 1,500 bushels 
 after the harvest of 1652. In the Middle Colonies wheat seems to have been 
 successful from the first. Samples of wheat grown in New Netherland were 
 sent back to Holland in 1626 along with other European grains 38 and after 
 that date we find it mentioned frequently. It succeeded particularly well on 
 the “ flats ” at Esopus on the Hudson. 39 In Penn’s colony wheat is mentioned 
 first among European grains in all source accounts. 40 
 
 Wheat and other European cereals were cultivated in New Amsterdam 
 more intensively than Indian corn. Van der Donck 41 wrote: 
 
 “ The land whereon there are few standing trees, and which has been grubbed and 
 ploughed twice, we hold to be prepared for a crop of winter grain. For summer grain 
 one ploughing is sufficient. If it is intended to sow the same field again with winter 
 grain, then the stubble is ploughed in, and the land is sowed with wheat or rye, which 
 in ordinary seasons will yield a fine crop.” 
 
 31 Clarke, Four Chiefest Plantations, 30. 
 
 32 Myers’s Narratives, 405. 
 
 33 History of Plymouth Plantation, 116; Stine, Economic History of Wheat in America, 
 
 MS., chap. Ill, p. 28. 
 
 34 Felt, Ipswich (Mass.), 46. 
 
 35 Love, Colonial Hartford, 156. 
 
 36 Hadley, 353. 
 
 37 Stine, in MS. History of Wheat, chap. Ill, p. 31. 
 
 38 N. Y. Documents Relative to Colonial History, I, 37. 
 
 39 Danckaerts, Journal, 324. 
 
 40 Myers’s Narratives, 240, 301, 323, 267. 
 
 41 N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 157. 
 
FIELD HUSBANDRY 
 
 13 
 
 Probably more often these grains were simply scratched in with a harrow, 
 either on newly cleared ground or on land from which a maize crop had been 
 harvested. Dr. More wrote from Pennsylvania, 1686: 42 
 
 “ The last year I did plant about twelve Acres of Indian Corn, and when it came of! 
 the Ground, I did only cause the Ground to be Harrowed, and upon that I did sow both 
 Wheat and Rye, at which many Laughed, saying, That I could not expect any corn 43 
 from what I had sowed, the Land wanting more Labour; yet I had this Year as good 
 Wheat and Rye upon it, as was to be found in any other place, and that very Bright 
 Corn.” 
 
 Wheat and rye were sown both in the fall and in the spring in the earliest 
 settlements. Wassenaer 44 says of New Netherland (1628) : 
 
 “ The winter grain has turned out well there, but the summer grain which ripened 
 before it was half grown in consequence of the excessive heat, was very light.” 
 
 Van der Donck mentioned summer and winter sowing of wheat, rye, and 
 barley, 45 and one of the earliest accounts of Pennsylvania tells of summer and 
 winter wheat. In the latter colony a crop of buckwheat was secured from the 
 land between the harvesting of the spring wheat and planting of the winter 
 grain. 46 In New England spring or summer wheat seems to have been the 
 chief variety sown for the first half century at least, 47 but after 1660 an 
 impetus was given to the cultivation of winter wheat by the blast, which more 
 disastrously affected the summer grain. 
 
 THE WHEAT BLAST. 
 
 The so-called “ blast,” now recognized as the black stem-rust, first appeared 
 in eastern Massachusetts about 1660. Josselyn, 48 with the curious mixture of 
 fact and fancy which characterized many of the early descriptions of Amer¬ 
 ica, wrote in 1663: 
 
 “ Our wheat, i. e., summer Wheat many times changeth into Rye, and is subject to be 
 blasted, some say with a vapour breaking out of the earth, others, with a wind North¬ 
 east or North-west, at such time as it flowereth, others again say it is with lightning. I 
 have observed, that when a land of Wheat hath been smitten with a blast at one Corner, 
 it hath infected the rest in a weeks time, it begins at the stem (which will be spotted) 
 and goes upwards to the ear making it fruitless; . . . .” 
 
 In Connecticut the blast was first noticed a few years later. John Winthrop, 
 jr., referred to it in a letter of 1666, and in 1668 he wrote that it had damaged 
 the wheat crop several years, 
 
 “ generally through all the plantations, both of ye Massachusetts colony, Plymouth, & 
 this also [the colony of Conecticutt] insomuch that the croppe of wheat hath failed 
 divers yeares in most plantations. The corne flourished well till it came to be eared, and 
 the eares also would at first appeare faire, and as if full, but no corne in them. There 
 have beene thousands of acres in that maner every yeare. What the cause was, 
 
 42 Myers’s Narratives, 285. 
 
 43 I. e., grain, according to the English usage. 
 
 44 In Jameson’s Narratives, 88. 
 
 45 N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 157. 
 
 46 Letter of Thomas Paschall, in Myers’s Narratives, 252. 
 
 47 See Judd, Hadley, 95. 
 
 48 Two Voyages to New England, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series, III, 336-337. 
 
 See also Morton, New England Memorial, 309; Flint, Hundred Years Progress, in 
 Maine Board Agric. 19th Annual Report, 1874, p. 114; Hutchinson, Massachusetts 
 Bay, I, 485- 
 
14 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 whether naturall, or a blasting fro heaven we know not. Our old husbandmen of 
 England, some of them thought it a meldew, others that the originall defect is in the 
 roote: the peas, barly, rye & India corne were not touched with it, as was generally 
 observed.” 49 
 
 The causes of the blast were shrouded in mystery, as Winthrop’s specula¬ 
 tions show, and remained so for more than two centuries; meanwhile, early 
 in the eighteenth century the relation of barberry bushes to the blast had 
 been noted and legislation enacted for their removal. 50 
 
 RYE, BARLEY, OATS. 
 
 Rye was a strong competitor of wheat from the beginning, both in the Mid¬ 
 dle Colonies and in New England. On light sandy and gravelly soils it yielded 
 better than wheat. Winthrop tells of much rye being sown with the plough 
 in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1636. 51 It was also sown broadcast on 
 burned land and scratched in with a rake or harrow. In New Sweden, rye 
 seems to have taken precedence over wheat, not on account of greater ease 
 of cultivation, but because the Swedish colonists preferred rye bread. 52 In 
 New England the settlers would have preferred white bread, but the greater 
 difficulty of cultivating wheat and the disastrous effects of the blast caused 
 wheat flour to become a luxury for farmers, and the rye and Indian bread be¬ 
 came the standard article of consumption. 
 
 Barley and oats were grown both in New England and the Middle Colonies 
 from the first; the former for the production of beer, which was the popular 
 drink even in New England, until the apple orchards began to bear; oats for 
 provender for horses, except in the settlements where Scotch immigrants 
 predominated, 53 as in East New Jersey. Oats seem not to have been used for 
 human food in New England until about 1800 54 The practice of sowing 
 mixed crops was brought over from Europe. Peas and oats, and sometimes 
 rye and oats, were sown for cattle food; meslin, a mixture of wheat and rye, 
 was often used for bread. Field peas were raised for human food and not 
 as a forage crop. They entered into agricultural trade to some extent, being 
 exported from the Connecticut Valley to the West Indies via Boston. 55 
 
 FLAX. 
 
 Flax had been a common crop on farms in England in the sixteenth century, 
 being a subject of legislative encouragement, and was cultivated among the 
 first crops in New England as well as in New York and Pennsylvania. One of 
 the earliest laws of Connecticut (1640) ordered every family to raise half 
 a pound of hemp or flax. 56 The amount raised in any particular settlement 
 
 49 Winthrop Papers, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 5th series, VIII, 122. 
 
 50 For a discussion of later history of the blast and its effect on wheat cultivation see 
 
 pp. 93, 238. 
 
 51 New England, I, 246. 
 
 52 Paschall, in Myers’s Narratives, 252. 
 
 53 Winthrop, New England, I, 104; Johnson, Wonder Working Providence, 91, n. 1; 
 
 Trumbull, Northampton (Mass.), I, 380; Van der Donck, in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Col¬ 
 lections, 2d series, I, 157; Scot, in N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 287. 
 
 54 Miller and Wells, History of Ryegate, Vermont, 98. 
 
 55 Van der Donck, in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 160; Judd, Hadley, 355. 
 
 56 Conn. Colony Public Records, I, 61. 
 
FIELD HUSBANDRY 
 
 IS 
 
 depended a great deal upon the ability of the population to prepare the fiber 
 and spin and weave it. There seems to have been no particular difficulty in 
 the strictly agricultural operations with flax, but getting it through the proc¬ 
 esses of household manufacture involved many difficult and disagreeable tasks.. 
 For the first few years of the new settlements the people wore the clothes they 
 had brought with them, or else traded for European goods. Only after the 
 fur trade had failed and they had settled down to self-sufficient agriculture 
 did the cultivation of flax begin in earnest. There was probably considerable 
 difference also among the various groups of settlers in their experience in 
 spinning flax. The wives of the Dutch settlers in New York, so Van der 
 Donck 5T relates, did not spin very much; hence very little flax was raised there, 
 but by 1670 the situation was changed, perhaps by the influx of English set¬ 
 tlers from New England, for Denton 58 says: “ they sowe store of flax, which 
 they make every one Cloth of for their own wearing. ...” The Germans 
 who settled at Germantown, Pennsylvania, were expert linen weavers and 
 grew much flax. 59 In the Swedish settlements on the Delaware flax was raised 
 for the household manufacture of linen, and also in East New Jersey. 60 
 
 In New England there seems to have been little cultivation of flax until 
 the introduction of the linen-spinning wheel and the manufacture of linen by 
 the Scotch-Irish immigrants of the early eighteenth century. Before that 
 time cotton imported from the West Indies was used to supplement the scanty 
 supplies of flax and wool. 61 
 
 Hemp we find occasionally mentioned. Being much in demand for naval 
 stores in the commercial nations, it was a subject for experiment in the earli¬ 
 est settlements. In spite of legislative encouragement, it never proved a suc¬ 
 cessful crop on the Atlantic seaboard. 
 
 TOBACCO. 
 
 Little tobacco was planted in New England, and even then only as a garden 
 crop for private consumption. As a matter of fact, it was forbidden in the 
 Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1629, 62 but in New Netherland and New Sweden 
 it seems to have been successfully undertaken as a cash crop. In 1644, Gov¬ 
 ernor Printz, of New Sweden, reported exports of 4,991 pounds harvested 
 in his colony, and 6,920 pounds in 1647. 63 In New Netherland tobacco was 
 used as a preliminary crop to prepare the land for other purposes. Van Tien- 
 hoven remarked that tobacco “ mellowed the soil ” and was therefore culti¬ 
 vated on land before winter grain was sown. 64 It shared with maize the ad¬ 
 vantage of being a crop which could be planted without much preparation of 
 the soil. 
 
 57 N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, 1 , 160. 
 
 38 Brief Description of New York, 18. 
 
 59 Frame, in Myers’s Narratives, 304. 
 
 60 Paschall, in Myers’s Narratives, 252; Smith, New Jersey, 540. 
 
 C1 Judd, Hadley, 380. 
 
 62 Records, I, 403. 
 
 63 Myers’s Narratives, 96, 120. 
 
 04 O'Callaghan, Documentary History of New York, IV, 30. 
 
16 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 VEGETABLES. 
 
 Beyond the growing of pumpkins, squashes and beans in the Indian fash¬ 
 ion, the cultivation of garden vegetables was almost entirely lacking. Garden¬ 
 ing was too intensive an occupation for pioneer farmers. But the colonists 
 did find time to experiment freely with the seeds of the European garden 
 vegetables which they brought over with them. Cabbages, turnips, onions, 
 radishes, carrots, and parsnips were most frequently mentioned in New Eng¬ 
 land sources. To this list the Dutch added beets, endive, succory, finckel, 
 sorrel, dill, spinach, parsley, chevril, cresses and leeks. An account of 1650 
 states: 
 
 “ Garden fruits succeed very well, yet are drier, sweeter, and more agreeable than 
 in the Netherlands; for proof of which we may easily instance musk-melons, citrons or 
 water-melons, which in New Netherland grow right in the open fields, if the briars 
 and weeds are kept from them, while in the Netherlands they require the close care 
 of amateurs, or those who cultivate them for profit in gardens, and then they are 
 neither so perfect by far, nor so palatable, as they are in New Netherland.” 65 
 
 In Penn’s colony, asparagus, cauliflower, and potatoes, in addition to the 
 New England list, were mentioned in 1685. The inclusion of potatoes is 
 noteworthy. Although taken to Ireland from the West Indies by way of 
 Virginia before 1600, the American tubers were long regarded as an exotic 
 there and in England, and found a place only in rich men’s gardens. Penn 
 tells us that they were planted by one Robert Turner, a rich merchant, near 
 Philadelphia. The introduction of potatoes into New England as a food 
 product came about a half century later, with the immigration of the Scotch- 
 Irish. 66 
 
 FRUIT. 
 
 Apples, pears, plums, quinces, and cherries flourished in New England, 
 having been raised partly from seeds and partly from trees brought over 
 from England. 67 Josselyn 68 reported : 
 
 “ Our fruit-Trees prosper abundantly. Apple-trees, Pear-trees, Quince-trees, Cherry- 
 trees, Plum-trees, Barberry-trees. I have observed with admiration, that the Kernels 
 sown or the Succors planted produce as fair & good fruit, without grafting, as the Tree 
 from whence they were taken: the Countrey is replenished with fair and large Orchards.” 
 
 In this section apples seem to have been most generally grown of all fruits, 
 owing to their hardiness. Cider had attained popularity as a farm beverage 
 before 1700, although it did not displace beer for some time after that date. 69 
 
 Van der Donck saw apple and pear trees in New Netherland, some of which 
 had been brought over from Holland and others which had been raised from 
 seeds. The Dutch had also quinces and cherries. Danckaerts 70 said he had 
 never seen or eaten finer apples than those which he found at Bergen, near 
 the present Jersey City. 
 
 65 Jameson’s Narratives, 296. 
 
 66 Carrier, Beginnings of Agriculture in America, 81-87. 
 
 67 Mass. Bay Col. Records, I, 24; Winthrop Papers, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections , 3d 
 
 series, IX, 265. 
 
 68 Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series, III, 337. 
 
 69 Judd, Hadley, 364. 
 
 70 Journal, 156. 
 
FIELD HUSBANDRY 
 
 17 
 
 “ One kind was very large, fair, and of good taste, fifty-six of which only could be put 
 in a heaped up bushel, that is, half a bag. Another variety, somewhat smaller, but not 
 less fair in appearance, and of a better flavor, my comrade was acquainted with, and 
 said they were called the Double Paradise. He acknowledged they were very delicate.” 
 
 Peaches were grown much more successfully in the Middle Colonies than 
 in New England. Van der Donck 71 wrote : 
 
 “ If a stone is put into the earth, it will spring in the same season, and grow so rapidly 
 as to bear fruit in the fourth year, and the limbs are frequently broken by the weight 
 of the peaches, which usually are very fine.” 
 
 Danckaerts, 72 a quarter of a century later, said of the peaches on Long 
 Island: 
 
 “ It is impossible to tell how many peach trees we passed, all laden with fruit to 
 breaking down, and many of them actually broken down. We came to a place surrounded 
 with such trees from which so many had fallen off that the ground could not be dis¬ 
 cerned, and you could not put your foot down without trampling them; and, notwith¬ 
 standing such large quantities had fallen off, the trees still were as full as they could 
 bear. The hogs and other animals mostly feed on them.” 
 
 Peaches had already been introduced on the Delaware River before Penn’s 
 arrival. He found them so abundant, “ not an Indian plantation without them,” 
 that he was uncertain whether they were not indigenous. 73 “ Peaches, as well 
 as wild plums, corn, cherries, and grapes were distilled for brandy,” says 
 Paschall, 74 “ and most people have Stills of Copper for that use.” Attempts 
 were made to raise grapes for wine in practically all the early settlements, 
 but with little success. Penn had a fine vineyard of French vines 75 with a 
 French vigneron, but for the small farmer struggling for a bare existence 
 such experiments were far too costly. 
 
 71 N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 153. 
 
 72 Journal, 121. 
 
 73 Myers’s Narratives, 227. 
 
 74 Ibid., 253. _ 
 
 75 Pastorius, in Myers’s Narratives, 398. 
 
 3 
 
Chapter II.—Livestock. 
 
 EARLIEST IMPORTATIONS. 
 
 Livestock of various kinds, neat cattle, sheep, swine, goats, and horses 
 formed a part of the initial equipment of all the earliest settlements except 
 the temporary factories or trading posts. At the beginning there was a pitiful 
 scarcity of stock in some of the settlements. Europe was the only source of 
 supply of the original breeding-stock, for the Indians had no domestic animals 
 except their dogs. The losses on the ocean voyage seem to have been large. 
 Capt. John Smith 1 related that of 200 cattle brought over by Governor 
 Winthrop for the Massachusetts Bay Colony on one voyage 70 died on the 
 way. When occasionally a ship arrived without losses at sea the fact was noted 
 as unusual. 2 When the animals finally arrived it was extremely difficult to 
 provide adequate forage and shelter and to protect them against the wolves. 
 In the face of such difficulties it was a noteworthy accomplishment of New 
 England and the Middle Colonies in the seventeenth century to have become 
 not only independent of outside sources of supply, but even to have developed 
 a surplus of cattle, horses, and meat products for export. 
 
 As would naturally be expected, some settlements were from the first 
 better provided than others. The Plymouth colonists managed to exist three 
 years before they received any neat cattle, and even in 1627 they had neither 
 horses nor sheep. 3 The Massachusetts Bay Company, with its larger resources, 
 was able to equip its settlers more adequately. In the very first year 30 cows 
 and 12 mares, besides a number of swine and goats were sent over, 4 and in 
 the years 1630 to 1633 livestock of various kinds arrived on almost every ship. 
 The settlements farther north on the New England coast must also have been 
 well stocked. Although we have no records of the original importations, an 
 inventory taken at Mason’s plantation on the Piscataqua River in 1635 shows 
 58 cattle, 92 sheep and lambs, 27 goats, 64 swine, and 22 horses, mares, and 
 colts. 5 At Trelawny’s plantation, near the present site of Portland, Maine, 
 there were in 1648, 57 cattle, 18 goats, and 52 swine. 6 Dutch settlers on Man¬ 
 hattan brought with them in 1625, 103 head of livestock, including stallions, 
 mares, bulls, cows, and sheep. 7 The Swedish settlements on the Delaware 
 were, like the Plymouth colony, miserably provided, for agriculture. Governor 
 Printz reported in 1647 that there were in all only 25 head of cattle, and 
 most of these had been purchased from neighboring colonies. 8 
 
 1 Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series, III, 40; see also The Planter’s Plea, in Force, 
 
 Tracts, II, 43. 
 
 2 Winthrop, New England, I, 192. 
 
 3 Bradford, Plymouth Plantation, 166, 217. 
 
 4 Higginson, in Young’s Chronicles, 216. 
 
 5 N. H. State Papers, I, 115. The cattle had been imported from Denmark. (See p. 24.) 
 
 6 Willis, in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, I, 228. 
 
 7 Wassenaer, in Jameson’s Narratives, 79. 
 
 8 Myers’s Narratives, 124. 
 
 18 
 
LIVESTOCK 
 
 19 
 
 THE FORAGE PROBLEM—NATIVE GRASSES 
 
 UNSATISFACTORY. 
 
 A condition of prime importance for the successful raising of livestock 
 is of course an abundant supply of nutritive forage plants. In this respect 
 the North American continent was strikingly deficient. The Indians of the 
 region kept no herbivorous domestic animals and hence had developed no 
 forage plants. Consequently our important hay and pasture plants, timothy, 
 Kentucky bluegrass, and the red and white clovers, were, like our domestic 
 animals, imported from Europe. The first pastures were the woods, where 
 the underbrush had been destroyed by the Indian burnings, and the natural 
 openings or clearings in the lowlands along the banks of streams. There 
 were found two chief kinds of forage plants ; (i) the wild rye ( Elymus sp.), 
 the common grass along the Atlantic coast from Virginia northward, and 
 (2) the broom straw (Andropogon Sp.), which was the dominant grass in 
 the Middle Colonies but was also found in New England. 
 
 At first acquaintance these grasses looked promising; they grew high and 
 thick. “ Manhigh,” “ as high as my head,” “ thicke and long, as high as a 
 man’s middle; some as high as the shoulders, so that a good mower may cut 
 three loads in a day.” 9 But it is remarkable how uniformly writers qualify 
 their statements about the native grasses and admit that although the cattle 
 ate them freely and got along well enough during the summer, the proportion 
 of roughage to nutriment was so large that the hay was apt to be insufficient 
 for winter. Capt. John Smith noted this fact and warned the New England 
 planters to clear land for pasture as soon as possible. He wrote: 
 
 “ There is grasse plenty, though very long and thicke stalked, which being neither 
 mowne nor eaten, is very ranke, yet all their cattell like and prosper well therewith, but 
 indeed it is weeds, herbs, and grasse growing together, which although they be good 
 and sweet in the Summer, they will deceive your cattell in winter; therefore be carefull 
 in the Spring to mow the swamps, and the low Hands of Auguan, where you may have 
 harsh sheare-grasse enough to make hay of, till you can cleare ground to make pasture, 
 which will beare as good grasse as can grow any where, as now it doth in Virginia; 
 and unlesse you make this provision, if there come an extraordinary winter, you will 
 lose many of them and hazard the rest, especially if you bring them in the latter end 
 of Summer, or before the grasse bee growne in the Spring, comming weake from 
 Sea.” 10 
 
 We have similar testimony from the Middle Colonies. De Rasieres, writing 
 in 1628, said of Manhattan: 
 
 “ The grass is good in the forest and valleys, but when made into hay, is not so nutri¬ 
 tious for cattle as here [i. e., in Holland], in consequence of its wild state, but it yearly 
 improves by cultivation.” * 11 
 
 Thomas Budd said of the region on either side of the Delaware River: 12 
 
 “In the Woods groweth plentifully a course sort of Grass, which is so proving that 
 it soon makes the Cattel and Horses fat in the Summer, but the Huy being course, which 
 is chiefly gotten on the fresh Marshes, the Cattel loseth their Flesh in the Winter, and 
 become very poor, except we give them Corn ;....” 
 
 9 Josselyn, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series, III, 240; Scot, in N. J. Hist. Soc. 
 
 Collections, I, 295; Wood, New England’s Prospect (Prince ed.), 12. 
 
 10 In Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series, III, 37. 
 
 11 In Jameson’s Narratives, 104. 
 
 12 Good Order Established in Penn, and N. J. (1685), p. 34. 
 
20 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The lack of really good hay and pasture is shown by the high regard in 
 which the coarse reeds and sedges of the fresh and salt water marshes were 
 held. Says Temple, 13 the historian of Whately, Massachusetts: 
 
 “ It was considered scarcely desirable or safe to form a Plantation where there was 
 not plenty of ‘ fresh marsh ’—what we should call open swamp. And so, when the west 
 side people petitioned for a new town, the Hadley Committee, in their answer to the 
 General Court, gave as one of the strongest reasons against the separation, that the 
 tract west of the river ‘ does not afford boggy meadow or such like, that men can live 
 upon; but their subsistence must be from their Home lots and intervals.” 
 
 INTRODUCTION OF ENGLISH GRASSES. 
 
 As long as the livestock had to rely on native grasses they were in danger 
 of starvation. Drought, which was not infrequent, would so reduce the forage 
 as to destroy whole herds. Cattle were at times slaughtered to save them from 
 death by hunger. 14 It was not long, however, before the English grasses were 
 brought in. They spread rapidly and in a few generations were so common 
 as to be considered indigenous. Their introduction was probably as much the 
 result of accident as of design, by the importation of forage to feed the animals 
 on shipboard. As early as 1665 “ English grass,” a term which regularly in¬ 
 cluded bluegrass and white clover, was mentioned in an official report on 
 Rhode Island. 15 In 1663 Josselyn says of New England: “Our English 
 clover grass sowen thrives very well.” 16 Denton, 17 in 1670, speaks of Long 
 Island producing “ excellent English grass, the seed of which was brought 
 out of England, which they sometimes mow twice a year.” A few years later 
 Danckaerts 18 saw in the same locality fields covered with clover in blossom 
 “ which diffused a sweet odor in the air for a great distance.” In the Pennsyl¬ 
 vania and New Jersey settlements we find a number of references to English 
 grass, including specific references to clover, in the first years of the English 
 settlements there. It is evident that sometimes the seeding was intentional. 
 William Penn describes a successful experiment in sowing English grass seed 
 in 1685 and tells us also that Robert Turner, a wealthy merchant-planter, 
 sowed “ great and small clover.” 19 Budd 20 wrote that mutton throve well on 
 the natural grass, adding— 
 
 “ but if we sprinkle a little English Hay-Seed on the Land without Plowing, and then 
 feed Sheep on it, in a little time it will so encrease, that it will cover the Land with 
 English Grass, like unto our Pastures in England, provided the Land be good.” 
 
 That the seeding was occasionally accidental is shown by such a statement 
 as the following regarding East New Jersey: 21 
 
 “ the ground all over brings forth good English grass naturally after it is ploughed.” “ As 
 soon as any of the land here comes to be cultivated, it overruns with small Clover-grass, 
 by the pasturage and dunging of cattle, and so supplants the naturall grass and herbs, 
 notwithstanding of their quick and strong growth.” 
 
 13 Temple, Whately, 13. 
 
 14 Green, Hist. Address at Groton (1876), p. 10. 
 
 15 Rhode Island Colonial Records, II, 129. 
 
 16 In Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series, III, 336. 
 
 17 Brief Description of New York, 5. 
 
 18 Journal (1679), p. 131. 
 
 19 Further Account of Penn., in Myers’s Narratives, 264, 269. 
 
 20 Good Order Established in Penn, and N. J. (1685), p. 37. 
 
 21 Scot, in N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 291, 295. 
 
LIVESTOCK 
 
 21 
 
 The seed used, as one of the above quotations indicates, was unwinnowed 
 chaff gathered from the hay mows or around the hay stacks, consequently 
 there could be little care in the selection of hay plants, and the resulting pas¬ 
 turage contained an abundance of old-world weeds. But even so it was greatly 
 superior to the forage afforded by the native American grasses. 22 
 
 MANAGEMENT AND CARE OF LIVESTOCK. 
 
 One of the necessities of a system of mixed husbandry such as prevailed 
 in all the earliest settlements was the protection of growing crops from live¬ 
 stock. Inclosures or fences of some kind were obviously needed, but fencing, 
 was a labor-consuming process and in many of the settlements the constant 
 energies of all the labor force were necessary to clear the land, put in crops 
 and provide shelter. In the Middle Colonies, where settlements were gener¬ 
 ally made by individuals without, at first, any group cooperation, the problem 
 was one for each farmer to work out as best he could. But in New England 
 and in the towns established by New Englanders on Long Island, in West¬ 
 chester County, New York, and in northern New Jersey the method of com¬ 
 munity settlement made possible a system of common pasturage. Among the 
 Dutch of New Netherland common pasturage seems to have been a general 
 institution even before the English conquest, 23 and after that event it was 
 definitely recognized in the Duke of York laws. 24 Governor Nicolls said in an 
 official report (ca. 1669) : 25 “ . . . . The feed of Cattell is free in common- 
 age to all Towneships, The Lots of Meadow or Corne Ground are peculiar to 
 each Planter.” 
 
 The fullest development of the system of common fields and common 
 fences was of course found in New England. 26 The tillage and mowing land 
 of the community was laid out in common fields, which were surrounded by 
 common fences. The fence, of posts and rails with a ditch before it, was 
 constructed and kept in repair by the holders of allotments within the fields, 
 each man being responsible for a certain length of fence in proportion to 
 the extent of his allotment. It ought to be noted here that although tillage 
 was carried on in a common field it was not tillage in common. Every settler 
 cultivated his own allotment; he was, however, under restriction as to choice 
 of crops and date of harvest. 
 
 While the crops were on the ground, from early spring until after harvest, 
 the fields were closed to grazing and the livestock were pastured outside of the 
 village in care of the village shepherds, cowherds, swineherds, and goatherds. 
 The young stock, the sheep, and the swine were pastured in remote uncleared 
 or partially cleared tracts the “ town commons ” ; the working oxen, horses, 
 and milch cows on land nearer the village, so that they could be driven back 
 and forth daily. 
 
 22 In the preparation of this section the author has drawn freely from Carrier, Beginnings 
 
 of Agriculture in America, and also from Carrier and Bort, History of Kentucky 
 Blue grass and White Clover in the United States, in Journal of Am. Soc., Agronomy, 
 VIII (1916), pp. 256-266. 
 
 23 Elting, in J. H. U., Studies, IV, No. 1 (1886), pp. 24, 41. 
 
 24 Reprinted in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, I, 307 et seq. See especially 
 
 327-331. 
 
 25 In O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New York, I, 87. 
 
 26 See pp. 49 et seq. 
 
22 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The sheep were often pastured separately in care of a shepherd who re¬ 
 mained with them for the whole grazing season, folding them at night by the 
 use of movable pens. 27 Swine were the most troublesome of all livestock, as 
 the frequency of the legislative attempts to control them testifies. They were 
 pastured at a great distance from the growing crops ; in New Haven (1641) 23 
 it was ordered that all that have hogs should pasture them 5 miles from the 
 plantation, “ and haunt them forth abroad, nevertheless everyone is to endeavor 
 to secure their corn by sufficient fences.” All swine which roamed abroad not 
 in charge of a herdsman were to be ringed, and during the season when the 
 crops were on the ground were in addition to wear a wooden yoke to prevent 
 rooting. 29 The constant reiteration of such provisions and the assessment of 
 damages in town courts against the owners of unruly swine show such pre¬ 
 cautions to have been often disregarded. 
 
 In order to facilitate the work of the herdsmen, the common pastures were 
 often situated on an island or on a peninsula where the sea acted as a fence to 
 keep the stock from straying. The islands in Boston Harbor were utilized 
 as pastures; so also Staten Island and Coney Island near New York. 
 
 DUTIES OF THE COWHERD. 
 
 The duties of the cowherd, the picturesque official who went through the 
 village street every morning sounding his horn and gathering his charges and 
 returning with them in the evening, are set forth in many of the ancient 
 records. For example, the following is the agreement with a herdsman in 
 Ipswich, Massachusetts, 1661. 30 
 
 “ Haniel Bos worth is to keep the herd of cows on the north side of the river, from the 
 1st of May to the 20th of October. He is to go out with them half an hour after sun¬ 
 rise and to bring them home a little before sun-set, at 13 s. a week, ‘ a peck of corn a 
 head at their going out, one pound of butter or half peck of wheat in June, and the rest 
 of his pay at the end of his time, whereof half to be paid in wheat or malt; the pay to be 
 brought to his house within six days after demanded, or else to forfeit 6d. a head 
 more.’ ‘Agreed with Henry Osborn to join Bosworth to keep the cows on the same 
 terms. One of them to take the cows in Scott’s Lane and to blow a horn at the meeting¬ 
 house green in the morning.’ ” 
 
 OPENING THE MEADOWS—STINTED COMMON. 
 
 In the fall after harvest, on a day fixed by the town authorities, the barriers 
 were taken down and the village cattle were allowed to pasture on the stubble. 
 This yearly “ opening of the meadows ” was an event in the life of the vil¬ 
 lage. 31 Such pasturage was regarded as especially valuable in preparing the 
 cattle for the long winters and the rights of the “ proprietors ” to enter their 
 cattle were jealously guarded. The common was “ stinted,” that is, an order 
 was passed by the town authorities fixing the number of livestock of various 
 kinds which might be introduced, each owner’s allotment varying according 
 
 27 Temple and Sheldon, N orthheld, 281; Judd, Hadley, 102. 
 
 28 New Haven Colony Records, 52, 
 
 29 See Dedham Town Records, III, 6. 
 
 30 Felt, Ipswich, 44. 
 
 31 See the description in Sheldon’s Common Field of Deerfield. In Pocumtuck Valley 
 
 Memorial Association, Hist, and Proceedings, V, 250. 
 
LIVESTOCK 
 
 23 
 
 to the acreage of the field which he had tilled or according to the value of 
 the feed remaining on his land. Thus in New Haven it was ordered (1642), 
 that the Neck should be a stinted common for cattle and the settlers were 
 allowed to enter animals in proportion to their holdings in the field, according 
 to the following ratio: 12 acres to a horse. 6 acres to an ox, 3 acres for a 
 young steer not over 2 years old and 2 acres for a calf. 32 The method of 
 assigning rights in the common field at Deerfield (Mass.), is described as 
 follows: 33 
 
 “ The unit for a right was an ox, and other animals were graded by that standard. 
 The grading varied from season to season, according to the whim or judgment pre¬ 
 vailing at the meeting where values were fixed. 
 
 “ As a general rule a cow was considered equal to an ox and counted one right. Three 
 three-year-olds equaled two rights, two two-year-olds one right, and three calves or five 
 sheep one right. Horses appear to have been considered undesirable and their presence 
 was not encouraged. Sometimes they were let in on one right but oftener were charged 
 three and sometimes five rights. Some years they were ruled out entirely, and no horse 
 was admitted on a right that was bought.” 
 
 In Dorchester, Massachusetts, there were 120 “cow rights ” in a common 
 pasture of 480 acres; 5 goats, or 10 kids, or 2 yearlings, or 4 calves or 1 
 horse, or 1 ox were accounted equal to 1 cow. 34 
 
 BRANDS AND EARMARKS. 
 
 The ownership of animals in the common herds was established by a sys¬ 
 tem of brands or earmarks which were registered with the town authorities 
 in New England and with the county clerks in the Middle Colonies. In 1664 
 we find the general court of the Connecticut Colony passing the following 
 law: 35 
 
 “ For the preuenting of differences that may arise in the owneing of Cattle that be 
 lost or stree away, It is Ordered, that the owners of any Catle within these Plantations 
 shall earemarke or brand all their Cattle and swyne that are aboue halfe a yeare old 
 (except horsses) and that they cause their seuerall marks to be registered in the Towne 
 booke; and whatsoeuer cattle shall be found vnmarked after the first of May next 
 shall forfeit 5 s. a head, whereof 2 s. vid. to him that discouers yt, and the other to the 
 Country.” 
 
 THE CONTROL OF BREEDING. 
 
 When the stock ran in common herds any attempt on the part of an individ¬ 
 ual owner to improve his particular group of animals by selection of males 
 for breeding was of course impossible. For the control of breeding com¬ 
 munal action was necessary. It is a tribute to the intelligence and decision of 
 the New England colonists that in a period when so little attention was paid 
 anywhere to stock breeding they took measures to raise the standards of 
 their flocks and herds. The town bull is a well-known feature of early colo- 
 
 32 New Haven Colony Records, 82. 
 
 33 In Pocomtuck Valley Memorial Association, History and Proceedings, V, 249. 
 
 34 Dorchester Town Records, 23. 
 
 85 Conn. Col. Pub. Rec., I, 118 (1636-65). Reproductions of earmarks are given in the 
 Plymouth Town Records, I, 1, in Chester (Penn.) Court Records (1684), reprinted 
 in Smith’s Delaware County, Penn. 151, and for Cape May County, New Jersey, in 
 Penn. Magazine of History, XV, (1891-1892), 370. 
 
24 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 nial economy. Various townsmen were appointed to keep a bull and the 
 price of its service was fixed by law. 36 
 
 It is important to note that in some towns the selection of the bull calves 
 which were to be raised as town bulls was carefully attended to, evidently for 
 the purpose of securing the best possible breeding stock. As early as 1639 
 the Town of Hartford 37 ordered that a committee of two settlers 
 
 “ shall view such Bull Calfs as they shall' thinck ffitt to bee kept for bulls and shall 
 give notis to [the] Townsmen who shall Agree wth the ptyes as they shall see best: 
 
 to haue them kept for bulls.” 
 
 % 
 
 In the Windsor, Connecticut, town records 38 we read (1653) that two men 
 were directed “ to appoint what calves shall be reared for bulls . . . . ” A 
 committee to view bull calves was appointed in Guilford, Connecticut, in 
 i 649. 39 Care for breeding was not confined to cattle. In 1673 the general 
 court of the Connecticut Colony ordered that two or three men in each planta¬ 
 tion should keep rams and none should be permitted to run at large with the 
 ewes. 40 The breeding of horses early became an important branch of the 
 colonial livestock industry because of the lucrative trade in these animals with 
 the West Indies; hence it is not surprising to find legislative action tending 
 to improve the breed. In Massachusetts Bay Colony it was forbidden in 1668 
 to let any stallions over 2 years old under 14 hands high run at large in com¬ 
 mons and woods, 41 and in Connecticut it was required (1674) that all horses 
 over 2 years old under 13 hands high should be gelded. 42 
 
 THE NEAT CATTLE—THEIR VARIED ANCESTRY. 
 
 The colonial cattle had a varied ancestry. It seems certain that the first 
 cattle of the Massachusetts Bay Colony came mostly from Devonshire and 
 were the ancestors of the present Devons. 43 To this strain there was soon 
 added an important mixture by the importation of Danish cattle in 1633 to 
 Capt. John Mason’s plantation, on the Piscataqua River, New Hampshire. 
 They were large yellow animals brought over to be used principally as draft 
 animals in Mason’s lumbering operations. They increased rapidly and at 
 Mason’s death in 1635 amounted to perhaps 300 in all. Some of Mason’s 
 creditors seized the best of them and they were dispersed among the small 
 farmers along the river. A herd of 100 head were driven overland to Boston, 
 where they were sold in 1640. 44 The so-called “ native ” or “ red ” cattle of 
 New England included also admixture of Dutch stock, and of black cattle 
 from the Spanish West Indies. 45 The Dutch cattle brought to New Nether- 
 
 36 See Dorchester Records (1633), in 4th Report Boston Records, 33. 
 
 87 Conn. Hist. Soc. Collections, VI, 29. 
 
 38 Book I, 15, quoted in Stiles, Ancient Windsor, I, 175. 
 
 39 Steiner, Guilford, 242. 
 
 40 Public Records, II, 197. 
 
 41 Records, IV, pt. 2, 367. 
 
 42 Public Records, II, 244. (This act was repealed in 1726, Ibid., VII, 31.) 
 
 43 Thompson, MS. History of Stock Raising, ch. II. This conclusion is supported by 
 
 investigations of the ports from which the ships bringing cattle sailed. See also 
 Potter, Native Cattle of New Hampshire in N. H. State Agric. Soc. Transactions 
 (1854), 232. 
 
 44 See Dean, Capt. John Mason, 87; Potter, op. cit., 227-230; Belknap, New Hampshire, 
 
 III, 142. 
 
 45 Potter, Dative Cattle of New Hampshire in N. H. State Agric. Soc. Transactions 
 
 (1854), 232. Winthrop tells (1635) of the importation of 63 heifers from Holland. 
 New England, I, 191. 
 
LIVESTOCK 
 
 25 
 
 land were soon crossed with English stock brought from New England. They 
 seemed to be more hardy than the Holland cattle and consequently endured 
 better the scanty fodder and lack of shelter. 46 In Pennsylvania the cattle of 
 the English settlers were mostly purchased from the Swedes on the Delaware, 
 the descendants of a few animals which the latter had brought from Sweden 
 with intermixture of importations from New Netherland and New Eng¬ 
 land. 47 It appears, therefore, that the colonial cattle were derived from four 
 main stocks—English, Danish, Dutch and Swedish—which by the process 
 of intercolonial trade soon became indistinguishably blended. 
 
 CARE OF LIVESTOCK—SHELTER AND WINTER FEED 
 
 Livestock were given little winter shelter in any of the colonies. Such had 
 been the practice in England and there are many indications that the earliest 
 settlers did not realize how much more severe the winters were apt to be in 
 the new country; and, besides, there was again the scarcity of labor; it was 
 perhaps a choice between providing adequate shelter for themselves or for 
 their cattle. Winthrop records, December 26, 1630: “ Many of our cows 
 and goats were forced to be still abroad for want of houses.” 48 And Wood, 49 
 in 1634, wrote of New England: 
 
 “ There is no want of Winter fodder till December, at which time men beginne to house 
 their milch-cattle and Calves. Some, notwithstanding the cold of the Winter, have 
 their young Cattle without doores, giving them meate at morning and evening.” 
 
 For winter feed the scanty supply of hay was occasionally supplemented 
 by a little wheat straw or a few corn husks. Governor Winthrop 50 remarked 
 in his Description of Maize: 
 
 “ The Stalks of this Corn, cut up before too much dryed, and so laid up, are good 
 Winter-fodder for Cattle. But they usually leave them on the Ground for the Cattle 
 to feed on. The Husks about the Ear are good Fodder, given for change sometimes 
 after Hay.” 
 
 With such care the New England cattle early acquired through a vigorous 
 process of natural selection a reputation for tough vitality. In the Represen¬ 
 tation of New Netherland (1650), 51 the English cattle, i. e., those brought 
 from New England, are contrasted with the more pampered Dutch breed: 
 
 “The tame cattle are in size and other respects about the same as in the Netherlands, 
 but the English cattle and swine thrive and grow best, appearing to be better suited 
 to the country than those from Holland. They require, too, less trouble, expense and 
 attention; for it is not necessary in winter to look after such as are dry, or the swine, 
 except that in the time of a deep snow they should have some attention. Milch cows also 
 are much less trouble than they are in Holland, as most of the time, if any care be 
 requisite, it is only for the purpose of giving them occasionally a little hay.” 
 
 Van der Donck 52 says of the English cattle in the Dutch Colony: 
 
 “ They also have English cattle in the country, which are not imported by the Nether- 
 landers, but purchased from the English in New-England. Those cattle thrive as well 
 
 48 In Jameson’s Narratives, 296; Van der Donck, in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d 
 series, I, 165. 
 
 47 Kalm, Travels (1770 ed.), I, 141. 
 
 48 New England, I, 47. 
 
 40 New England’s Prospect (Prince ed.), 13. 
 
 50 Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, XII (1678), 1067. 
 
 51 In Jameson’s Narratives, 296. 
 
 52 In N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 165. 
 
26 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 as the Holland cattle, and do not require as much care and provender; and, as in England, 
 this breed will do well unsheltered whole winters. This breed of cattle do not grow 
 near as large as the Dutch cattle, do not give as much milk, and are much cheaper; 
 but they fat and tallow well.” 
 
 RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF VARIOUS KINDS OF STOCK. 
 
 Neat cattle, including working oxen, beef cattle and dairy cows taken to¬ 
 gether, seem to have been the most important kind of livestock generally 
 throughout the colonies, although there developed at a surprisingly early date 
 certain regions where sheep were predominant. The tax lists of io Long 
 Island towns in 1675 showed 4,293 neat cattle, 1,564 sheep, 1,344 swine and 
 
 Table 2. —Neat cattle, excluding oxen ( bulls / cows, heifers, and steers, over 1 year old). 
 
 [Sources: O’Callaghan, Doc. Hist. N. Y., II, 439 et seq.; IV, 139 et seq.; Boston Tax Lists in 
 
 First Report Boston Records (1876), 128 et seq.] 
 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 Dutch 
 
 towns 
 
 (1675). 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 English 
 
 towns 
 
 (1675). 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Muddy 
 
 River 
 
 (1687). 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Romney 
 
 Marsh 
 
 (1687). 
 
 Essex 
 
 County 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories 
 
 (1635- 
 
 1664). 
 
 Connect¬ 
 
 icut 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories 
 
 (1639— 
 
 1648). 
 
 New 
 
 Haven 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Total farms listed. 
 
 153 
 
 271 
 
 31 
 
 34 
 
 50 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 570 
 
 Number of farms re- 
 
 
 
 
 
 46 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 porting cattle . 
 
 148 
 
 242 
 
 31 
 
 32 
 
 15 
 
 530 
 
 P. ct. of all farms re- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 porting cattle . 
 
 97 
 
 89 
 
 IOO 
 
 94 
 
 92 
 
 IOO 
 
 IOO 
 
 93 
 
 Total neat cattle reported 
 
 1,206 
 
 2,366 
 
 195 
 
 344 
 
 287 
 
 75 
 
 150 
 
 4,623 
 
 Average No. of cattle 
 
 
 
 
 10.8 
 
 6.2 
 
 
 
 8.7 
 
 per farm .. 
 
 8.1 
 
 9-8 
 
 6-3 
 
 5-0 
 
 9-3 
 
 No. of farms reporting: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 1 to 5 cattle. 
 
 58 
 
 77 
 
 14 
 
 7 
 
 19 
 
 9 
 
 192 
 
 6 to 10 cattle. 
 
 49 
 
 95 
 
 13 
 
 12 
 
 l6 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 193 
 
 11 to 15 cattle. 
 
 27 
 
 47 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 II 
 
 0 
 
 4 
 
 99 
 
 16 to 20 cattle. 
 
 8 
 
 22 
 
 0 
 
 4 
 
 0 
 
 O' 
 
 1 
 
 35 
 
 21 to 25 cattle. 
 
 5 
 
 9 
 
 0 
 
 2 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 17 
 
 Over 25 cattle. 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 7 
 
 Largest herd reported.. 
 
 36 
 
 37 
 
 13 
 
 40 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 
 22 
 
 40 
 
 a Bulls were included with oxen in the Long Island inventories. 
 
 941 horses. 63 In Muddy River (now Brookline), which was in 1678 a farm¬ 
 ing section of Boston, the assessors reported 215 neat cattle, 214 sheep, 56 
 horses and 29 swine. However, in another section of the same town, includ¬ 
 ing Romney Marsh (now Chelsea) and the islands of Boston Harbor, the 
 sheep far outnumbered all other livestock, amounting to 1,544 as compared 
 to 416 neat cattle, 69 horses, and 95 swine. 54 The general preponderance of 
 neat cattle is attested also by the examination of the inventories of estates 
 which were filed with the wills of early settlers. In Essex County, Massachu¬ 
 setts, 65 50 such inventories show 381 neat cattle, 102 sheep, 11 horses, and 
 160 swine. The inventories of 15 Connecticut settlers (1639-1648) 56 show 
 108 neat cattle, 88 swine, 16 horses, and only 4 sheep. In 1663 there were on 
 
 63 O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New York, II, 439 et seq., and IV, 139 et seq. 
 
 64 Boston tax lists, in First Report Boston Records (1876), 128 et seq. 
 
 55 Essex County Quarterly Courts, Records and Files, I (1636-1656), and Probate 
 
 Records, County of Essex, I (1635-1664). 
 
 56 In Conn. Col. Public Records, I, 442 et seq. 
 
LIVESTOCK 
 
 27 
 
 no farms in the settlements originally made by the Swedes on the Delaware, 
 then under Dutch rule, 200 cows and oxen, 20 horses, 80 sheep, and several 
 thousand swine. 57 While the tax lists and inventories do not furnish suffi¬ 
 cient data for trustworthy generalizations covering all the northern colonies, 
 nevertheless the pictures which they present of conditions in a few typical 
 areas are deserving of close analysis. 
 
 The general accounts of agriculture in the early settlements uniformly men¬ 
 tioned neat cattle most prominently among livestock. The importance of 
 cattle in the life of the early settlers is emphasized occasionally in the reasons 
 given for the formation of new settlements. We are told that the founding of 
 Hartford, Connecticut, was caused by the desire of the farmers of eastern 
 Massachusetts for more and better land for pasturing their cattle. 58 In Penn¬ 
 sylvania a similar cause for dispersion was present. Thomas wrote in 1698 59 
 that the people were “ obliged to go farther up into the Countrey, because there 
 is the chiefest and best place for their Stocks.” 
 
 DAIRYING AND BEEF PRODUCTION. 
 
 Dairying and raising of beef cattle for market were generally not differ¬ 
 entiated. The market for milk was limited by the difficulties of transporta¬ 
 tion, and even in the largest towns, such as Boston, cows were kept. Butter 
 and cheese were made on every farm, but were not of a high quality. Such 
 processes demanded more care and attention than the ordinary farmer could 
 then afford. Hence the city people throughout the seventeenth century and 
 until the end of the eighteenth century imported at least part of their butter and 
 cheese from England and Ireland. 60 The raising of beef cattle and other 
 livestock for sale began very early. Farmers in the surrounding towns drove 
 their animals to the slaughter-houses in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia 
 and salted meat was shipped to the West India Islands. In that region of 
 specialized farming there was a constant demand for salted beef and pork 
 and for horses as well. The New England settlements until about 1650 were 
 importers of livestock, not only from Europe but also from the Southern 
 Colonies, chiefly from Virginia. But after the middle of the seventeenth cen¬ 
 tury the New England settlements began to have a surplus for export, not 
 only of beef and pork, but also horses and sheep. 61 The result of opening the 
 market was the beginning of specialization in cattle-raising in at least one 
 region in New England (Hampshire County, Massachusetts, in the Connecti¬ 
 cut Valley). Grass-fed cattle were driven to Boston from this section soon 
 after its settlement. 62 
 
 “John Pynchon sent cattle in the fall, from Springfield to Boston, before 1655; and 
 he sent winter-fattened cattle in the spring before 1670, and many years after. It is not 
 known when the farmers of Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield began to stall-feed 
 oxen for market. It is manifest from the records of Hatfield, that a number of cattle 
 were fattened there in the winter of 1696-7, and that this was not a new business.” 
 
 57 Johnson, Swedish Settlements on the Delaware, II, 667. 
 
 58 Love, Colonial Hartford, 116. 
 
 59 Historical Account, in Myers’s Narratives, 325. 
 
 60 Judd, Hadley, 376. 
 
 61 The trade in livestock is further discussed on p. 44. 
 
 62 Judd, Hadley, 368. 
 
28 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 SHEEP. 
 
 The sheep of the colonies in the seventeenth century were derived from 
 England and from Holland. Sheep were more difficult to establish in the 
 earliest settlements than the other kinds of livestock. They were particularly 
 liable to attack by wolves, and severe losses were sustained by exposure to 
 cold winters without shelter. But wool must be had, and the colonists, par¬ 
 ticularly in New England, set in motion the forces of legislation to encourage 
 its production. In the Massachusetts Bay Colony the towns were urged in 
 1645 to take steps to encourage raising of more sheep; in 1648 sheep were 
 given especial privileges in the common pastures. In 1654 the domestic supply 
 of wool was still deficient and the exportation of sheep was restricted and the 
 
 Table 3. —Sheep over one year old. 
 
 [Sources: O’Callaghan, Doc. Hist. N. Y., II, 439 et seq.; IV, 139 et seq.; Boston Tax Lists in 
 
 First Report Boston Records (1876). 128 et seq.] 
 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 Dutch 
 
 towns. 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 English 
 
 towns. 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Muddy 
 
 River. 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Romney 
 
 Marsh. 
 
 Essex 
 
 County 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 Connect¬ 
 
 icut 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 New 
 
 Haven 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Total farms listed. 
 
 153 
 
 271 
 
 31 
 
 34 
 
 50 
 
 15 
 
 l6 
 
 570 
 
 Number of farms re- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 porting sheep . 
 
 32 
 
 Il6 
 
 13 
 
 30 
 
 15 
 
 I 
 
 6 
 
 213 
 
 Per cent of all farms re- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 porting sheep . 
 
 21 
 
 43 
 
 42 
 
 88 
 
 30 
 
 6.6 
 
 37 
 
 36 
 
 Total sheep reported... 
 
 191 
 
 L473 
 
 214 
 
 L544 
 
 102 
 
 4 
 
 54 
 
 3,582 
 
 Average sheep per farm 
 
 5-9 
 
 12.7 
 
 16.5 
 
 5L5 
 
 6.8 
 
 4.0 
 
 9.0 
 
 16.8 
 
 Number of farms re¬ 
 porting: 
 
 
 68 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 to 10 sheep. 
 
 27 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 13 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 122 
 
 11 to 20 sheep. 
 
 5 
 
 29 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 55 
 
 21 to 40 sheep. 
 
 0 
 
 16 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 28 
 
 41 to 60 sheep. 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 Over 60 sheep. 
 
 0 
 
 2 
 
 0 
 
 5 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 7 
 
 Largest flock reported. 
 
 16 
 
 81 
 
 40 
 
 370 
 
 16 
 
 4 
 
 24 
 
 370 
 
 slaughter of rams and wether lambs under 2 years old was prohibited. 63 In 
 the Connecticut Colony sheep were exempted from taxation, 1666, and in 
 1670 all males over 14 were required to work one day a year in clearing under¬ 
 brush for sheep pasture. 64 Rhode Island seems not to have felt the need of 
 encouraging the sheep-growing industry, and in fact this colony had by 1700 
 become the chief seat of sheep raising in New England. In 1665 an official 
 Commission sent from England reported of Rhode Island: “ In this province 
 is the best English grass and the most sheep,” 65 and the same testimony was 
 given at an official inquiry in London in 1676. 66 Rhode Island was the source 
 whence some of the sheep of the Middle Colonies were derived. 67 
 
 63 Mass. Bay Colony Records, II, 105, 251; III, 355, 424. 
 
 64 Conn. Col. Public Records, II, 34, 139. 
 
 65 Hutchinson Papers, II, 416. 
 
 66 See Weeden, Early Rhode Island, 114. 
 
 67 Budd, Good Order Established in Penn, and N. J. (1685), p. 40. 
 
LIVESTOCK 
 
 29 
 
 In the Middle Colonies sheep were not as numerous as in New England. 
 Van der Donck wrote in 1656: 68 
 
 “ Sheep are also kept in New Netherland, but not as many as in New-England, where 
 the weaving business is driven, and where much attention is paid to sheep, to which our 
 Netherlanders pay little attention. The sheep thrive well, and become fat enough. I 
 have seen mutton so exceedingly fat there, that it was too luscious and offensive. The 
 sheep breed well, and are healthy. There is also good feeding in summer, and good 
 hay for the winter. But the flocks require to be guarded and tended on account of the 
 wolves, for which purpose men cannot be spared; there is also a more important hinder- 
 ance to the keeping of sheep, which are principally kept for their wool. New-Nether- 
 lands throughout is a woody country, being almost every where beset with trees, stumps 
 and brushwood, wherein the sheep pasture, and by which they lose most of their wool, 
 which by appearance does not seem to be out, but when sheared turns out light in the 
 fleeces.” 
 
 Of sheep in early Pennsylvania and New Jersey we have little information, 
 save for the testimony of Budd (1685) and Thomas (1698), who agree that 
 they were present in considerable numbers, were free from many of the 
 diseases to which they were subject in England and were remarkably prolific. 69 
 
 DRAFT ANIMALS—HORSES AND OXEN. 
 
 The horses of New England were originally imported from England, but 
 were soon supplemented by 27 Flanders mares and 3 stallions brought from 
 Holland in 1635. 70 In New Netherland, according to Van der Donck, 71 there 
 were both Dutch and English horses. The latter were the lighter and used 
 for riding rather than as draft animals. He continues : 
 
 “ There are Curacoan and Arabian horses imported into the country, but those breeds 
 are not very acceptable, because they do not endure the cold weather of the climate well, 
 and sometimes die in winter. The whole of this breed require great care and attention 
 in the winter. Fine large horses are bred in the country, which live long and are 
 seldom diseased.” 
 
 The foundation of a good breed of horses in Pennsylvania was laid by 
 William Penn, who brought over 3 brood mares at his first coming and in 
 1699 imported “ the magnificent colt, Tamerlane, of the best strain in Eng¬ 
 land. 72 Horses were used throughout the earliest settlements for riding and 
 to a less extent as draft animals, either alone or with oxen. But oxen were 
 generally preferred for ploughing and other farm work. A comparison of the 
 numbers of oxen and horses inventoried in the estates of Essex County set¬ 
 tlers shows a predominance of the former in the ratio of 6 to 1 ; and oxen 
 are clearly predominant in 1675 in the English towns on Long Island. In the 
 Dutch towns horses were the more numerous, but oxen were also used. Van 
 Tienhoven 73 advised new settlers in New Netherland (1650) : 
 
 “ Yoke oxen for the plough, inasmuch as in new lands full of roots, oxen go forward 
 steadily under the plough, and horses stand still, or with a start break the harness 
 in pieces.” 
 
 68 In N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 166. 
 
 69 Budd, Good Order Established in Penn, and N. 39; Thomas, in Myers’s Narra¬ 
 
 tives, 324. 
 
 70 Winthrop, New England, I, 191. 
 
 71 In N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 165. 
 
 72 Eggleston, Husbandry in Colony Times, in Century Magazine, XXVII, 445. 
 
 73 In O’Callaghan Documentary History of N. Y. f IV, 32. 
 
30 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 They evidently took the advice, for in 1656 Van der Donck 74 reported: 
 “ Oxen do good service there, and are not only used by the English, but by 
 
 Table 4. —Horses over one year old. 
 
 [Sources: O’Callaghan, Doc. Hist. N. Y., II, 439 et seq.; IV, 139 et seq.; Boston Tax Lists in 
 
 First Report Boston Records (1876), 128 et seq.] 
 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 Dutch 
 
 towns. 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 English 
 
 towns. 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Muddy 
 
 River. 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Romney 
 
 Marsh. 
 
 Essex 
 
 County 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 Connect¬ 
 
 icut 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 New 
 
 Haven 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Total number of farms 
 listed . 
 
 153 
 
 271 
 
 31 
 
 34 
 
 50 
 
 15 
 
 l 6 
 
 570 
 
 No. of farms reporting 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 horses . 
 
 128 
 
 230 
 
 30 
 
 27 
 
 6 
 
 II 
 
 440 
 
 Per cent of all farms 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 reporting horses .... 
 
 84 
 
 85 
 
 97 
 
 80 
 
 12 
 
 53 
 
 69 
 
 77 
 
 Total horses reported. 
 
 379 
 
 562 
 
 56 
 
 69 
 
 11 
 
 16 
 
 39 
 
 1,132 
 
 Average horses per farm 
 
 3-0 
 
 2.4 
 
 1.9 
 
 2.5 
 
 1.8 
 
 2.0 
 
 3-5 
 
 2.5 
 
 Number of farms re¬ 
 porting— 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 horse . 
 
 19 
 
 102 
 
 13 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 148 
 
 2 horses . 
 
 42 
 
 45 
 
 9 
 
 15 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 118 
 
 3 horses . 
 
 25 
 
 32 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 0 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 72 
 
 4 horses . 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 49 
 
 5 horses . 
 
 12 
 
 10 
 
 0 
 
 2 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 25 
 
 6 horses . 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 9 
 
 More than 6 horses 
 
 4 
 
 14 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 20 
 
 Largest no. reported... 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 Table 5. — Oxen, four years old and over. 
 
 [Sources: O’Callaghan, Doc. Hist. N. Y., II, 439 et seq.; IV, 139 et seq.; Boston Tax Lists in 
 
 First Report Boston Records (1876), 128 et seq.] 
 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 Dutch 
 
 towns. 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 English 
 
 towns. 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Muddy 
 
 River. 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Romney 
 
 Marsh. 
 
 Essex 
 
 County 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 Con¬ 
 
 necticut 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 New 
 
 Haven 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Total farms listed. 
 
 153 
 
 271 
 
 31 
 
 34 
 
 50 
 
 15 
 
 l6 
 
 570 
 
 No. of farms reporting 
 
 36 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 oxen . 
 
 193 
 
 9 
 
 27 
 
 19 
 
 7 
 
 II 
 
 302 
 
 Per cent of all farms re- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 porting oxen . 
 
 24 
 
 72 
 
 29 
 
 79 
 
 38 
 
 47 
 
 69 
 
 53 
 
 Total oxen reported... 
 
 8l 
 
 640 
 
 20 
 
 72 
 
 69 
 
 20 
 
 26 
 
 928 
 
 Average oxen per farm. 
 
 2.2 
 
 3-1 
 
 2.2 
 
 2.7 
 
 3-6 
 
 2.9 
 
 2.4 
 
 3-0 
 
 Number of farms re¬ 
 porting— 
 
 
 
 
 1 ox . 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 I 
 
 13 
 
 2 oxen . 
 
 21 
 
 99 
 
 8 
 
 22 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 8 
 
 169 
 
 3 oxen . 
 
 5 
 
 8 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 4 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 18 
 
 4 oxen . 
 
 3 
 
 47 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 58 
 
 S oxen . 
 
 0 
 
 8 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 8 
 
 6 oxen . 
 
 I 
 
 14 
 
 0 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 22 
 
 Over 6 oxen . 
 
 0 
 
 12 
 
 0 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 14 
 
 Largest no. reported... 
 
 6 
 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 12 
 
 some of the Netherlander also, to the wagon and plough.” In New Jersey 
 oxen were used for drawing carts and for breaking up new land, but for sub- 
 
 74 In N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 166. 
 
LIVESTOCK 
 
 31 
 
 sequent ploughing horses were regarded as strong enough. 75 In Pennsylvania, 
 William Penn 76 reported (1683), “that people Plow mostly with Oxen.” 
 
 Horses shared the general neglect which was the portion of all livestock. 
 Perhaps they fared even more hardly than cattle and sheep, because they had 
 no food value. In the Middle Colonies, as well as in New England, horses 
 were allowed to run wild on the commons. In 1671 the city records of New 
 York contained numerous complaints of unmarked horses and cattle running 
 wild in the commons and woodlands of Manhattan. 77 Josselyn 78 wrote of 
 New England: 
 
 “ Horses there are numerous, and here and there a good one, they let them run all 
 the year abroad, and in the winter seldom provide any fother for them, (except it be 
 Magistrates, great Masters and Troopers Horses) which brings them very low in flesh 
 till the spring, and so crest fallen, that their crests never rise again.” 
 
 Of the Pennsylvania horses Budd 79 wrote: 
 
 “ Our Horses are good serviceable Horses, fit both for Draught and Saddle, the 
 Planters will ride them fifty Miles a day, without Shoes, and some of them are indif¬ 
 ferent good shapes; of which many Ships are freighted yearly from New-England 
 with Horses to Barbadoes, Nevis, and other places; and some Ships have also been 
 freighted out of Pennsylvania and New-Jersey with Horses to Barbadoes; but if we 
 had some choice Horses from England, and did get some of the best of our Mares, and 
 keep them well in the Winter, and in Pastures inclosed in the Summer, to prevent there 
 going amongst other Horses, we might then have a choice breed of Horses, which 
 would tend much to the advantage of the Inhabitants.” 
 
 Horse-raising for the West India market was early developed in New 
 England, where the export of horses began before 1650. The Middle Colo¬ 
 nies were also exporting horses in the second half of the seventeenth century. 
 
 SWINE. 
 
 Swine seem to have adapted themselves to their new environment with less 
 difficulty than any other domestic animal. The English swine imported into 
 New England had arched backs, were excellent runners, and gave a good 
 account of themselves in their encounters with bears, wolves, and rattlesnakes. 
 In the settlements near the coast they fed on clams and other shellfish, and in 
 the woods they found an abundant supply of acorns and other nuts. This fare 
 was supplemented in some instances with Indian corn. Judd 80 reports that 
 in the Connecticut Valley, where pork-packing for the West India market de¬ 
 veloped about 1660, the swine were fattened with Indian corn before slaugh¬ 
 tering. Van der Donck 81 says of the swine of New Netherland: 
 
 “ Hogs are numerous and plenty. Many are bred and kept by the settlers in the 
 neighbourhood of the woods and lowlands. Some of the citizens prefer the English 
 breed of hogs, because they are hardy, and subsist better in winter without shelter; but 
 the Holland hogs grow much larger and heavier, and have thicker pork. In some years 
 acorns are so abundant in the woods, that the hogs become fine and fat on the same, 
 their pork frequently being a hand-breadth in thickness. When it is not an acorn year, 
 
 75 Scot, in N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 298, 314. 
 
 76 In Myers’s Narratives, 22Q. See also Thomas, ibid., 319. 
 
 77 De Voe, Market Book, 43. 
 
 78 Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series, III, 338. 
 
 79 Good Order Established in Penn, and N. J. (1685), p. 37. 
 
 80 Hadley (Mass.), 370. 
 
 81 N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, I, 166. 
 
32 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 or where persons have not an opportunity to feed their swine on acorns, in those cases 
 they fat their hogs on maize, or Turkey wheat, which, according to the accepted opinions, 
 produces the best pork, being better than the Westphalia pork. The heavy pork is fre¬ 
 quently six or seven fingers in thickness, and will crack when cut. The persons who desire 
 to raise many hogs, take care to have sucking pigs in April. When the grass is fine, the 
 sows and pigs are driven woodwards to help themselves. At a year old the young sows 
 have pigs. Thus hogs are multiplied, and are plenty in New-Netherland.” 
 
 Table 6. — Swine, over one year old. 
 
 [Sources: O’Callaglian, Doc. Hist. N. Y., II, 439 et seq.; IV, 139 et seq.; Boston Tax Lists in 
 
 First Report Boston Records (1876), 128 et seq.] 
 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 Dutch 
 
 towns. 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 English 
 
 towns. 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Muddy 
 
 River. 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Romney 
 
 Marsh. 
 
 Essex 
 
 County 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 Con¬ 
 
 necticut 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 New 
 
 Haven 
 
 inven¬ 
 
 tories. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Total farms listed. 
 
 153 
 
 271 
 
 31 
 
 34 
 
 50 
 
 15 
 
 l6 
 
 570 
 
 No. of farms reporting 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 360 
 
 swine . 
 
 77 
 
 174 
 
 13 
 
 29 
 
 40 
 
 14 
 
 13 
 
 Per cent of all farms re- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 porting swine . 
 
 50 
 
 64 
 
 42 
 
 85 
 
 80 
 
 93 
 
 8l 
 
 63 
 
 Total swine reported... 
 
 185 
 
 1,159 
 
 29 
 
 95 
 
 160 
 
 88 
 
 8l 
 
 L 797 
 
 Average No. per farm. 
 
 2.4 
 
 6.7 
 
 2.2 
 
 3-3 
 
 4.0 
 
 6-3 
 
 6.2 
 
 47 
 
 No. of farms reporting— 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 269 
 
 1 to 5 swine. 
 
 72 
 
 108 
 
 13 
 
 2 7 
 
 33 
 
 7 
 
 9 
 
 6 to 10 swine. 
 
 5 
 
 42 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 78 
 
 11 to 15 swine. 
 
 0 
 
 10 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 14 
 
 16 to 20 swine. 
 
 0 
 
 12 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 14 
 
 Over 20 swine. 
 
 0 
 
 2 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 Largest No. reported... 
 
 9 
 
 30 
 
 D 
 
 20 
 
 18 
 
 15 
 
 28 
 
 30 
 
 OTHER LIVESTOCK. 
 
 Goats were a part of the initial equipment of early settlements in New 
 England and in New Netherland. They cost less in Europe, were hardier 
 than cows or sheep, and were easier to transport. The milk and meat which 
 they provided was a welcome addition to the colonists’ scanty food supplies. 
 Johnson 82 remarked in 1650 that at Lynn, Massachusetts: “ Goates which 
 were in great esteeme at their first coming, are now almost quite banished. 
 . . . .” The examination of inventories of estates shows that goats had be¬ 
 come negligible by the end of the seventeenth century. Poultry, including 
 fowls, geese, ducks, and turkeys, were brought from England with the first 
 settlers. Bees seem to have been more common in the Middle Colonies than in 
 New England. In New York, says Denton, 83 “you shall scarce see a house, 
 but the South side is begirt with Hives of Bees, which increase after an 
 incredible manner.” Near Philadelphia, says Thomas: 84 
 
 “ Bees thrive and multiply exceedingly, .... the Sweeds often get great store of 
 them in the woods where they are free for any Body. Honey (and choice too) is sold 
 in the Capital City for Five Pence per Pound. Wax is also plentiful, cheap, and a 
 considerable Commerce.” 
 
 82 Wonder Working Providence, 73. 
 
 83 Brief Description of New York (1670), p. 21. 
 
 84 Myers’s Narratives, 324. 
 
Chapter III.—Farm Labor, Equipment, and Land. 
 
 LABOR SCARCE AND WAGES HIGH. 
 
 The scarcity of labor and the resulting high rate of wages are conditions 
 commonly found in new countries, resulting inevitably from the cheapness 
 of land. Thomas 1 wrote from Pennsylvania in 1698: 
 
 “ The chief reason why Wages of Servants of all sorts is much higher here than 
 there, arises from the great Fertility and Produce of the Place; besides, if these large 
 Stipends were refused them, they would quickly set up for themselves, for they can have 
 Provision very cheap, and Land for a very small matter, or next to nothing in com¬ 
 parison of the Purchace of Lands in England; . . . 
 
 As early as 1633 Winthrop 2 had complained of high wages in the Massa¬ 
 chusetts Bay Colony. He says: “ The scarcity of workmen had caused them to 
 
 raise their wages to an excessive rate.” In the years from 1630 to 
 
 the middle of the century we find the colony and town authorities recognizing 
 the condition and attempting to meet it by fixing maximum wage rates. 3 
 
 Unsuccessful attempts were made to use the native Indians as farm labor¬ 
 ers. Pastorius 4 wrote: 
 
 “ If one of these savages allows himself to be persuaded by a Christian to work, he 
 does it with complaining, shame, and fear, as an unaccustomed act; he looks about him 
 all the while on all sides, lest any of his people may find him working, just as if work 
 were a disgrace, and idleness were an especial inborn privilege of the nobility, which 
 should not be soiled by the sweat of toil.” 
 
 \ 
 
 The use of negro slaves in tobacco plantations had already begun in Vir¬ 
 ginia and Maryland before 1700, and slaves were used in New England and 
 the Middle Colonies, usually for domestic service. Occasionally farm labor 
 was performed by negro slaves even in the North. In East New Jersey 
 (1685), Colonel Morris employed 60 or 70 negroes on his manor; another 
 planter had 20 slaves, and a third, 7 or 8. 5 
 
 Indentured servants who were to play an important part in the develop¬ 
 ment of the Middle Colonies in the eighteenth century had not yet appeared in 
 large numbers. Their presence in New England is evident from occasional 
 mention in town records. They were employed more usually as artisans’ 
 helpers than as farm laborers. In the larger-scale farming of New Jersey 
 and Pennsylvania, indentured servants were more common. As soon as 
 their time was up they took up lands for themselves and so formed a tempor¬ 
 ary and constantly fluctuating labor-supply. 
 
 1 Historical Account, in Myers’s Narratives, 328. 
 
 - New England, I, 138. 
 
 3 New Haven Colony Records, 36; Connecticut Colony Public Records, I, 65; Burt, First 
 
 Century of Springfield, I, 168; Massachusetts Bay Colonial Records, I, 109; Plymouth 
 
 Colony Records, I, 128. 
 
 4 In Myers’s Narratives, 386. See also Report of a French Protestant Refugee (1687), 
 
 p. 20. 
 
 5 Scot, in N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 271, 275. 
 
 4 
 
 33 
 
34 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The chief reliance for farm labor, therefore, in the earliest settlements was 
 in the farm family itself, including not only the adult males, but women and 
 children as well. As Johnson wrote, “ every one that can lift a hawe [hoe] 
 standing stoutly to their labours.” Labor was economized as much as pos¬ 
 sible. We have seen that the planting of corn among standing trunks of dead 
 trees soon replaced the more thorough methods of clearing. The institutions 
 of common fields and of town herdsmen were developed to save labor in 
 farming. 
 
 GROUP COOPERATION. 
 
 Tasks of unusual difficulty or urgency were accomplished by group coop¬ 
 eration. In New England, where a communal spirit was strongly developed, 
 such cooperation was often compulsory. For example, in Northampton, 
 (Mass.), it was enacted (1718) 6 
 
 “that Every man from sixteen years old to Sixty; Work one or Two Days (In Each 
 year as the Selectt men for the time being shall Directt) att clearing the commons 
 for Sheep; the men to work in Small companys, att Such Time and In such Place, and 
 under the Inspection of such men as the Selectt men shall a Point, None To fail of any 
 of the above Injuncttions under the Penalty of flue Shillings forefitture.” 
 
 Artisans were impressed to aid the farmers in harvest time. In the Massa¬ 
 chusetts Bay Colony in 1646 the following law was passed: 7 
 
 “ Because the harvest of hay, corn, flax, and hemp comes usually so near together 
 that much loss can hardly be avoided, it is ordered and decreed by this court, that the 
 constable of every town, upon request made to him, shall require artificers or handi¬ 
 craftsmen, meet to labor, to work by the day for their neighbor’s needing him, in mowing, 
 reaping, and inning thereof, and that those whom they help shall duly pay them for their 
 work, and if any person so required shall refuse, or the constable neglect his office 
 herein, they shall each of them pay to the use of the poor of the town double so much 
 as such a day’s work comes unto; provided no artificer, etc., shall be compelled to work 
 for others while he is necessarily attending on like business of his own.” 
 
 Voluntary cooperation of groups of settlers in heavy tasks, as, for instance, 
 in log-rolling bees, corn-huskings, etc., soon took the place of compulsory 
 cooperation, and in the eighteenth century became a significant feature of 
 colonial agriculture in the North. 
 
 FARM EQUIPMENT,—TOOLS AND IMPLEMENTS. 
 
 The lack of capital, a characteristic condition in all new settlements, we 
 have already seen illustrated in the scarcity of livestock and food supplies. 
 It is no less strikingly shown in the poverty of farm tools and implements. 
 A list of the tools considered necessary for a settler's family of six persons 
 was given by Josselyn 8 in the account of his first voyage to New England, 
 1638: 
 
 “ Five broad howes, five narrow howes, five felling axes, two steel hand-sawes, two 
 hand-sawes, one whip saw, set and filed with box, a file and wrest, two hammers, three 
 shovels, two spades, two augars, two broad axes, six chissels, three gimblets, two 
 hatchets, two froues to cleave pail, two hand-bills, nails of all sorts, two pick-axes, 
 three locks and three pair of fetters, two currie combs, a brand to brand beasts with, 
 
 6 Trumbull, Northampton , I, 560. See also Connecticut Colony Public Records, II, 139. 
 
 7 Records, II, 180. (Spelling modernized.) 
 
 8 Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series, III, 224. 
 
FARM LABOR, EQUIPMENT, AND LAND 
 
 35 
 
 a chain and lock for a boat, a coulter weighing io pound, a hand-vise, a pitchfork, one 
 hundred weight of spikes, nails and pins, 120 to the hundred, a share.” 
 
 This is of course an ideal list and the actual outfit of most settlers was 
 probably far more inadequate. In the inventories of Essex County estates 
 (1635-1664), 9 the following agricultural tools were mentioned: 
 
 “ Bills, broad hoe, carts, colter, dung fork, fans, flail, fork tines, forks, grubaxe, hand¬ 
 bills, harrow tines, harrows, hay knife, hoes, reaping hooks, mattocks, pickaxes, pitch- 
 forks, ploughs and ploughirons, rakes, scythes, shovels, sickles, sleds, spades, wheel 
 barrows, wheels.” 
 
 Hoes, spades, and shovels, scythes and reaping hooks, carts, harrows, and 
 ploughs are most frequently mentioned. A few of the more complete inven¬ 
 tories of tools are reprinted below: 10 
 
 Estate J. Fairfield, Wentrant, 1646 (221 acres of land.) : Axes, saws, shovels, harrow 
 tines, an iron spade, 3 sickles, wheelbarrow, garden rake, pitchfork. 
 
 Estate E. Lewis, Lynn, 1650 (Land not given,) : 2 little harrows, 1 plow with coulter 
 and share, pr. wheels, cart, wain, old plow, yokes, 2 scythes, 4 hooks, a fan, 
 axes, churn. 
 
 Estate John Osgood, Andover, 1650 (Land not given.) : 3 hoes, 2 carts and wheels, 
 
 ploughs and iron, a harrow, spade, crow, 3 scythes, 1 mattock, pitchforks. 
 
 Estate W. Stevens, Newbury, 1653 (51 acres.) : Cart and wheels, plough and plough 
 irons, scythe, axes, spade, shovel, sled, and wheelbarrow. 
 
 Estate G. Burrill, Lynn, 1654 (Land not given.) : Spades and hoes, plough, cart and 
 wheels, dungcart, pair of harrows. 
 
 Estate N. Merrill, Newbury, 1654 ( I 3 acres) : Cart, wheels, sled, harrow, spades, mat¬ 
 tock, hoes, shovel, fan. 
 
 An unusually prosperous farmer at Hartford, Connecticut, left the follow¬ 
 ing tools at his death in 1640: 1 wain, 1 plow, 2 plow irons, 1 gang of harrow 
 tines, scythes, 4 hoes, 2 mattocks, cheese press, fan, axes, wedges. 11 
 
 PLOWS. 
 
 Plows were scarce in the early settlements in New England. The Pilgrims 
 had none for twelve years after their first landing, using only hoes and 
 mattocks for breaking up the soil 12 and in 1636 there were but 30 plows 
 in the whole Massachusetts Bay Colony. 13 In 1642 hoes were still used in the 
 absence of plows in Rhode Island. 14 The scarcity of plows was alleviated 
 by cooperative action. The owner of a plow went about doing plowing for 
 his neighbors. “ Ploughing was a distinct employment,” says Felt, 15 “ and 
 particular men made it their chief business in its season.” Various towns 
 paid bounties to farmers who would buy a plow and keep it in repair. 16 
 Plows are mentioned in the inventories of only 16 out of 58 estates pro¬ 
 bated in Essex County, Massachusetts, in the years 1636-1664, 17 and in 
 Hartford (Conn.), in 8 out of 15 inventories in the years 1639-1648. 18 
 
 9 Quarterly Courts, Records and Files, I; Probate Records, I. 
 
 10 Essex County Quarterly Courts, Records and Files, I, 117, 207 > 240, 288, 355, 389. 
 
 11 Connecticut Colony Public Records, I, 448. 
 
 12 Flint, Hundred Years’ Progress, in Maine Bd. Agric., 19th Annual Report (1874), 
 
 p. hi. 
 
 13 Winthrop, New England, I, 246. 
 
 14 Dorr, Planting of Rhode Island, 58. 
 
 15 Ipswich, 47. 
 
 16 Flint, Hundred Years’ Progress, in Maine Bd. Agric., 19th Annual Report (1874), 
 
 p. in. 
 
 17 Quarterly Courts, Records and Files, I; Probate Records, I. 
 
 18 Connecticut Colony Public Records, I, 442-508. 
 
36 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The Swedish colonists on the Delaware were at first as badly provided 
 with agricultural tools as with livestock. Among the lists of goods sent 
 over on the various expeditions we find tools mentioned very rarely. 19 It 
 seems that they had no oxen for plowing until five or six years after 
 the colony was founded. 20 But the Dutch after their occupation in 1656 
 made vigorous efforts to furnish adequate equipment to their colonists. 
 The following list of tools was sent from Holland in 1662: 21 
 
 “ 12 ploughshares, with coulters, 1 first-class wheel plough, with its Pulleys, &c., 12 
 two-prong hay and grain forks, 12 three-prong hay and grain forks, 100 iron teeth to 
 make harrows, 24 best scythes, 24 good reaping hooks, 50 steeled axes, 24 grubbing-hooks, 
 20 winnowing fans, 25 wheelbarrows, 30 spades, 30 shovels, 30 hoes, 20 iron rakes, 12 
 hay knives.” 
 
 The English colonists who came to the Delaware River 40 years later 
 seem to have begun breaking up the ground with oxen and plows in their 
 first years. The equipment considered necessary for a family of five on 100 
 acres of land was listed by Budd 22 as follows: 
 
 “ For a Share and Coulter, a Plow-Chain, 2 Scythes, 4 Sickles, a horse Collar, some 
 Cordage for Harness, 2 Stock Locks, 2 weeding Hoes, 2 grubbing Hoes, one cross-cut 
 Saw, 2 Iron Wedges, 1 Iron Pot, 1 frying Pan, 2 falling Axes, 1 broad Ax, 1 Spade, 
 1 Hatchet, 1 Fro to cleave Clapboard, Shingle and Coopers Timber.” 
 
 Among the implements used by Pennsylvania farmers Thomas 23 mentions 
 “ Wooden-Tyned Harrows,” “ Plow Irons ” which had to be mended twice 
 a year, carts, and wains. 
 
 CARTS. 
 
 The first carts in use by the Swedes, and in New England, also, had 
 wheels which were mere cross-sections of a round hardwood log. Farmers 
 who could not afford carts made use of drags, sleds, or sledges drawn by oxen, 
 horses, or by hand over the grass in summer or over the snow in winter. An 
 early improvement 24 “ w r as simply a slender crotched tree, with prongs some 
 seven or eight feet long, to drag on the ground; the trunk serving the pur¬ 
 pose of a sled-spire. On the two prongs was placed a box, holding eight or 
 ten bushels, called a car.” The implements of the early settlers were not 
 only few, but heavy, clumsy, and ill-adapted to their purposes. The wooden 
 fork was often shaped by the farmer himself; the cart irons, ploughshares, 
 chains, axes, bill-hooks, scythes, and other cutting instruments were ham¬ 
 mered out by the village blacksmith. Trumbull 23 says, 
 
 “ The mouldboard of the old-fashioned plow was a straight piece of wood, sometimes 
 shod with iron; the coulter and share were of iron, and the beam was long, curved and 
 heavy. It was an awkward and ungainly tool, very difficult to manage. Mechanics, 
 called ‘plough wrights,’ manufactured the majority of them, but many were made by 
 
 carpenters and blacksmiths in every town.Most of the harrows had teeth of 
 
 wood, hardened by fire, but these were soon discarded for teeth of iron. Carts were 
 large, solid, and heavy. Their wheels were in many instances sawn from solid plank, 
 
 19 Johnson, Swedish Settlements, I, 112, 128. 
 
 20 Report of Governor Prints (1644), in Myers’s Narratives, 107. 
 
 21 N. Y. Doc . Rel. to Col. Hist., II, 184. 
 
 22 Good Order Established in Pennsylvania and New Jersey (1685), P- 8. 
 
 23 In Myers’s Narratives, 319. 
 
 24 Hayward, Hancock, N. H., 74; Eggleston, Husbandry in Colony Times. Century 
 
 Magazine, XXVII (1883-84), p. 446. 
 
 25 Northampton, I, 284. 
 
FARM LABOR, EQUIPMENT, AND LAND 
 
 37 
 
 and were used without tires or boxes. Many old shovels had a wooden frame and were 
 shod with iron. Some of them, however, as well as spades, were of iron, except the 
 handle. Hoes were large and heavy, especially the broad hoe. Medad Pomeroy, the 
 blacksmith, made broad hoes, spades, and axes, for each of which he charged five 
 shillings. These cumbersome implements greatly taxed the strength of men and 
 animals.” 
 
 SIZE OF FARMS. 
 
 In New England the land holdings of the first settlers were not large. 
 Occasionally large grants to particular individuals were made by the colonial 
 authorities, or by the trading corporations who preceded them, but the more 
 usual method of land distribution was to communities of settlers. A group 
 of 5° or ioo heads of families got a grant for a township and divided the 
 land among themselves. The first divisions were of planting and meadow, 
 the cattle being herded on the common pastures. Considering the cheapness 
 of land the early divisions are surprisingly small. In Dorchester, Massa- 
 
 Table 7. —Size of farms, not including pasturage. 
 
 [Sources: O’Callaghan. Doc. Hist. N. Y., II, 439 et seq.; IV, 139 et seq.; Boston Tax Lists in 
 
 First Report Boston Records (1876), 128 et seq.] 
 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 Dutch 
 
 towns, 
 
 1675. 
 
 Long 
 
 Island, 
 
 English 
 
 towns, 
 
 1675. 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Muddy 
 
 River 
 
 1675. 
 
 Boston, 
 
 Romney 
 
 Marsh. 
 
 1687. 
 
 Total. 
 
 No. of farms. 
 
 146 
 
 259 
 
 30 
 
 33 
 
 469 
 
 Total farm acreage. 
 
 5 , 554-6 
 
 4,669.0 
 
 406.5 
 
 1,2350 
 
 11,865.1 
 
 Average acreage . 
 
 No. of farms reporting— 
 
 38.0 
 
 l8.0 
 
 13-5 
 
 37 4 
 
 25.0 
 
 1 to 20 acres. 
 
 102 
 
 183 
 
 26 
 
 18 
 
 329 
 
 21 to 40 acres. 
 
 38 
 
 62 
 
 3 
 
 10 
 
 113 
 
 41 to 60 acres. 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 I 
 
 0 
 
 13 
 
 61 to 80 acres. 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 7 
 
 81 to 100 acres. 
 
 0 
 
 I 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 Over 100 acres. 
 
 0 
 
 I 
 
 0 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 chusetts, the division of 1638 gave an average of 10 acres per family; in 
 Hartford, Connecticut (1640), the average allotment was 27 acres, and in 
 New Haven, Connecticut (1640), 44 acres. 26 
 
 Inventories of estates give us additional information on the size of 
 farms. In Essex County, 27 42 estates probated in the years 1635-1664 show 
 land holdings ranging from 1 to 234 acres with an average of 50 acres each. 
 Of these holdings, 21, or one-half, were under 20 acres, and 32 (76 per cent) 
 were under 50 acres. In the Connecticut colony 28 13 estates probated 1639- 
 1648 show landholdings ranging from 6 to 221 acres and averaging 60 acres 
 each. Of these 5 (39 per cent) were under 20 acres and 7 (54 per cent) under 
 50 acres. It should be remembered that these figures do not include pasture 
 land which was largely held in common and when included in the inventories 
 was designated as commons for so many cows and not specifically in acres. 
 The size of farms (not including pasturage) in 10 towns on Long Island 
 and in 2 districts of Boston is shown in table 7. 
 
 20 For a fuller discussion of these allotments see chapter V, pp. 52-54. 
 
 27 Essex County Quarterly Courts, Records and Files, I, Probate Records, I. 
 
 28 Connecticut Colony Public Records, I, 442-508. 
 
38 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The difference between the land holdings in the five Dutch and the five 
 English towns is remarkable. In the former, Brooklyn, Boswyck (Bush- 
 wick), Midwout (Flatbush), Amersfort (Flatlands), and New Utrecht, the 
 average taxable land area in 146 farms was 38 acres, but in the English 
 towns (Huntington, Southhold, Flushing, Newtown, and Brookhaven) 260 
 farms averaged only 18 acres of taxable land. The explanation is not found 
 in smaller-scale agriculture in the English farms, for the returns of live¬ 
 stock in the same tax lists show an average of 24 animals per farm in English 
 towns, as against only 14 per farm in the Dutch towns. If pasture land had 
 been included, the English farms would have been much larger than the 
 Dutch. It was on the latter that the more intensive type of agriculture was 
 found. In Holland agriculture was considerably more advanced in the early 
 seventeenth century than in England, and, besides, the geographical position 
 of the Dutch settlers on the western end of Long Island gave them ready 
 access to the New York market. Only two of the English towns were on 
 the western end of the island; the others were in the central part and on the 
 eastern end, at distances varying from 35 to 90 miles from Manhattan 
 Island. The English settlers confined their attention more largely to the 
 raising of cattle, which they fed on the tax-exempt commons. 
 
 There are interesting differences in the size of farms in the two farming 
 districts of Boston, Muddy River and Romney Marsh and the islands. The 
 former is now one of the richest suburban residential districts in America. 
 But by a strange irony of fate it was originally assigned to the poorer inhabi¬ 
 tants of Boston who had no cattle. 29 Romney Marsh (now Chelsea, a rela¬ 
 tively undesirable suburb), was assigned to the wealthy settlers who had 
 servants to till their lands. 30 
 
 LAND UTILIZATION. 
 
 The information available on the distribution of land into arable, mowing, 
 and pasture is very fragmentary. According to the Boston tax lists of 1687, 
 the farms in Muddy River had 63 per cent of their area in pasture, and in 
 Romney Marsh, 72 per cent. We have occasionally rather full descriptions 
 of land in the inventories of the larger estates. For example, the inventory 
 of N. Foote, 31 of Wethersfield (1646), showed 169 acres in 9 parcels, of 
 which 21 acres were in tillage, 37 in meadow, 81 in upland, 27 acres in swamp, 
 and 14 acres in two house lots. The estate of T. Dewy (1648), totaled 49 
 acres in seven parcels, distributed as follows: Houselot, ij acres; meadow, 
 18J acres; tillage, 12 acres; upland, 17J acres. In the Essex County inven¬ 
 tories tillage is specifically mentioned 12 times in lots ranging from 2 to 33 
 acres. The average amount was 9 acres. In 20 estates meadow was specific¬ 
 ally mentioned in amounts averaging 12 acres per farm. 
 
 While no precise conclusions can be drawn from such fragmentary data, 
 it appears that in New England and on Long Island the amount of arable 
 and mowing land managed by the typical farm family was not greater than 
 40 nor less than 10 acres. Planting land, the inventories of estates indicate, 
 
 29 Muddy River and Brookline Records, I, 13, 14. 
 
 30 Chamberlain, Chelsea, I, 123. 
 
 31 Connecticut Colony Public Records, I, 462. 
 
FARM LABOR, EQUIPMENT, AND LAND 
 
 39 
 
 occupied less acreage than mowing. Since livestock was generally pastured 
 in common herds in the woods and on unimproved land, the acreage of pas¬ 
 turage pertaining to each farm can not be estimated. Regarding New Jersey 
 and Pennsylvania no comparable statistical records are available. We know 
 that the system of land tenure favored large estates and a few records of large- 
 scale agriculture have been preserved. Among Penn’s colonists were a num¬ 
 ber of rich men who began large-scale operations. The letters of early 
 settlers 32 of East New Jersey show several cases of plantations, outside the 
 settled towns, of several thousand acres each, cultivated with the aid of negro 
 slaves or with indentured servants. 
 
 32 Scot, in N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 271-277; 287-295. 
 
Chapter IV.—Trade in Agricultural Products. 
 
 IMPORTS OF FOOD. 
 
 Neither New England nor the Middle Colonies had in the seventeenth 
 century a great agricultural staple for export, such as the tobacco of Vir¬ 
 ginia or the rice and indigo of the Carolinas, but nevertheless the exchange 
 of agricultural products seems to have held a prominent place in their 
 economic life. At the very first we find all the early settlements importing 
 food. As we have already pointed out, colonies established by trading com¬ 
 panies, such as the Plymouth Colony, the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and 
 those established by the Dutch and Swedish West India Companies on the 
 Hudson and Delaware Rivers, were intended to live by fishing or by trading 
 for furs with the Indians, and it was expected that they would import a part 
 at least of their food supplies. Higginson (1629) advised all immigrants to 
 Massachusetts Bay to bring a year’s stock of food with them. 1 Van Tien- 
 hoven 2 wrote in 1650: 
 
 “And as it is found by experience in New Netherland that farmers can with difficulty 
 obtain from the soil enough to provide themselves, with necessary victuals and support, 
 those who propose planting Colonies must supply their farmers and families with 
 necessary food for at least two to three years, if not altogether it must be done at 
 least in part.” 
 
 The scarcity of food in the early years of some of the settlements was 
 pitiful. For three years the Plymouth Colony was on the verge of starvation 
 and maintained life only by strict rationing of its grain, by purchases from 
 the Indians, and by making extensive use of the fish, game, and wild food 
 plants. 3 In the earliest settlements on Massachusetts Bay, and also at Provi¬ 
 dence and at Hartford, we find scarcity of food, especially cereals, repeatedly 
 mentioned until about 1640. 4 In May 1648 there was not enough grain 
 in the Massachusetts Bay Colony to sustain the inhabitants for two months, 
 and in consequence all export of grain was prohibited. 5 The Swedish colony 
 on the Delaware, for 20 years after its founding in 1638, was dependent on 
 outside sources of food supplies. Governor Printz wrote back to Sweden 
 in 1647: “The reason that so many people died in the year 1643 was that 
 they had then to begin to work, and but little to eat.” 6 Hunting was the 
 chief reliance of the first settlers of West Jersey, but powder and shot became 
 so scarce that they had to live on fish. 7 Penn’s colonists at Philadelphia had 
 
 1 In Young’s Chronicles, 263. 
 
 2 In O’Callaghan Documentary History of New York, IV, 33. 
 
 3 Bradford, Plymouth Plantation, 138, 156, 157. 
 
 4 Winthrop, New England, I, 128, 219; Johnson, Wonder Working Providence, 115, 210; 
 
 Rhode Island Records, I, 98; Winthrop, Life and Letters, II, 302. 
 
 5 Massachusetts Bay Colony Records, II, 240. 
 
 G In Myers’s Narratives, 121. 
 
 7 Smith, New Jersey, 155. 
 
 40 
 
TRADE IN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS 
 
 41 
 
 the easiest time of all. They purchased corn and beef from the old inhabi¬ 
 tants (i. e., the Swedes), who had by this time a flourishing agricultural 
 settlement, and imported some provisions also from New York, New Eng¬ 
 land, and Rhode Island. 8 Penn wrote back to England in 1683, 9 when the 
 new colony had been established less than a year, 
 
 “ the greatest hardship we have suffered, hath been Salt-Meat, which by Fowl in Winter, 
 and Fish in Summer, together with some Poultery, Lamb, Mutton, Veal, and plenty of 
 Venison the best part of the year, hath been made very passable.” 
 
 PURCHASES OF CORN FROM THE NATIVES. 
 
 Purchases of Indian corn from the natives were frequent and must have 
 proved important additions to the colonists’ scanty food-supplies. All along 
 the North Atlantic coast the Indians were found living by agriculture as 
 well as by hunting and fishing. The Indian corn, whose cultivation they 
 taught the colonists, was their most important crop. Very early in the his¬ 
 tory of the New England settlements we find recorded purchases of corn 
 from the Indians. For example, in 1630 the Massachusetts Bay colonists got 
 100 bushels from the Indians on Cape Cod 10 and in 1634 they bought 500 
 bushels from the Narragansets. * 11 At Hartford on the Connecticut River 
 in 1637 the supply of corn in the hands of the natives was considered so 
 important that the trade was forbidden to individuals in the colony. 12 It 
 would seem that by 1641 purchases of Indian com for resale had begun, for 
 in that year a penalty of 4d. per bushel was imposed on all who buy corn 
 from the Indians, provided “ they buy it not for to supply their own nec¬ 
 essity.” 13 Van Tienhoven 14 wrote from New Netherland in 1650: 
 
 “ If no wheat or rye can be had for bread, maize can be always had in season from 
 the Indians at a reasonable price.” 
 
 The early Dutch settlement on Delaware Bay bought corn and beans from 
 the Indians, as did their Swedish successors. 15 The colonists of East New 
 Jersey not only got corn, but venison and pork from the Indians. 16 The pork 
 must have been from swine escaped from other settlements, running wild 
 in the woods. 
 
 BEGINNING OF REGIONAL SPECIALIZATION. 
 
 The trade in agricultural products among the original European settle¬ 
 ments in America seems at first to have been sporadic—the relief of occa¬ 
 sional scarcity at one point from a surplus at another. Thus, New England 
 in 1633 17 bought sheep from the Dutch of New Netherland, and a genera- 
 
 8 Penn, Further Account of Pennsylvania, in Myers’s Narratives, 266. See also Penn. 
 
 Magazine of History, VII, 271; Acrelius, New Sweden, 36. 
 
 9 Letter to the Free Society of Traders, in Myers’s Narratives, 240. 
 
 10 Dudley’s Letter to the Countess of Lincoln, in Young’s Chronicles, 323. 
 
 11 Winthrop, New England, I, 175. 
 
 32 Connecticut Colony Public Records, I, 11. 
 
 73 Ibid., I, 68. 
 
 14 In O’Callaghan Documentary History of New York, IV, 33. 
 
 15 DeVries in Myers’s Narratives, 18; Report of Governor Printz, op. cit., 99. 
 
 16 Scot, in N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 302. 
 
 17 Winthrop, New England, I, 124. 
 
42 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 tion later we find New England supplying sheep as well as beef, flour, wheat, 
 butter, and cider to New Netherlands 3 Such also was the nature of the 
 exchanges by which New England relieved the food scarcity in New 
 Sweden. 19 But there was also in progress in these early years the beginnings 
 of agricultural trade based on the special natural resources of particular 
 regions. The peculiar advantages of New England for maritime pursuits 
 were early apparent. Its imports of corn and wheat, at first from the South¬ 
 ern and later from the Middle Colonies, were not entirely due to inability 
 to raise a sufficient supply of these grains at home, but in part at least to the 
 realization of the advantages of specialization in fishing, trading, and ship¬ 
 building. 
 
 The import of corn meal from Virginia began almost as soon as the New 
 England settlements were founded. In 1631, 700 bushels of Virginia com 
 were received at Mason’s plantation on the Piscataqua River, 20 and in 1634, 
 when immigration had greatly swelled the population of the Massachusetts 
 Bay Colony, 5,000 bushels of corn were brought from Virginia in half a 
 year. 21 
 
 TRADE WITH THE WEST INDIES. 
 
 The trade of New England and the Middle Colonies with the English, 
 French, and Dutch islands in the Caribbean Sea was a central feature of 
 the economic life of the English settlements in America. The sugar planters 
 in the West India Islands were engaged in specialized agriculture. Their 
 cash crop was so profitable that they could not afford to use land or labor in 
 grazing cattle or in cultivating food crops. On the other hand, New England 
 and the Middle Colonies had no agricultural staples. Their products were 
 the same as those of Northern Europe and consequently, except on occasions 
 of crop failure in Europe, there was no market there for either colonial 
 grain or meat. But there was a good market for such products in the West 
 Indies, and so the general agriculture or mixed husbandry of the colonies 
 north of Maryland supplemented the specialized farming of the sugar planta¬ 
 tions in the seventeenth century. In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth 
 centuries the rice and cotton plantations of the South furnished a similar 
 market for the products of northern agriculture. 
 
 The trade relations of other English colonies with New England were 
 early regarded as of particular importance. Says an early writer on colonial 
 economy: 22 
 
 “The other American plantations cannot well subsist without New England, which 
 is by a thousand leagues nearer to them than either England or Ireland; so that they 
 are supplied with provisions, beef, pork, meal, fish, &c., also with the lumber trade, deal 
 boards, pipe staves, &c., chiefly from New England. Also the Caribbee Islands have 
 their horses from thence. It is then, in a great part, by means of New England, that 
 the other plantations are made prosperous and beneficial.” 
 
 18 Description of the Towne of Manhaddens, in Jameson’s Narratives, 423. 
 
 10 Reports of Governor Rising, 1654, 1655, in Myers’s Narratives, 136, 158; see also 
 
 Keen, New Sweden, in Winsor’s America, IV, 455, 474. 
 
 20 Deane, Capt. John Mason, 62. 
 
 21 Calendar of State Papers, Colonial, I, America and the West Indies (1574-1660), 
 
 P : 175 . 
 
 22 Brief Relation of New England (1689), in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series, I, 98. 
 
TRADE IN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS 
 
 43 
 
 The economic development of New England, also, was greatly forwarded 
 by the West India trade. It yielded a “ favorable balance,” i. e., exports were 
 larger than imports, and with this surplus and the carrying charges, for the 
 New Englanders used their own vessels, they were able to purchase manufac¬ 
 tured goods from Europe. 
 
 EXPORTS OF GRAIN, PROVISIONS AND HORSES FROM 
 
 NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 Just when exports of agricultural products from New England to the 
 West Indies first began is uncertain and relatively unimportant. Occasional 
 shipments were made between 1640 and 1650. 23 In the latter year trade to the 
 Barbados was important enough to incur official prohibition by an Act of 
 Parliament. 24 But the reports of food scarcity and the imports from Virginia 
 show that there was no actual surplus in New England for export before the 
 middle of the century. In 1650, Johnson 25 points out, in somewhat exagger¬ 
 ated language, the significant transition from a condition of food importation 
 to food exportation in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. He mentions wheat 
 and peas, beef, pork, butter, and cheese among the export products and adds: 
 
 “ and those who were formerly forced to fetch most of the bread they eat, and beer they 
 drink, a hundred leagues by Sea, are through the blessing of the Lord so encreased, 
 that they have not only fed their Elder Sisters, Virginia, Barbados, and many of the 
 Summer Islands that were prefer’d before her for fruitfulness, but also the Grand¬ 
 mother of us all, even the firtil Isle of Great Britain, beside Portugal hath had many a 
 mouthful of bread and fish from us, in exchange of their Madeara liquor, and also Spain.” 
 
 Ten years later Governor Winthrop 26 wrote from the Connecticut colony: 
 
 “ I must lett you first know that, through the great blessing of the Lord vpon the 
 labours of the people heere, there is a comfortable supply of all sorts of corne & provi¬ 
 sions necessary for subsistance, & that not only for themselves (the present inhabitans), 
 but also for many others; so as it is not now as in our beginnings, when we were neces¬ 
 sitated to bring wth us provitions sufficient for a long tyme, but now the country doth 
 send out great store of biscott, flower, peas, beife, porke, butter, & other provisions 
 to the supply of Barbados, Newfoundland, & other places, besides the furnishing out 
 many vessells & fishing boats of their owne, so as those who come over may supply 
 themselves at very reasonable rates.” 
 
 In the reports of the Commissioners in New England (1665) 27 corn, beef, 
 pork, and horses are given as exports from New England, and in 1675 butter, 
 cheese, flour, peas, biscuit, are mentioned in addition to beef, pork, and 
 horses. 28 About the middle of the seventeenth century there seems to have 
 been a short period intervening between two periods of the importation of 
 breadstufifs, when New England had a surplus of wheat and corn for export. 
 The fertile lands of the Connecticut Valley were yielding good crops of grain, 
 
 23 Exports of horses, beef, meal, and pease are mentioned in 1648, in Description of the 
 
 Province of New Albion, in Force, Tracts, II, 5. See also Weeden, Social and 
 Economic History of New England, I, 151. 
 
 24 Act of October 3, 1650. See also Mass. Colony Records, IV, pt. I, p. 40. 
 
 25 Johnson, Wonder Working Providence, 247. 
 
 26 Letter, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 5th series, VIII, 65. 
 
 27 Calendar of State Papers, Colonial, V, America and the West Indies (1661-1668), 
 
 P- 346 . 
 
 28 Ibid., IX (1675-1676), p. 221. 
 
44 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 which was exported from Connecticut ports to Boston. As early as 1644 
 the general court at Hartford took steps to secure better marketing condi¬ 
 tions for Connecticut grain. Prices were low and the Massachusetts Bay 
 and Plymouth Colony farmers were complaining of the Connecticut competi¬ 
 tion. Consequently the court granted a monopoly of the export of grain to 
 a number of merchants who were to endeavor to find a foreign market for it. 29 
 
 The period of grain surplus in New England was short, for the blast which 
 began to affect the wheat crop after 1664 had seriously lessened the wheat 
 exports from Connecticut by 1680. The Indian war of 1674-1676 caused a 
 decrease in grain production. Many farmers were kept under arms and a 
 number of settlements in the Connecticut Valley were temporarily aban¬ 
 doned. 30 In Connecticut the scarcity of grain resulting from the war was 
 so serious that exports were prohibited except under special license. 31 At 
 this time grain imports from Virginia were resumed. 32 
 
 The period 1675-1680 marks the end of the export of New England grain. 
 New competitors began to enter the West India markets. Hudson Valley 
 wheat was being shipped regularly and in considerable quantities be¬ 
 fore 1680, 33 and by 1690 the colonists in Pennsylvania and New 
 Jersey were sending wheat, not only to the West Indies but to New England 
 itself. 34 Wheat and wheat products, flour, and ship bread, are still mentioned 
 among New England exports after 1680, but should be regarded as chiefly 
 reexports of wheat from the Middle Colonies. 35 
 
 The exports of horses and salted meat from New England, which also 
 began about 1650, continued not only throughout the seventeenth but even 
 to the end of the eighteenth century, indicating a greater adaptability of that 
 region to grazing than to tillage. In 1660 Samuel Maverick spoke of many 
 thousand “ Neate Beasts and Hoggs ” being slaughtered every year for export 
 to Newfoundland, Barbados, Jamaica, and for provisioning ships. 36 The 
 export of provisions is a subject of frequent mention in the official reports 
 from New England after 1665. 37 
 
 New England horses were much in demand in the West Indies not only 
 for riding but also for furnishing motive power for the sugar-mills. Connecti¬ 
 cut horses were known as the best in New England. They were shipped 
 from Norwich, New London, and New Haven. Horses were exported also 
 from Boston, Salem, and Providence. The importance of the trade is shown 
 by the early attempts to subject it to legislative control. Massachusetts, in 
 1649, fearing lest its breeding stock should be weakened, forbade the export 
 
 29 Connecticut Colony Public Records, I, 116. 
 
 30 See Mathews, Expansion of New England, 56-58. 
 
 31 Connecticut Colony Public Records, II, 270. 
 
 32 Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, IX, America and the West Indies (1675- 
 
 1676), p. 366. 
 
 33 See p. 45. 
 
 34 See Letter of Dr. More in Myers’s Narratives, 290; Scot, East New Jersey, I, 270; 
 
 Letters from Pennsylvania, in Penn. Magazine of History, IV (1880), pp. 194, 199. 
 
 35 Lord Cornbury complained to the Board of Trade in 1708 that the New Englanders 
 
 bought wheat in New York with clipped money, carried it home, ground and bolted 
 it, and sold the flour to the West Indies. See N. Y. Documents Relative to Colonial 
 History, V, 58. 
 
 36 Briefe Description of New England, 4 7. 
 
 37 See Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, V, America and the West Indies 
 
 (1661-1668), and later volumes. 
 
TRADE IN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS 
 
 45 
 
 of mares. In Connecticut a law of 1660, 38 in order to prevent shipment of 
 stolen animals, provided that all horses should be registered with “ the marks 
 both naturall and artificiall, as also the colour and age of ye beast ” with the 
 authorities of the town from which they came. 
 
 TRADE OF THE MIDDLE COLONIES. 
 
 The Middle Colonies, as we have seen, shipped some grain to New Eng¬ 
 land, but their principal market was the Dutch, French, and English islands 
 in the West Indies. Thither were shipped principally wheat and horses. 
 The shipment of wheat from New Netherland to the West Indies is chron¬ 
 icled by Jogues 39 in 1643, who wrote: 
 
 “ Shortly before I arrived there, three large ships of three hundred tons each had 
 come to load wheat; two found cargoes, the third could not be loaded, because the 
 savages had burnt a part of the grain. These ships had come from the West Indies, 
 where the West India Company usually keeps up seventeen ships of war.” 
 
 Denton (1670) 40 records exports of wheat as well as of horses, beef, pork, . 
 pease, and tobacco from New York, and a few years later (1678), Governor 
 Andros 41 estimated the wheat exports from New York at 60,000 bushels 
 yearly. New Jersey and Pennsylvania seem to have had a surplus of wheat 
 almost from the very first years of their settlement. Scot 42 says of East 
 New Jersey: 
 
 “ This with the Province of New York, being the Granary or Store house of the West 
 Indies, without which Barbadoes and the Leeward Islands could not subsist; Yea, New 
 England is forced to come there every year for Corn.” 
 
 Horses seem to have been the first commodity exported from Penn’s 
 colony, 43 but in a few years it had a surplus of grain, also, for export. The 
 general nature of the export trade of Pennsylvania and its connection with 
 farming is expressed in a letter of an early settler (1691) : 44 
 
 “ The Country-men finding the profit now coming in, do clear away the Woods, Plow 
 and improve their Lands in Corn, Hemp and Flax, and enlarge themselves in great stocks 
 of Horses, Oxen, Cows, Hogs, and some Sheep, so that they can, and do now spare 
 great quantities of Corn to our Neighbour Provinces, which formerly we were forc’d 
 to be beholding to, the Merchants making great Merchandizes, viz. for the West Indies. 
 
 I understand Ten or Twelve Sail went loaden thither the last Summer with Bisket, 
 Flower, Beef and Pork.” 
 
 THE MARKET FOR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS 
 
 IN THE TOWNS. 
 
 The three chief centers of internal trade in farm products were Boston, 
 Philadelphia, and New York. From these ports shipments were made to the 
 West Indies and merchant and fishing fleets were provisioned. Boston, with 
 about 7,000 inhabitants, 45 was the largest urban center in the colonies. The 
 
 38 Connecticut Colony Public Records, I, 356. 
 
 39 In Jameson’s Narratives, 260. 
 
 40 Brief Description of New York, 3. 
 
 41 O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New York, I, 90. 
 
 42 In N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 270. 
 
 43 Penn, Letter to the Free Society of Traders (1683), in Myers’s Narratives, 229. 
 
 44 Letters from Pennsylvania, in Pennsylvania Magazine of History, IV (1880), p. 200. 
 
 45 Winsor, Memorial History of Boston, II, 492. 
 
46 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 population was mostly engaged in maritime pursuits, but included also some 
 farmers. For example, the tax list of 1687 shows 177 cows kept within the 
 limits of the city proper, not including those in the outlying farms of Chelsea 
 and Brookline. 46 There are many indications that the Boston market was an 
 important factor in the agriculture of the surrounding settlements. Its stimu¬ 
 lating influence was apparent as early as 1632. In the Plymouth Colony, 
 where the new immigration caused the price of corn and cattle to rise, “ by 
 which many were much inriched, and commodities grue plentifull,” 47 this 
 trade was not regarded as an unmixed blessing. It caused dispersion of 
 population. 48 
 
 “ For now as their stocks increased, and the increse vendible ther was no longer any 
 holding them togeather, but now they must of necessitie goe to their great lots, they 
 could not other wise keep their katle.” 
 
 Beef cattle were an important item in the trade of Boston with neighbour¬ 
 ing towns. Johnson 49 wrote of Ipswich, 1650: 
 
 “ the Lord hath been pleased to increase them in Corne and Cattell of late; Insomuch 
 that they have many hundred quarters to spare yearly, and feed, at the latter end of 
 Summer, the Towne of Boston with good Beefe : ” 
 
 The cost of transportation of corn overland was so high that for many 
 years there was little trade in that commodity with the back country. Of 
 Sudbury, 19 miles west of Boston, Johnson 50 remarked (1650) : “the great 
 distance it lyes from the Mart Towns maketh it burdensome to the Inhabi¬ 
 tants to bring their corne so far by land,” and the same complaint 51 was 
 made regarding Andover (20 miles from Boston, 15 miles from Salem). A 
 few years later, however, Maverick 52 describes the trade between Rehoboth 
 and Boston as follows: 
 
 “ It is not aboue 40 Miles from Boston, betweene which there is a Comone trade, carry¬ 
 ing & recarrying goods by land in Cart and on Horseback, and they have a very fayre 
 conveyance of goods by water also.” 
 
 In the same work are mentioned a number of towns which supplied Boston 
 with firewood and building materials. 
 
 MARKETS AND FAIRS. 
 
 New York had less than 4,500 people in 1700 53 and Philadelphia about 
 5,ooo. 54 The trade of these cities with the surrounding country districts 
 seems to have been principally in beef cattle. Under Dutch rule two fairs had 
 been established to be held annually in New Amsterdam, on October 15 for 
 cattle and on November 1 for hogs, 55 and in 1656 a market space was set 
 
 46 Boston, Reports of the Records, First Report, 91 et seq. 
 
 47 Bradford, Plymouth Plantations, 293. 
 
 48 Loc. cit. 
 
 49 Wonder Working Providence, 96. 
 
 50 Ibid., 196. 
 
 51 Ibid., 249. 
 
 52 Brief Description of New England (1660), p. 44. 
 
 63 O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New York, I, 691, gives the census figure for. 
 ^ 1703 as 4,436. 
 
 54 Scharf and Westcott, Philadelphia, I, 140. 
 
 55 De Voe, Market Book, 17. 
 
TRADE IN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS 
 
 47 
 
 aside and a weekly market was provided for by the governor. 66 The growth 
 of trade was rapid enough to require the establishment of six other market 
 places before 1700. 57 Livestock were driven to the New York market from 
 Long Island and New Jersey 68 and from a number of towns in western 
 Connecticut. In 1659, when a new cattle market was established notices were 
 sent to towns as far distant as Southold on Long Island and Milford in Con¬ 
 necticut. 69 The consumption of fresh meat in New York was increasing 
 rapidly toward the end of the seventeenth century. In 1684, according to the 
 city records, not more than 400 neat cattle were killed yearly for local con¬ 
 sumption and in 1698 about 3.000. 60 
 
 Fairs and markets were established in Philadelphia in the early years of 
 the settlement. Like their European prototypes, these institutions were de¬ 
 signed to bring the producers and consumers together under conditions of 
 free competition and to prevent abusive practices by middlemen. So we find 
 in Philadelphia the market regulations of 1693, 61 after specifying the time 
 and place where markets should be held, provided: 
 
 “ That all sorts of Provision brought to this town to sale, viz, flesh, fish, tame fowl, 
 eggs, butter, cheese, herbs, fruits, roots, etc., shall be sold in the aforesaid market place, 
 and in case any of the aforesaid provisions should come to the town of Philadelphia 
 on other days that are not market days, yet that they be sold in the market under the 
 same circumstances, regulation, and forfeitures as upon the days on which the market is 
 appointed, and in case any of the said provisions be exposed to sale in any other place 
 in this town, then the said market shall be forfeited the one half to the poor of Phila¬ 
 delphia, the other half to the clerk of the market. 
 
 “ That the market begin and be opened at the ringing of the bell, which shall be rung 
 from the first day of the 2nd month, April, to the first day of September between the 
 hours of six and seven, and from the first day of September to the first day of the 
 second month, April, between the hours of eight and nine, and in case any of the afore¬ 
 said provision or any sort of marketing be sold, flesh excepted before the ringing of the 
 bell, unless it be for his Excellency, Governor in Chief, or Lieut. Governor, the same 
 shall be forfeited one-half to the poor, the other to the clerk of the market. 
 
 “ That no person cheapen or buy any of the afore mentioned provision by the way 
 as it comes to the market, upon forfeiture of the same, besides the forfeiture of six 
 shillings, both to the buyer and seller, one-half to the poor, the other to the clerk of 
 the market. 
 
 “ That no hucksters or persons to sell again shall buy or cheapen any of the afore 
 mentioned provision, until it has been two hours in the market after the ringing of the 
 bell, upon forfeiture of the same, and six shillings, one-half to the poor, the other half 
 to the clerk of the market/’ 
 
 The consumption of fresh meat in Philadelphia in summer, according to 
 Thomas 62 was “ Twenty Fat Bullocks every Week .... besides many 
 Sheep, Calves and Hogs.” 
 
 In New England, a weekly market was established in Hartford in 1643, 63 
 and annual fairs were held in Hartford, New Haven, and Providence. 64 In 
 
 56 Ibid., 36. 
 
 57 Ibid., 44, 70, 77, 85, 109, 125. 
 
 r ’ 8 Danckaerts, Journal, 157; Scot, in N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 313. 
 
 59 De Voe, Market Book, 38. 
 
 60 Ibid., 87. 
 
 61 Reprinted in Pennsylvania Magazine of History , XXIII (1899-1900), p. 408. (The 
 
 spelling, capitalization, etc., are modernized.) 
 
 62 Myers’s Narratives, 318. 
 
 63 Connecticut Colony Public Records, I, 91. 
 
 6 *New Haven Colony Records, I, 130; Weeden, Early Rhode Island, 120. 
 
48 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Boston, Thursday was appointed as a weekly market day in 1633, and in 
 1696 Tuesdays and Saturdays were added. 65 The municipal control of the 
 sale of produce does not seem to have been popular either among the city or 
 country folks there. A visitor in 1709 66 reported: 
 
 “ The Town of Boston is plentifully supply’d with good and wholesome Provisions of 
 all sorts, not inferior to those in England, .... but though the Town is so large and 
 populous, they could never be brought to establish a Market in it, notwithstanding 
 several of their Governours have taken great Pains to convince the Inhabitants how 
 useful and beneficial it would be to ’em; but the Country People always opposed it, so 
 that it could not be settled: The Reason they give for it is, if Market Days where 
 appointed, all the Country People coming in at the same Time would glut it, and the 
 Townspeople would buy their Provisions for what they pleased, so rather chuse to send 
 them as they think fit; and sometimes a tall Fellow brings a Turkey or Goose to sell, 
 and will travel through the whole Town to see who will give most for it, and is at 
 last sold for 3 s. 6d. or 4 s. and if he had stay’d at Home, he could have earned a Crown 
 by his Labour, which is the customary Price for a Day’s Work: ” 
 
 65 Weeden, Social and Economic History of New England, I, 406. 
 
 66 Uring, Voyages and Travels, hi. 
 
Chapter V.—Land Tenure. 
 
 THE LAND SYSTEM OF NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 The English settlements in New England, with the exception of New 
 Hampshire, were organized as corporate colonies. The trading companies 
 by which they were established and governed received from the English 
 Crown extensive grants of land, which they in turn granted to individuals 
 and to groups of settlers. Grants from the Crown directly to individuals were 
 practically unknown in New England, the notable exception being the grant 
 of the Province of Maine, embracing land between the Piscataqua and 
 Kennebec Rivers, to Sir Ferdinando Gorges in 1639. 
 
 The land policy of the New England colonies was democratic and far¬ 
 sighted. Its guiding motive was not profit, but methodical occupation of 
 the company’s territory by actual settlers and the development of its great 
 resources, not for the benefit of a few but in the interest of the whole com¬ 
 munity. Such a policy necessarily involved “ great restraint upon the indi¬ 
 vidual wills of settlers, with a view to the greatest safety and prosperity of 
 
 all.” 1 Such aims are apparent not only in the plan of community 
 
 settlement, the predominant feature of the New England land system, but 
 also in the rather infrequent grants to individuals. 
 
 GRANTS TO INDIVIDUALS. 
 
 In Southern New England, grants by the colonial authorities directly to 
 individuals were rarely of large areas, and in the aggregate they made up 
 but a small part of the total disposable area. Egleston’s 2 investigations show 
 that in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, 1631-1656, there were about 100 
 grants to individuals, of which the largest was 3,200 acres; only a few 
 exceeded 500 acres and the majority were not more than 250 acres. It should 
 be noted, also, that such grants to individuals were uniformly in consideration 
 either of services already rendered to the community or of services expected in 
 the future. Thus magistrates, ministers, and school-teachers were compensated 
 by gifts of land and artisans were encouraged to set up saw mills, salt works, 
 and manufactures of iron, copper, and gunpowder. 
 
 GRANTS TO COMMUNITIES. 
 
 Most of the area of New England was settled in village communities. 
 Such communities were usually formed by the splitting off of a number of 
 families from one of the older settlements. The first step was for a group of 
 heads of families to secure a tract of unoccupied land. In Massachusetts a 
 
 1 Egleston, Land System of the New England Colonies, in J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and 
 
 Pol. Sci., IV (1886), Nos. 11, 12, p. 27. 
 
 2 Ibid., p. 24. 
 
 5 
 
 49 
 
50 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 town grant was usually secured from the general court, but in Rhode Island 
 and Connecticut the lands were purchased from the Indians without charter 
 or grant, the title being confirmed later by royal charters. _ 
 
 The original grantees or purchasers were known as proprietors. Group 
 settlements were the rule on land purchased from the Indians as we 1 as on 
 town grants. 4 In New Haven, Connecticut, and in the neighboring settlements 
 of Guilford and Milford, the lands “ were purchased by their principal men, 
 and held in trust for the people, who, after contributing to pay the expenses 
 of surveying, etc., drew lots proportioned to their contributions. The lands 
 of the earliest settlements on the Connecticut River, Hartford, Wethersfield, 
 
 Fig i -Early allotments in Wethersfield, 1640-41. . (From Andrews, River Towns of 
 Connecticut in Johns Hopkins University Studies m Hist, and Pol. Set., vol. VI , 
 
 Nos. 7-9, p. 5 -) 
 
 The above represents the lands recorded under date 1640-41- On the extreme ei 
 are the West Fields; on the right, across the river, Naubuc Farms, v ^ious 
 
 Three-Mile Purchase; in the center the Great Meadow and Plain with their various 
 divisions. The latter allotments can not in every case be absolutely ascertained, as t 
 records are often vague and faulty. 
 
 and Windsor, were similarly purchased from the natives. 6 In order to pre¬ 
 vent overlapping of purchases and confusion of titles, purchases from * e 
 natives were soon subjected to the c ontrol of the colonial authorities. In 
 
 3 Egleston, in J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and Pol Sci., IV (1886) , Nos 11, 12, p. 9 - 
 
 4 The Narragansett country in Rhode Island was an exception . Se T e ,{ 
 
 Narragansett Planters in J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and Pol. Sci. f V ( )> • 3 > 
 
 6 . Connecticut, in J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and Pol. Sci., VII 
 
 (1889), Nos. 7 - 9 , PP- 32-36. 
 
LAND TENURE 
 
 51 
 
 New Haven it was ordered (1639) “that no planter or planters shall make 
 purchase of any lands or plantation from the Indians or others for their 
 own private use or advantage, but in the name and for the use of the whole 
 plantation. 7 (Spelling modernized.) Similar laws were later passed in the 
 Connecticut and Rhode Island colonies. 8 
 
 LAYING OUT THE TOWN ; THE HOME LOTS. 
 
 The tract on which settlement was to be made, known as the “town 
 grant, varied in area from 4 to 10 square miles. Near the center of the 
 
 Fig. 2. Map of Watertown, Massachusetts, 1636. (From Maclear, Early New England 
 
 Towns, 81.) 
 
 grant a village was laid out. The site for the village green and meeting-house, 
 otten a hilltop, was first determined and then streets were laid out, and on 
 both sides of the streets were set off the house-lots of the settlers. The order 
 for the lading out of Yarmouth, Maine (1681), was as follows: 
 
 That ten acres of plain land be laid out in a square lot for a meeting house burial 
 place, minister s house lot, market place and school; around this ten acre lot, a street four 
 rods wide, and on this street, house lots of half an acre each, and in some convenient 
 place, a common field equal to six acres to each house lot.” 
 
 7 Colony Records, 27. 
 
 #Se< n Colo - vy Publlc Records, I (1663), p. 402; Rhode Island Records, I (1658), 
 p. 403* v 7 1 
 
 9 Russell, History of North Yarmouth, in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, II, 172. 
 
52 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The home lots were plots of ground “ sufficient for a dwelling house and 
 outbuildings, a door yard and garden, with perhaps a small inclosure fo 
 feeding cattle or raising corn.” 10 They varied in size from town to town and 
 were not uniform even within the same town. The smallest were sometimes 
 only one-quarter acre, from this they increased to 6 8, or 10 acres. In a 
 few towns home lots of 20 and even 30 acres are found. 
 
 DIVISION OF UPLANDS AND MEADOWS. 
 
 The next step was the division of the arable and mowing lands, the so- 
 called “ uplands and meadows.” Large fields of several hundred acres each 
 were roughly surveyed and then divided into strips which were numbered 
 and distributed among the settlers by lot. Each settler’s portion was, there- 
 fore, actually a “ lot.” The maps of land distribution in the ancient towns 
 
 show a remarkable regularity of arrangement. 12 
 
 “ The small oblong strips are, in nearly every case, grouped together in a few lo g 
 rows or tiers. These tiers are often parallel, but sometimes one tier will be at right angles 
 to another. The cause of this regularity is that the strips or lots are laid off from on 
 or two (sometimes more, according to the size of the field), mam base lines, usually 
 a river or highway; each field is thus a parallelogram divided into tiers of small, usually 
 
 equal, parallelograms.” 
 
 A rather striking case of the early use of the rectilinear survey, later 
 adopted in our national land system, is found in Cohasset, Massachusetts 
 
 (1670) : 13 
 
 “ The town was originally laid out, as near as might be, in Squares, whose sides should 
 be one mile. It was divided into four parts, called divisions, by lines _ running nearly 
 east and west, the whole length of the town, each division being a mile in width, i hese 
 divisions were separated into parts or squares, by lines one mile from each other, running 
 at right-angles with the lines of divisions. It was intended by the proprietors of Cono- 
 hasset, that roads, if possible, should run with the lines which marked the divisions and 
 squares, and spaces of land for that purpose were accordingly left. But when the roads 
 were really made, it was found necessary to vary much from the original design, owing 
 to the immoveable rocks and other obstructions, falling in the way. 
 
 THE RULE OF DISTRIBUTION. 
 
 The quantity of land allotted to each proprietor was determined by a rule 
 of distribution which was in many cases agreed to in advance of settlement. 
 The home lots were occasionally of equal size, 14 but in the distribution of 
 other land holdings the right of some to receive more than others was invari¬ 
 ably recognized. There were two criteria of distribution: (i) the invest¬ 
 ment of the settler in the original enterprise, and (2) his ability to use land. 
 Under the first were included his contribution to the expense of removal 
 
 10 Adams, Origin of Salem Plantation, in Essex Institute Historical Collections, XIX 
 
 11 See examples^given by Egleston, in J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and Pol. Sci., IV (1886), 
 
 Nos 11 12 p 52; MacLear, Early New England Towns, in Columbia University 
 
 Studies’™ Pol. Sci., XX IX (1908), No. 1, p. 81 . . 
 
 12 Ford, Colonial Precedents of Our National Land System, in Wisconsin University 
 
 Bulletin, History Series, II (1909-10), p. 12. . , • 
 
 13 Flint, History and Description of Cohasset, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series. 
 
 14 Temole^nd Sheldon. Northdeld, 66; Temple, JVhately, 16. 
 
LAND TENURE 
 
 53 
 
 from England or to the purchase of the land from the Indians and the cost 
 of surveying it. The second criterion was based on the value of the planter’s 
 estate, and m some cases also upon the number of heads in his family. 
 In the determination of the amount of a man’s estate, not merely a valuation 
 of his property was taken into consideration, but also his contribution past 
 or prospective, to the success of the joint enterprise. It should be noted also 
 
 that the roll of estates was used as a basis of taxation, as well as of land 
 distribution, 15 so that 
 
 ''wealthy planters consented to receive less than their proper share of lands, and were 
 held to pay less than their ratable proportion of expenses; while the young man for 
 
 Z phiUationTaxes!” * ** aH ° tment ° f ^ agrCCd t0 W a P ro P-tionate part of 
 
 . In Guilford, Connecticut, the planters were first divided into four classes 
 viz.: those of £50, £100, £250, and £500 estates, 16 and then it was ordered 
 
 “ that all lands shall from time to time be allotted or divided, unto all and every of the 
 Iilanters here, both according to his or their estates put in, and according to the number 
 of heads in each family, viz—for every hundred pound estate, five acres of upland and 
 six acres of meadow, and for every head three acres of upland and half an acre of 
 meadow and so proportionably for fifty pounds estate, none being reckoned for such 
 heads to any man but himself, his wife and children.” 
 
 In Northampton, 17 20 acres of meadow were allotted to each £100 of estate 
 and in addition each head of a family received 15 acres and 3 acres for each 
 son In New Haven, at the first division of land, the rate was 5 acres for 
 each £100, and 2 \ acres for each person in the planter’s family. 18 
 . principle that those should have most land who could make best use of 
 
 it is clearly expressed in the following town vote in Springfield, Massachu¬ 
 setts (1636) : 19 
 
 It is agreed that after this day we shall observe this rule about dividinge of plantinge 
 ground and meddowe in all plantinge ground to regard chiefly persons who are most apt 
 to use such ground: and in all meddowe and pasture to regard chiefly Cattell and 
 estate, because estate is like to be imp’vd in cattell, and such ground is aptest for theyr 
 
 shall l nd /l WG fh agre ,u ^ n0G P ’f n that iS maStCr ° f a l0tt thou ^ h he have cattyle 
 nr virJ iT ° f m ° Wmge g round : and ™ne that have cowes, steeres 
 
 akers and thU nrf ^ apieCe and a11 h ° rSeS not less than fower 
 
 ers and this order in dividing meddowe by cattyle to take place the last of May next.” 
 
 RELATIVE SIZE OF ALLOTMENTS. 
 
 The working out of the rules outlined above caused some inequalities, 
 but in general the allotments before 1700 produced a fairly even distribution of 
 land. In Hartford, 20 Connecticut, the first distribution (1640), was of 3,311 
 acres among 121 proprietors, giving each on the average 27 acres. The larg- 
 est farm granted was 160 acres; 41 grants were from 1 to 10 acres and 70 
 grants from 1 to 20 acres. In New Haven, Connecticut, we have more com- 
 plete records of the distribution. Soon after the settlement of the colony 
 
 15 Temple, Whately, 16. 
 
 16 Town Records, in Steiner’s Guilford, 49. 
 
 17 Trumbull, Northampton, I, 22. 
 
 18 Colony Records, 192. 
 
 l ° w * Records, in Burt’s First Century of Springfield , I, 158 
 Hartford Town Votes, in Conn. Hist. Soc. Collections, VI, 22-24. 
 
54 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 in 1638 house lots were apportioned, and in January 1640 land was distrib¬ 
 uted of’ three different kinds, upland, land in the neck, and meadow, 1. e„ 
 salt marsh According to the rule of division agreed upon, each proprie or 
 received of upland, 5 acres for each £100 of his estate andl 2* acres for each 
 person in his family; of meadow, 5 acres for each £100 of estate and -§ acre 
 for each head; and of land in the neck, an acre for every £100 and a half acre 
 
 f °The C result was to give to the 123 grantees average allotments of 23^acres 
 of upland, 4i acres in the neck, and i6J acres of salt marsh. In October of 
 the same year a second division of 8,151 acres of upland was made whtch 
 Yielded average allotments of 66 acres each, bringing up the total °f the 
 average holding in four parcels to no acres. 22 There was of course conside - 
 able disparity in the holdings. Some were as low as 10 acres, while the hig 
 est share was close to 1,000 acres, but on the whole a considerable degree 
 of equality prevailed. There were only 9 persons whose allotments were 
 above 300 acres and 34 whose holdings ranged from 100 to 300 acres 
 
 In Hadley, Massachusetts, the original distribution was according to 
 estates, no account being taken of the size of families. Each proprietor re¬ 
 ceived an 8-acre home lot and in addition 25} acres of meadow for each £ioc 
 of estate; 7 lots of meadow, aggregating 1,578 acres, were distributed among 
 48 proprietors, giving to each 7 parcels totalling, in the average, 33 acres. 
 The wealthiest proprietors (10) received the maximum amount, 50., acres, 
 17 received amounts from 26 to 40 acres; and 21 got from 10 to 25 acres. 
 
 TENDENCIES TOWARD CONCENTRATION OF LAND 
 
 HOLDINGS. 
 
 Through purchase, marriage, and inheritance, proprietary rights tended to 
 accumulate in a few hands, with the result that later distributions of lands 
 particularly those of the eighteenth century, showed more inequality, cu 
 even before 1700 the tendency to the concentration of land m fewer^ hands 
 was evident. In 1650 the general court of Connecticut noted 2 Mhat there 
 is creeping in, in severall Townes and plantations within this Jurisdiction, 
 a great abuse of buying and purchasing Home Lotts and laying them to¬ 
 gether, by meanes whereof great depopulations are like to follow, .. . . . 
 The towns attempted to prevent the accumulation of land holdings m a few 
 hands, and at the same time tried to protect themselves against the intrusion 
 of unwelcome associates by imposing restrictions on the alienation of land. 
 In Springfield it was voted (1638) 
 
 “ that no man that is possessed of a lot by the dispose of the Plantation, shall after sell 
 it to another, of the Plantation, that has a lot already; neither shall any man Possess 
 two men’s Lots, without the consent of the Plantation or such as shall be appointed, till 
 they have been inhabitants five years in the Plantation: But If any desire to sell his 
 Lots, he may to a (stranger), p rovided the said Plantation shall not disallow of the 
 
 22 The^table^o^allotments to each proprietor is given in New Haven Colony Records, 
 
 I, 91-93. 
 
 23 Judd, Hadley, 26, 30. 
 
 IsTown Recordin' Burt's* °First Century of Springfield, I, 164. (Spelling modernized.) 
 
LAND TENURE 
 
 55 
 
 said Stranger. But in case they shall not allow the admission of the said 
 the Plantation shall buy the said lots as indifferent men shall apprise them.” 
 
 stranger then 
 
 In general, during the early years the consent of the town was necessary 
 for the sale of lots, and in the case of contemplated sale to non-residents 
 the town reserved the right of preemption. 26 
 
 •The task of the committees in charge of distribution was arduous. In¬ 
 equalities inevitably arose, some lots being more desirable than others be¬ 
 cause of greater fertility or of nearness to the village. In order to secure 
 equality the fields were sometimes minutely subdivided, each grantee re¬ 
 ceiving a number of small strips in various portions of the field. In other 
 cases an additional quantity of land was granted to compensate for poor 
 quality. In general, the records of distribution show an admirable spirit of 
 iairness and willingness to remedy injustices. 
 
 THE COMMON FIELDS—PROPRIETORS COMMONS. 
 
 The allotments were not fenced separately, but instead they were sur¬ 
 rounded by a common fence, to the construction and maintenance of which 
 each proprietor contributed in proportion to his allotment. Each proprietor 
 cultivated his own lot or lots, subject to restrictions on the choice of crops 
 and the dates of planting and harvesting. In New Haven it was ordered 
 (1640) thatt after this yeare none shall plant Indian corne in the neck 
 butt onely sow itt with English.” 22 In 1647 the town authorities were peti¬ 
 tioned to regulate crops grown in the common fields, but refused, referring 
 the matter to the grantees for decision among themselves. 28 The custom of 
 admitting the cattle to graze on the stubble after the crop had been harvested 
 made a common crop policy inevitable. In the early days most of the 
 improved land of the community was inclosed in common fields, but as hold- 
 mgs were consolidated by purchase, separate inclosures became practicable 29 
 The proprietors continued to pasture their cattle in common long after the 
 tillage fields had become separately inclosed. 30 
 
 TOWN COMMONS. 
 
 . It is important to realize that the common fields so far described whether 
 in tillage or pastured, were not accessible to all the inhabitants of ihe town 
 They were common ” only to the original proprietors, and to those persons 
 who through purchase, marriage, or inheritance had acquired proprietary 
 rights therein. They were known, therefore, as “proprietors’ commons” 
 in addition, however, there were other fields which were open to the use 
 of all the inhabitants, the “ town commons.” They included all the land 
 of the original grant not yet divided among the proprietors nor allotted 
 to later corners. On such common fields any inhabitant might pasture his 
 animals, and from such tracts wood, stone and earth were taken, subject to 
 
 * CR hode Island Records, 1 , 126; Hartford Town Voles (1635), in Conn Hist 
 Collechons, VI, 1; Steiner, Guilford, 50. n ' Hlst ' 
 
 7 Colony Records. 48. 
 
 28 Ibid., 367. 
 
 See Pai £ e ’ Ca . mbrid 9 e (Massachusetts), 36. 
 hor a discussion of common pastures see pp. 21—23. 
 
 Soc. 
 
56 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 regulations by the town authorities. Later distributions of land were a 
 out of town commons, not only to proprietors but to new inhabitants as we . 
 Often the newcomers had already “ squatted ” on the undivided lands and 
 the distribution of land to them was in the nature of formal recognition of 
 their title. In Cambridge we find, 31 in the allotment of 1689, those inhab 
 tants who had “ no rights in the land but who had settled there were to have 
 a share amounting to 12 acres, more or less apiece. In Salem, also, the 
 were many squatters living on the undivided land. “ Many of this class 
 had been servants who, gradually acquiring a little money obtained from t 
 town the privilege of building upon the undivided land by paying to the 
 town a small rent. 32 In Hartford, Connecticut, certain cottagers were 
 granted lots to have only at The Towns Courtesy with hbe'ty o e c 
 wood and keep swine or cows by proportion on the common. 
 
 COMMONERS AND NON-COMMONERS. 
 
 The commoners, or proprietors, constituted a privileged group in the 
 town. They were “ the original grantees or purchasers of the land of the 
 town and their legal heirs, assigns, or successors, with such as from time 
 to time they chose to add to their number.” 34 They were a land commum y 
 within a political community, controlling not only the management of t 
 proprietors’ commons, but also the distribution of the undividedi lands, 
 which were used in common by all the inhabitants. At first when e pro¬ 
 prietors constituted almost the entire population, there could be no senou 
 conflict between them and the later arrivals, for the land commumty ai d 
 the political community were practically identical. It made little di e renc ’ 
 then, whether the management of the common fields was d ‘ r< *ted by 
 town meeting or by the meeting of proprietors. In Wethersfield nearly all 
 the business relating to land was done in town meeting So also in the 
 towns in New Haven Colony and in many towns in Massachusetts. In 
 Rhode Island boards of proprietors appear at an early date. ° But as the 
 • settlement grew by influx of outsiders the non-commoners came to equal 
 and finally to surpass the proprietors in numbers. In the gathering of the 
 political community, the town meeting, the newcomers struggled hard to 
 wrest from the proprietors the control over the land. Such struggles became 
 frequent before 1700 and occupied a large place in the histories of the town 
 in the next century. Eventual adjustment of the difficulty occurred in one 
 of three ways: 36 (i) by increasing the number of commoners, (2) by 
 granting certain lands to newcomers without accompanying rights of com¬ 
 monage- or (3) by inclusion of the newcomers with the original proprietors 
 in a general division of lands to all the inhabitants, but granting no right 
 to non-commoners in further divisions. __ 
 
 31 MacLear, in Columbia Univ. Studies in Political Science, XXIX (1908), No. 1, p. 86. 
 
 32 Ibid., p. 102. . _ „ ,, T 
 
 33 Hartford Town Votes, in Conn. Hist. Soc. Collections, VI, 19* 
 
 34 Osgood, American Colonies, I, 461. 
 
 35 Ibid., American Colonies, I, 464- >T 
 
 36 Egleston, J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and Pol. Sci., IV (1886), Nos. 11, 12, p. 41. 
 
LAND TENURE 
 
 57 
 
 THE DISADVANTAGE OF COMMON FIELDS. 
 
 The disadvantages of cultivating strips in common fields were so serious 
 that the arable land was soon separately inclosed. Much land was wasted in 
 the numerous roads by which each proprietor gained access to his particular 
 allotments. The lots were small and scattered and often their great length 
 in proportion to their width prevented cross-harrowing or cross-ploughing. 
 The distance of the common field from the home lots caused loss of time in 
 coming and going. The restrictions on the choice of crops were undoubtedly 
 annoying, but so little was then known about crop rotations that it seems 
 doubtful whether they imposed a serious check on agricultural progress. 
 1 he scattering of the allotments of meadow or mowing land was more marked 
 than in the case of uplands or planting land. Earliest land records of Groton, 
 Massachusetts, 37 show that 1,656 acres of upland were held by 28 persons in 
 7/ parcels, w r hile 5°/ acres of meadow were held by 20 persons in 135 
 parcels. Each settler held on the average 59 acres of upland in 2 or 3 parcels 
 and 19J acres of meadow in 5 parcels. 
 
 “ The waste of time and insecurity of property from Indian thefts, when not within 
 the immediate view of its owners, were constant sources of loss and vexation to the 
 holders of these minute estates. Their exchange and surrender, so as to create larger and 
 more manageable freeholds, afforded a great part of its occupation to the Town Meetings 
 of two generations, and were a check to agricultural improvements. The wearisome 
 
 hours of the ‘Town’s Quarter Day,’ were in great part due to the unskilled plan of 
 the first townsmen.” 38 
 
 The great economy of labor secured by herding cattle in common was to 
 some extent offset by the difficulty in controlling breeding and the dangers 
 of the rapid spread of parasites and diseases. 
 
 THE END OF THE COMMONS. 
 
 The tendency of proprietary rights to accumulate in a few hands has 
 already been noted. As holdings were thus consolidated the transition from 
 common pastures to separate inclosures was made relatively easy. The 
 “ undivided lands ” or town commons were rapidly reduced in size by suc¬ 
 cessive allotments to the proprietors and to newcomers whom the latter 
 admitted to the community. By the end of the eighteenth century common 
 lands had practically disappeared, although a few vestiges are even now 
 to be found in New England towns. 39 The ultimate disposition of the 
 commons often shows commendable public spirit on the part of the pro¬ 
 prietors. In Framingham, Massachusetts (1785), the proceeds of the sale 
 of the last land went to the public library; 40 in Ipswich the commoners 
 transferred all their interest in the undivided lands to the town to help pay 
 the debts contracted during the Revolutionary War. 41 In Watertown, in 1742, 
 the proprietors devoted the proceeds from the sale of the last lands “to 
 be a public stock for the use of said Watertown for ever, to be let out upon 
 
 3 ' In Greene’s Early Land Grants of Groton, 17 et seq. 
 
 ? j 1 * 1 "’ of Rhode Island, 43. See also Trumbull, Northampton, I, S49 
 
 Adams Germanic Origin of New England Towns in J. H. U., Studies in Hist, and 
 
 Pol. Set., I (1882), No. 2, p. 33. 
 
 40 Barry, Framingham, 135. 
 
 41 Felt, Ipszinch, 17. 
 
58 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 interest and the interest thereof to be devoted to help support the Gospel 
 Ministry and the Grammar and English School in said Watertown for ever. 42 
 
 ORIGIN OF THE NEW ENGLAND VILLAGE COMMUNITY. 
 
 The similarity of the home lots and the common fields of the New England 
 towns to the field system of the English manors has often been noted and 
 attempts have been made to trace the origin of the New England land system 
 to the institutions of the ancient Teutons which Tacitus described, 
 resemblances, which are in many cases striking, are certainly not explainable 
 by conscious imitation by the New England colonists of the tribal customs of 
 their primitive ancestors. It was rather a case of the adaptation of familiar 
 land practices to the peculiar conditions which confronted the English colo¬ 
 nists in their new homes. They wanted compact settlements, partly because 
 of the danger of Indian attacks and also in order to maintain their religious 
 life and social intercourse. Hence the village green and the home lots. The 
 scarcity of labor made separate inclosures impossible, and so they very natur¬ 
 ally introduced in their new homes the common fields of the old country. 
 
 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE NEW ENGLAND LAND SYSTEM. 
 
 The New England land system, with its community settlements, had im¬ 
 portant social and political results, as has often been shown by political his¬ 
 torians. It developed habits of group action and maintained a compact social 
 life. But on the economic side it was no less important. It provided an 
 effective and equitable method for the distribution of large areas of land 
 directly to the cultivators, in parcels proportioned to their ability to use land. 
 In Southern New England and in New Hampshire 44 in the years in which 
 the system of town grants was in operation, roughly speaking, before 1725, 
 land speculation was practically unknown. The system of common fields, 
 as we have seen, had obvious defects from the standpoint of agricultural prog¬ 
 ress and of farm management. The restrictions on the selection of crops 
 in the common fields and on the dates of planting and harvesting, had they 
 been long continued, might have prevented experiments in crop rotation, 
 but as a matter of fact they were soon abandoned. The scattering of the lots 
 in various fields prevented effective use of the farmers’ time and equipment, 
 but this also was but temporary, being remedied by the consolidation of 
 holdings. On the other hand, the advantages of the system were permanent. 
 
 THE PRIVATE LAW OF REAL PROPERTY IN NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 The rules of law regarding the transfer of land in the hands of private 
 individuals harmonized with the main principles of the system of town 
 grants. The transfer of land by purchase and sale was facilitated by very 
 
 42 Proprietors’ Book, 186, in Watertown Records, I. 
 
 43 See Adams, Germanic Origin of New England Towns, in J. H. U., Studies in Hist. 
 
 and Pol. Sci., I (1882), No. 2, pp. 12, 16. 
 
 44 In Maine the large grants from the Crown and from the council at Plymouth pro¬ 
 
 duced unusual conditions. That province, however, was very sparsely settled before 
 
 1700 and consequently the treatment of land tenure there belongs more properly in 
 
 Part II. 
 
LAND TENURE 
 
 59 
 
 early laws establishing simple forms of conveyance and providing for the 
 recording of deeds. 45 In the transmission of estates by inheritance the col¬ 
 onists soon began to set aside the English custom of primogeniture. Equal 
 distribution to all heirs, or the reservation of only a double portion to the 
 eldest son, soon became the general practice in making wills, and attempts 
 were made to establish this custom as the law of intestate estates. Thus, in 
 Massachusetts it was provided in the Liberties of 1641 : 46 
 
 “ When Parents dye intestate, the Elder sonne shall have a doble portion of his whole 
 estate reall and personall, unlesse the Generali Court upon just cause alleadged shall 
 judge otherw^c. When parents dye intestate haveing noe heires males of their bodies 
 
 , ei 1 ^ Daughters shall inherit as Copartners, unles the Generali Court upon just reason 
 shall judge otherwise.” 
 
 In Connecticut it was provided in 1639 47 that the estates of intestates 
 should be divided among the heirs by an administrator under the supervision 
 of the public court as in equity they shall see meet/ In practice, this grant 
 of discretionary power resulted in giving the eldest son a double portion of 
 the real estate and younger children, sons and daughters, single shares apiece, 
 following the custom of those who made wills. 48 In 1699 the Connecticut 
 colony incorporated its rules and customs of inheritance into a statute law, 49 
 which, however, was vacated by the King in Council in 1727, although the 
 similar law of IMassachusetts had been confirmed. After much controversv 
 and delay the Connecticut statute was finally recognized in 1742. 50 
 
 In Rhode Island, in 1718, primogeniture was abolished, having been found 
 “ to be very wrongful and injurious to the public good,” 51 but 10 years later 
 this act was repealed. Although the English custom was thus legally main¬ 
 tained, land even in the Rarragansett country, the region of large estates 
 seems to have been more or less equally apportioned among heirs. 53 
 
 The reasons for the modification of English rules of inheritance in the 
 colonies were largely economic, viz., the cheapness of land and the scarcity 
 of other forms of wealth. In defense of the Connecticut statute of 1699, 
 Governor Talcott 54 argued : 
 
 “ That this is a reasonable custom will appear if it be considered that in the first settle¬ 
 ment of the Country lands were the least valuable part of men’s estates, and so should be 
 much rather subject to a division than his chattels. Land was plenty and chattels scarce^ 
 so that without a division of the lands as well as chattels, very little could be assigned to 
 any except the eldest son. And the land itself must have remained unoccupy’d, if it had 
 not been divided. It was esteem’d much in favour of creditors when they 'were not 
 obliged to take lands in satisfaction of their debts, .... and it remains so to this time. 
 It was inhabitants and not land that was wanting; yea, it was common in dividing lands 
 
 45 New Haven Colony Records (1654), P- 215; Rhode Island Records, I, 54 (1638) • 
 Connecticut Colony Public Records, I, 552 (1650). 
 
 40 Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d series, VIII, 230. See also Massachusetts (Province) 
 Acts and Resolves, I (1602), ch. 14, p. 44. 
 
 47 Public Records, I, 38. 
 
 48 Conn. Hist. Soc. Collections, IV, 175, 187, 180. 
 
 49 Public Records, IV, 307. 
 
 50 Ibid., VII, 191, note. 
 
 51 Rhode Island Records, IV, 238. 
 
 52 Ibid., 417. 
 
 53 Charming’ in J. H. U. Studies in History and Political Science, IV (1886), No. 3, p. 16. 
 instructions to Jonathan Belcher (the agent of the colony in England), in Conn. 
 
 Hist. Soc. Collections, IV, 144. 
 
60 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 among the inhabitants to oblige them to hold the land they had once accepted, that they 
 might bear the burthen of Taxes and fencing. And much of our lands remain yet 
 unsubdued, and must continue so without the assistance of the younger sons, which 
 in reason can’t be expected if they have no part of the inheritance, for in this poor 
 country, if the landlord lives, the tenant starves; few estates here will let for little more 
 than for maintaining fences and paying taxes. By this custom of dividing inheritances, 
 all were supply’d with land to work upon, the land as well occupy’d as the number of 
 hands would admit of, the people universally imploy’d in husbandry 
 
 LAND TENURE IN THE MIDDLE COLONIES. 
 
 The characteristic features of the New England system, community set¬ 
 tlement and freehold tenure in small parcels, were present in the Middle 
 Colonies, but not so uniformly predominant. Leaving New York aside for 
 the moment, where institutions of the Dutch introduced a peculiar factor, 
 let us consider the conditions of land tenure in the Provinces of East and 
 West Jersey and Pennsylvania. These were proprietary colonies; in them 
 the land as well as the privileges of government were granted by the King, 
 not to trading corporations as in New England, but to individuals who were 
 called proprietors. A proprietary grant, such as William Penn had from 
 Charles II, was regarded as a private estate. It could be transmitted by 
 inheritance to heirs; it could be sold, leased, or mortgaged. So the proprie¬ 
 tors became not only political governors, they were investors and often 
 speculators in land. 
 
 TERMS OF DISTRIBUTION OF LAND IN PENNSYLVANIA AND 
 
 NEW JERSEY. 
 
 The enormous tracts of land, such as Penn and the New Jersey proprietors 
 held, were of no use unless they could be peopled. Consequently the pro 
 prietors advertised for settlers, putting out statements of the attractions 
 of the country, accompanied by the terms on which land would be distributed 
 to newcomers. In New Jersey, the Concessions and Agreements of the Lords 
 Proprietors, of 1664, 55 provided that every freeman who should transport 
 himself before January 1665 and provide himself with a musket, ammuni¬ 
 tion, and six months’ provisions, should receive 150 acres of land, and for 
 every able-bodied man servant similarly equipped who should be transported 
 with him the master was to receive another 150 acres. Servants were prom¬ 
 ised 75 acres of land at the expiration of their term of service. A premium 
 was put on early migration by the allotment of lesser amounts of land to 
 those settlers who arrived in the following years. Actual settlement was 
 required as a condition of all grants, it being provided that one able-bodied 
 servant, or two weaker ones, should be maintained upon every 100 acres. 
 The land was to be held in free and common socage, but subject to the pay¬ 
 ment of a yearly quitrent of one-half penny per acre to the lords piopiietors, 
 beginning after March 1670. 
 
 In West New Jersey a similar agreement was drawn up in 1677 56 giving 
 70 acres to the earliest arrivals and for their able-bodied servants, and less 
 
 55 Reprinted in Smith’s History of the Colony of New Jersey, 512 et seq. 
 
 56 Concessions and Agreements , in New Jersey Archives, I, 244. 
 
LAND TENURE 
 
 61 
 
 amounts for those who came later. Quitrents were to be paid, and actual 
 settlement, or at least the residence of servants on the land for a term of 
 years, was a condition of every grant. 
 
 William Penn, the proprietor of Pennsylvania, introduced the unique 
 practice of selling land to prospective settlers. In 1681, before leaving Eng¬ 
 land, he sold over 300,000 acres in amounts of from 250 to 10,000 acres to 
 250 persons, mostly well-to-do Quakers of Southern England. 57 His plan 
 of land distribution he outlined as follows: 58 1 
 
 Those'tEu’takp’iin f" . relate three , sorts of People: 1st. Those that will buy: 2dly. 
 be certain as m numhl fT ‘i 3 Servants - T ° the first, the Shares I sell shall 
 Lres free from ^ b T°a- Cr - eS; ^ 15 to say ’ every one shaU contain Five thousand 
 Quit rent hut Z F ' ncumbr f n ce, the price a hundred pounds, and for the 
 
 the saido!?1W E fi ,S K Sh ' ln? 1 ° r th J e . value of h year, y for a hundred Acres; and 
 unon Rent the h ut t0 t0 be paid 1,11 If ®4. To the second sort, that take up Land 
 
 inft Two hundred Arres^TfPi? *,° d °’ paying yearIy ° ne peny per Acre ’ not «ceed- 
 wTtl L n A a !' T° ™ th ' rd SOrt> t0 Wlt ’ Servants that are carried over, Fifty 
 
 whetTtheh'tim *is°«cpired!’ 6 eWy Head ’ a " d Fifty Act « -er y Servant 
 
 T™- °f 1,000 f- reS ° r m ° re were not to have over I- 000 acres in a 
 single tract, unless within 3 years they settled a family on each thousand 
 
 acres. Every grant must be settled within 3 years on pain of forfeiture 59 
 
 THE SIZE OF GRANTS. 
 
 As Penn and the other heads of proprietary governments were careful to 
 reserve the right to dispose of their lands on more liberal terms if they 
 wished, there was little uniformity in the size of grants. On the whole they 
 seem to have been somewhat larger than in New England. In the towns in 
 northeast New Jersey which were settled from New England, the normal 
 size of grants was between 100 and 200 acres, with only occasionally a grant 
 as large as 300 acres. In the Monmouth Grant the allotments were somewhat 
 larger. Outside the towns, there were extensive transfers of land, and a few 
 large estates were founded which were cultivated with negro slaves. But in 
 general in the early years the “ soil of East Jersey was being taken up in 
 comparatively small allotments by bona-fide settlers. Anything like a system 
 of large estates was unknown, nor was land speculation being carried on to 
 any great extent, except of course by the lords proprietors themselves ” 60 
 After the purchase of the Province of East Jersey by the 24 proprietors, 
 the taking up of land on a large scale began. In the Elizabethtown tract 
 38 surveys (1683-1703) were for 500 acres or more, and of these, 23 were 
 over 1,000 acres and 8 over 2,000 acres. Not only in this section, but throu^h- 
 out. the whole province, a period of comparatively large surveys began”in 
 1683, the holders sometimes being proprietors themselves, sometimes outside 
 investors. Provision was made for the subdivision of the large grants for 
 
 57 Myers’s Narratives, 219. 
 
 ^ Some Account of Pennsylvania, in Myers’s Narratives, 208 
 
 ° 516 et°seq a ^ C ° ncessions of 11 Jul ^ 168T ' Reprinted in Hazard’s Annals of Penn., 
 
 WTa "5 J'ff p r ?p nc r e °f Jersey Columbia University Studies in History, Eco- 
 mic and Public Law, XXX, 44. Lnless otherwise indicated facts regarding New 
 Jersey have been drawn from this monograph. 8 
 
62 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 not many of the original proprietors intended to retain their holdings intact 
 
 «< bona-fide ,«!«,. were »»,ew„a, 
 l a r ger than in the eastern province. The earliest adventurers, indeed, received 
 only 70 acres for each servant transported. But each of the I0 »P r »P rie ® 
 was entitled to an original allotment of 5,200 acres plus a second distntato 
 of 5 000 acres. Among the earlier settlers a large share held proprietary 
 rights; later arrivals bought fractions of proprietary rights or merely pur¬ 
 chased land from a proprietor. Few grants were for less than 100 acre , 
 while those of 200, 300, and even 500 acres were not rare. 
 
 A large part of the interior lands of New Jersey were held by the West 
 Jersey Society, a business company organized in 1691 to make profit from 
 land sales. It held at one time one-fifth of the area of WestJersey, 1 
 ino- the Minnisinck Province of 200,500 acres, lying between the Delaware 
 River and the Blue Mountains, and all of Cape May County. T e company 
 sold land in general in larger tracts than those of the earlier settlers. 
 
 QUITRENTS. 
 
 The annual payment by the grantee of land of a sum prescribed by the 
 proprietor, in lieu of all services, was a uniform feature of the land system 
 of ah proprietary colonies. As a form of revenue, qu.trents proved uniform y 
 unsatisfactory. The payments were evaded whenever possible a " ' v 
 always tardy. In Pennsylvania, quitrents were a perpetual s _ 
 dissatisfaction,” and in New Jersey, as well as in New York, ywlent resistance 
 was sometimes offered to the claim of the landlord. In West Jersey the 
 proprietors did not attempt to collect quitrents, but in the eastern province 
 the disputes between the proprietors and the settlers on the Ehzabet 
 and Monmouth tracts, beginning before 1700, led m the eighteenth cen ry 
 to long periods of agrarian discontent and disorder. 02 
 
 LAND TENURE IN NEW NETHERLAND AND NEW YORK. 
 
 The patroonships of New Netherland were so unique a feature of early 
 land tenure that they have received more attention than their influence on 
 agricultural conditions would seem to justify. According to the Privileges 
 and Exemptions of 1629, 63 anyone who should within 4 years plant a co ony 
 of co souls over 15 years old might be acknowledged a patroon of^ ew 
 Netherland. Each patroon was permitted to take up a tract of land fou 
 leagues T16 English miles] along the shore, or one side of a navigable river, 
 or °two leagues on each side of a river, and so far into the country as the 
 
 situation of the occupiers shall permit.” These grants unlimited in 
 
 extent, could be taken up anywhere in the colony except on the is and of 
 Manhattan, which the Dutch West India Company reserved for Use If. The 
 patroons had the right of perpetual inheritance and disposal by will. The 
 colonists were to be freed from taxat ion for 10 years. The patroons were 
 
 61 Eggleston, Social Conditions in the Colonies. Century Magazine, XXVIII (1884), 
 
 62 Osgood, American Colonies in the Eighteenth Century, 11,39- translation 
 
 os Reprinted in English in Jameson’s Narratives. go-p6; and m less correct transla 
 
 in O’Callaghan’s N. Y. Documents Relative to Colonial History, II, 553 55 /- 
 
LAND TENURE 
 
 63 
 
 more than landlords; they were political officers with many of the powers of 
 the lords of feudal manors, such as court jurisdiction, milling rights etc 
 1 heir colonists were bound to stay on the estate for a term of years. ' ’ 
 
 "der such provisions some very large properties and a" few smaller 
 patroonships were established; Rensselaerswyck and Pavonia on the Hudson 
 iver, and Svaanendael on the Delaware. Of these only the first a tract of 
 upwards ot 700,000 acres, became at all permanent. The others were either 
 
 sSft , MhoId- h m r h ShtS Were t>UrChaSed by the com pany.<“ But meanwhile 
 nenci o f H d ^ inCreas !5 ra P ldl y and > notwithstanding the promi- 
 
 V cl ? f a r ^ a ?, 0rS ' W6re the dominan t form of land tenure in New 
 - e terland, for the Dutch West India Company had not overlooked the inter- 
 
 es s of small settlers. The Privileges and Exemptions of l6 2 9 « contained the 
 tollowmg provision: y 
 
 nf' tt!- regar< ! *° l UCh - pri 7 ate pers0ns as on their own account, or others in the service 
 
 «hithe a™d aS se e ttle X: n hu ‘ han ““ of P a ‘™-> shal > be inclined to go 
 
 r , they shalI > Wlth the approbation of the Director and Council there 
 
 to e improvfand a sh e aU P e„Tov T ^7 S* “ ^ ^ 35 they ^all be able roperly 
 
 prove, and shall enjoy the same m full property either for themselves or masters.” 
 
 New SherlTT ’-!i! ral Ch f rter ^ grMted t0 an y° ne who should emigrate to 
 1 etherland with 5 souls, 100 morgens (about 200 acres) of land Under 
 
 end oTlohI’TsH 5 7 Tf 7“ " P in large nUmbers on the western 
 
 d of Long Island, on Staten Island, and on the west bank of the Hudson 
 
 „ ° US1 , made •?, ngmalIy by mdividuals, the Dutch settlements were soon 
 
 of New Engfand!" age C ° mmunities which rese mbled in many respects those 
 
 LAND TENURE UNDER THE ENGLISH GOVERNORS. 
 
 The English governors did not introduce any radical departures in the 
 Dutch land system. They confirmed all Dutch titles, both those of the small 
 
 of York nf °V 6 P^T’ substituting, of course, the tenure of the Duke 
 of., ork (later James II) for that of the Dutch West India Company. Their 
 pohcy m new grants a.med to secure rapid settlement and cultivation, “ that 
 thereby the respective plantations might be the better peopled, strengthened, 
 and improved, and his Majesty’s revenue accordingly advanced ” as 
 
 Governor N.colls 69 reported (ca. 1669) that “ the severall proportions of 
 indents of Land are alwaies allowed with respect to the numbers of Planters 
 
 taking* 67 are a ” e t0 manage ’ and in what time t0 accomplish their under- 
 
 For the first 20 years of the English occupation the grants of land were 
 tor the most part, under 1,000 acres and seldom exceeded 2,000 acres. 70 The 
 wide discretion given to the English gov ernors led to abuses in the granting 
 
 64 Osgood, American Colonies, II, 31. ~ 
 
 6j Jameson’s Narratives, 94 
 
 M Re I P 8 in e‘ t ed e ’ n English transIation in N - y- Documents Relative to Colonial History, I, 
 
 C7 See Eltinge, Dutch Village Communities on the Hudson Rivpr in t jt tt o. 
 
 cs X m y H T ry and , P S U ! iCal Sc 7 “’ IV ' No. I (1886 “pp.” ’ m 1 H - U - StUdUS 
 
 69 t * -Documents Relative to Colonial History, IV, 392 
 
 70 v v C n laghan ’ Do ^mentary History of New York, T, 87. 
 
 Y •» Documents Relative to Colonial History, IV, 392. 
 
64 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 of land in the later seventeenth century. Governor Dongan’s commission " 
 
 ( 16861 empowered him to grant lands to any planters or mhabitan s 
 s ( uch ter Zlunir such moderate Quit-rents, services.and a^dge- 
 ments as he should think fit. Similar powers were granted to latei govern 
 until reports began to come back to England of extravagant grants to favored 
 individuals. The Earl of Bellomont reported " (169S) that his P red ^ s ’ 
 Colonel Fletcher, “ hath made it almost impossible to settle the Count y 
 with Inhabitants there being no land but what must be purchased from h 
 7 ew Grantees . ” Instances were cited of 6 enormous grants varying 
 
 Rl s”o miles each. In .notes le.Ses” he es.nna.ed that » te. 
 
 whole Province is given away to about thirty persons in e ec ’ ‘ ' ’ . f 
 The effect of such a policy was to give a new impetus to the system 
 large estates which the Dutch had attempted to establish, but in spite o 
 the organization of a few manors such as those at Fordham and Pelham, 
 the typical land tenure remained that of the small freeholder cultivating his 
 own m 7 d Where cheap land was so abundant and farming could be earned 
 °7 with so little capital it would indeed have been an unenterprising dolt 
 who would have preferred the life of a tenant to that of a freeholder The 
 Earl of Bellomont remarked " that “ men will not care to become base tenants 
 to proprietors of land in this province [1. e., New York], when they c 
 buy*the fee-simple of lands in the Jerseys for five pounds per hundred acres, 
 
 and I beleive [sic] as cheaply in Pensylvama.” 
 
 QUITRENTS IN NEW YORK. 
 
 In New York the requirement of quitrents as a condition of land grants 
 had been enjoined upon the governors, and in 1687 a minimum annua 
 payment was specified of 2s. 6d. for each 100 acres of land granted but 
 this rule was disregarded. Governor Dongan reported (1687) that the 
 quitrents were very inconsiderable, “ the most part of the paten s g ran !; e __ 
 by my predecessors were without any reservation of Quit-Kents. .... 
 Occasionally we find instances of quitrents paid in kind. The planters on 
 Staten Island paid 1 bushel of wheat for each 80 acres, and on the arge 
 grants in the Mohawk Valley quitrents were paid in otter or bearer skins. 
 
 THE METHODS OF SETTLEMENT IN THE MIDDLE COLONIES. 
 
 The typical form of settlement in New England was by communities, and 
 by the migration of New Englanders to Long Island, to Westchester County, 
 New York, and to northern New Jersey their typical institutions were in re¬ 
 duced into the colonies under proprietary government Denton ■' observed 
 the New England system in operation in New York (1670). He wrote. 
 
 “ To give some satisfaction to people that shall be desirous to transport th emseLes 
 thither, (the Countrey being capable of entertaining many thousands,) how and after 
 
 71 N. Y. Documents Relative to Colonial Histoiy, III, 3^i» 
 
 73 N. Y., Documents Relative to Colonial History, IV, 397 - 
 
 75 O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New York, I, 164. 
 
 76 N. Y. Documents Relative to Colonial History, HI, 3^3 > I*> 39 -* 
 
 77 Brief Description of Nezv York, 17. 
 
LAND TENURE 
 
 65 
 
 what manner people live, and how Land may be procured, &c, I shall answer, that the 
 usual way, is for a Company of people to joyn together, either enough to make a Town, 
 or a lesser number, these go with the consent of the Governor, and view a Tract of 
 Land, there being choice enough, and finding a place convenient for a Town, they return 
 to the Governor, who upon their desire admits them into the Colony, and gives them a 
 Grant or Patent for the said Land, for themselves and Associates. These persons being 
 thus qualified, settle the place, and take in what inhabitants to themselves they shall see 
 cause to admit of, till their Town be full; these Associates thus taken in have equal 
 privileges with themselves, and they make a division of the Land suitable to every 
 mans occasions, no man being debarr’d of such quantities as he hath occasion for, the 
 rest they let lie in common till they have occasion for a new division, never dividing 
 their Pasture- land at all, which lies in common to the whole Town.” 
 
 But the proprietary system favored an individualistic system of settlement. 
 Grants were made to individuals rather than to groups of settlers. In New 
 England the village institutions which provided for the distribution of land 
 and the location of farms within the town grant were framed in advance 
 of settlement. In the Middle Colonies the process was reversed. Settlers 
 received their grants as individuals, often after actual settling upon the land, 
 and when a number of farms had been cleared in a neighborhood a local 
 government was organized. Says Osgood: 78 
 
 The economic impulse under which the provinces were settled operated upon indi¬ 
 viduals and families more than upon groups and entire communities. Migration and 
 
 the progress of settlement within the provinces were, in most cases, distinctly indi¬ 
 vidualistic in character.” 
 
 The evils of dispersion of population were so obvious that the proprietors 
 undertook to encourage group settlements. Governor Nicolls of New York 
 reported (ca. 1669) : 79 
 
 “ T he Governour gives liberty to Planters to find out and buy lands from the Indians 
 where it pleaseth best the Planters but the seating of Towns together is necessary in 
 these parts of America, especially upon the Maine Land.” 
 
 In East New Jersey the proprietors seem to have originally contemplated 
 group settlements. In the “ Proposals ” 80 of 1682 we find the following 
 provisions: 
 
 ‘And forasmuch as it will be most commodious for planters to live together, 
 whereby they may be a meet help to each other: It is ordered, that all the purchasers 
 and takers up of land, shall sit down by some village or township already laid out, or 
 to be laid out hereafter, in the said province.” 
 
 Penn understood thoroughly the social advantages of community settle¬ 
 ments. In the Conditions and Concessions of 1681 81 he made specific pro¬ 
 visions for the colonists who wished to “ sit together in a lot or township.” 
 Later he laid out a number of townships of 5,000 acres in squares, each hav¬ 
 ing a village with a minimum of 10 families. The arrangement of the villages 
 he describes as follows: 82 
 
 “Our Townships lie square; generally the Village in the Center; the Houses either 
 opposit, or else opposit to the middle, betwixt two houses over the way, for near neighbor- 
 hood. We have ano ther Method, that tho the Village be in the Center, yet after a 
 
 78 American Colonies, II, 48. 
 
 70 New York Documents Relative to Colonial History, III, 188. 
 
 80 In Smith’s New Jersey, 545. 
 
 81 Hazard, Annals of Penn., 516. 
 
 8 - Jurther Account of Pennsylvania, in Myers’s Narratives, 263. 
 
 6 
 
66 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 different manner: Five hundred Acres are allotted for the Village, which among ten 
 families, comes to fifty Acres each: This lies square, and on the outside of the square 
 stand the Houses, with their fifty Acres running back, where ends meeting make the 
 Center of the 500 Acres as they are to the whole. Before the Doors of the Houses lies 
 the highway, and cross it, every man’s 450 Acres of Land that makes up his Complement 
 of 500, so that the Conveniency of Neighbourhood is made agreeable with that of the 
 
 Land.” 
 
 Many of the colonists objected and wanted to have all their land in a lump, 83 
 
 “ tho by such Wilderness vacancies they had ruin’d the Country, .... I had m my 
 view Society, Assistance, Busy Commerce, Instruction of Youth, Government of Peoples 
 manners, Conveniency of Religious Assembling, Encouragement of Mechanics distinct 
 and beaten Roads, and it has answered in all those respects, I think, to an Universal 
 
 Content.” 
 
 Notwithstanding the encouragement and planning of Penn and other 
 proprietors, settlement by communities never attained in the Middle Colonies 
 the importance which it held in New England. 
 
 LAW OF INHERITANCE. 
 
 The law and custom of the transfer of land by inheritance was more favor¬ 
 able to the growth of large estates in some of the Middle Colonies than in 
 New England. In New York the English custom of primogeniture was 
 formally established in 1683, when the First Colonial Assembly resolved: 
 
 “That from hence forward Noe Lands Within this province shall be Esteemed or 
 accounted a Chattle or personall Estate but an Estate of ^Inheritance according to the 
 Custome and practice of his Majesties Realme of England.” 
 
 In New Jersey equal distribution among children of intestates was the 
 rule, 85 and also in Pennsylvania until I 7 ° 5 > when a provincial law provided 
 that the eldest son should have a double share of the estate of an intestate. 
 
 SUMMARY. 
 
 The land system of the Middle Colonies had a legal and institutional basis 
 different from that of New England. The former was based on the town 
 grant the latter on the proprietary grant. In New England land was settled 
 by communities, in the Middle Colonies by individuals. The payment of 
 quitrents was a uniform condition of all grants in the Middle Colonies, but 
 such payments were practically unknown in New England. The law and 
 custom of inheritance was more favorable to the growth of large estates in 
 the Middle Colonies, particularly in New York. Nevertheless, the mam 
 features of land tenure were the same. Land was cultivated by the owners, 
 in small parcels in Pennsylvania as in Massachusetts, in New York as in 
 Connecticut. The differences in the laws of land tenure and the regulations 
 for land distribution were not essential. Behind them, in both New England 
 and the Middle Colonies, was a common and fundamental economic condition, 
 the abundance of cheap land. Cheap land made large estates and tenancy 
 as impossible in one section as in the other. 
 
 83 Myers’s Narratives, 263. 
 
 84 New York Colonial Laws, I, 114* 
 
 85 Learning and Spicer, Concessions and Agreements, 403, 430 . 
 
 86 Laws of the Province of Penn. (1728), 49. 
 
Part II 
 
 RURAL ECONOMY IN THE EIGHTEENTH 
 
 CENTURY 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter VI.—Pioneering in the Eighteenth 
 
 Century. 
 
 In studying the agricultural development of New England and the Middle 
 Colonies in the eighteenth century, we can distinguish two sharply con¬ 
 trasted types of farming and of rural life: (a) pioneering, the agriculture 
 of the new settlements on the frontier, and (b) the agriculture of the older 
 communities along the seacoast and in the river valleys. 
 
 Until recent years pioneering has been an important feature of our agricul¬ 
 tural history at all stages of its development. The frontier with its appar¬ 
 ently inexhaustible supply of new, cheap land and its democratic and unre¬ 
 strained social life has always been present to the westward of the older 
 settlements, drawing away from them their surplus population, the most 
 energetic as well as the most unruly of the younger generation. If the 
 frontier has been a safety-valve for the relief of political discontent, it has 
 also proved, changing the metaphor, a sponge absorbing much of the best 
 talent from the farms of the East. 
 
 THE WESTWARD PROGRESS OF SETTLEMENT. 
 
 The first American frontier, as Professor Turner 1 has shown, was on the 
 Atlantic coast. Until the end of the seventeenth century the colonists had 
 occupied only a narrow fringe of the Coastal Plain from the Penobscot 
 River to New York City and in addition the lower valleys of the Connecticut, 
 Hudson, and Delaware Rivers. 2 In the hundred years ending in 1763 the 
 colonists, amid almost incessant Indian warfare, had succeeded in clearing 
 and settling a strip of Coastal Plain about 100 miles wide. This area, inter¬ 
 mediate between the coast settlements of the seventeenth century and the 
 trans-Allegheny settlements of the late eighteenth century, Professor Turner 
 had aptly termed “ The Old West.” In New England the frontier was found 
 in the first half of the eighteenth century in the western counties of Massa¬ 
 chusetts and Connecticut. In New York the population expanded along the 
 Hudson and Mohawk Valleys into the valleys of their tributaries, the Wall- 
 kill and Cherry Valleys, and also along the sources of the Susquehanna. In 
 Pennsylvania the trend of settlement was into the Great Valley, the fertile 
 limestone region of the southeastern part of the State and then southward 
 along this valley into the southern uplands. 
 
 After the Treaty of Paris (1763) had removed the French and Indian 
 menace, a great swarming of pioneers into new land took place. From the 
 old towns of Southern New England thousands of settlers moved into New 
 Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont. After the Revolution, immigration con- 
 
 1 The Old West, in Wisconsin Hist. Soc. Proceedings, 1908, pp. 184-233. 
 
 2 Maps showing settlement in 1660 are to be found in Channing, United States, I, 510, 
 
 and in Shepherd, Historical Atlas, 189, 191. 
 
 69 
 
70 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 tinued into northern New England, until by 1812 practically all its lands 
 available for farming had been taken up. Into New York State, meanwhile, 
 a stream of New England settlers had been flowing via the Mohawk Valley 
 to take up lands in the fertile Genessee Country. From the older settlements 
 of Pennsylvania emigrants passed across the Alleghenies and into the fertile 
 valleys of the Ohio. It is unnecessary to repeat here the story of the westward 
 movement of our population. We are interested only in the kind of agricul¬ 
 ture which was carried on by the pioneers of the eighteenth century, and 
 inasmuch as the record of the expansion of agriculture into the Ohio and 
 Mississippi Valleys belongs chiefly to the nineteenth century, we shall confine 
 our discussion to conditions east of the Alleghenies. 3 
 
 THE CAUSES OF EXPANSION ON NEW LAND. 
 
 The forces which caused the movement of the agricultural population west¬ 
 ward to the Alleghenies were varied. The soil of the old settlements soon 
 showed the effects of an exhausting cropping system without adequate fer¬ 
 tilization. Jared Eliot 4 wrote in 1747 from Killingworth, Connecticut, on 
 Long Island Sound, that soil depletion was in his opinion the most important 
 cause of the failure of the wheat crops ; continuing: 
 
 “When our fore-fathers settled here, they entered a Land which probably never had 
 been Ploughed since the Creation; the Land being new they depended upon the natural 
 Fertility of the Ground, which served their purpose very well, and when they had worn 
 out one piece they cleared another, without any concern to amend their Land, except a 
 little helped by the Fold and Cart-dung, .... Our Lands being thus worn out, I sup¬ 
 pose to be one Reason why so many are inclined to Remove to new Places that they may 
 raise Wheat: As also that they may have more Room, thinking that we live too thick.” 
 
 As early as 1750 the declining yield of grain crops showed that the land 
 in the neighborhood of Philadelphia was being “ worn out ”; 5 and in the 
 neighborhood of both New York and Boston it was evident before the end 
 of the eighteenth century that fertility was decreasing. 6 
 
 THE RISE OF LAND VALUES IN THE OLDER COMMUNITIES. 
 
 Land values in the eighteenth century reflected the increasing scarcity of 
 good land in the older communities as contrasted with its abundance on the 
 frontier. Price data of the eighteenth century are fragmentary 7 and unsat¬ 
 isfactory because of the disordered state of the colonial currencies. In the 
 case of land values comparisons are rendered especially difficult by the lack 
 
 3 For a full discussion of the movements of population in the eighteenth century see 
 
 Turner, The Old West, in Wis. Hist. Soc. Proceedings (1908), pp. 184-233. Also 
 Mathews, The Expansion of New England, chapters I to V. 
 
 4 Field Husbandry, 23, 24. 
 
 5 Watson, Philadelphia (1830 ed.), 717. 
 
 G New York Society for Promotion of Useful Arts, Transactions, I (2d ed., 1801), 57; 
 American Academy, Memoirs, I, 385. 
 
 7 Fragmentary data are to be found in the writings of the travelers of the period. See 
 especially Cooper, Information Respecting America (1794), pp. 71, 94, 107, 108; 
 Richard Smith, Journal (1769), pp. 21, 32. See also Brown, Schoharie County, 
 New York, 15; American Museum, VII (1790), p. 296; Washington, Letters on 
 Agriculture (Knight ed.), 35-37, 107. Brown, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st 
 series, IX, 118, 124. 
 
PIONEERING IN THE EIGHTEENTH! CENTURY 
 
 71 
 
 of standardized units. Comment on the rise in land values around Philadel¬ 
 phia in 1750 is found in the report of a German traveler, who wrote: 8 
 
 “The price of farms in Pennsylvania, especially round Philadelphia, is already quite 
 high; from 30 to 50 florins are paid for an acre, only a day’s journey from the city, 
 although the ground is still uncleared forest land. If a place is desired for a homestead, 
 which is already in a habitable and cultivated condition, containing a dwelling-house, 
 barns and good stables, together with meadows, orchards, tilled fields and sufficient wood¬ 
 land, twice as much is asked for it as for uncultivated land, the price being about one 
 hundred florins per acre. Rich Englishmen have already bought up from the Indians 
 all the remote land far and near, where all is as yet wild and wooded, in order to sell 
 it again to the Europeans who are coming to the country. Our German people who emi¬ 
 grate there do not get land enough for nothing upon which to build a cottage. The price 
 of land is increasing from year to year, especially because the English see that so many 
 people, anxious to own farms or plantations, are coming to the country every year.” 
 
 The author of American Husbandry (1775) 9 commented on rising land 
 values in New England. 
 
 “Trade, navigation, fisheries, increasing population, with other causes, have operated 
 strongly to raise the value of all the estates under cultivation, whose situation is favour¬ 
 able, for in proportion as the wild country is taken up good lands and convenient situa¬ 
 tions rise in value; till we see they come, near the great towns, to as high a value as in 
 the best parts of Great Britain, for near Boston there are lands worth twenty shillings 
 an acre.” 
 
 The best summary of the situation is to be found in the report prepared by 
 William Strickland 10 in 1794 for the English Board of Agriculture. After 
 giving a number of figures for land values in various parts of New York 
 State, he concludes: 
 
 “Hence the average price of land, in the old settled country below Schenectady (re¬ 
 jecting such as being mountainous is little capable of cultivation, and such as for mer¬ 
 cantile purposes, or from being in the vicinity of large towns, is of increased value) 
 appears to be £3. 7s. iod. per acre, and of the new settled country, to the west of it, 
 9s. 3 %d.” 
 
 Regarding New Jersey and Pennsylvania, he wrote: * 11 
 
 “ The best land in Jersey and in that part of Pennsylvania which is east of the moun¬ 
 tains, exclusive of the German tract, may be settled at about £4. per acre; they certainly 
 average something more than the old part of New York, this tract not being mixed with 
 any barren mountains, and being less rocky and broken. 
 
 “The back lands of Pennsylvania sell for considerably less than those of New York: 
 from what information I could obtain, I could not state them at more than 3s. or 4s. 
 per acre; a great quantity was upon sale for less; the tenure of them is less satisfactory 
 than of those of New York, the titles less to be relied upon, and the whole having less 
 credit, many egregious frauds have been committed upon purchasers, particularly those 
 in Europe.” 
 
 LAND POLICY AND EMIGRATION—NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 The policy adopted in the eighteenth century by the northern colonies in 
 the disposal of unoccupied lands favored the dispersion of population and the 
 rapid settlement of new areas. In the older New England towns up to the 
 
 8 Mittelberger, Journey to Pennsylvania, 118. 
 
 9 I, 63. 
 
 10 Observations, 12. 
 
 11 Ibid., 16. 
 
72 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 
 early seventeenth century it had been relatively easy for a newcomer to 
 obtain free of cost all the land he could effectively use. During the eighteenth 
 century, as the supplies of undivided land in the town commons became 
 diminished, the proprietors adopted a less liberal policy in land distribution. 12 
 About 1725 there came a change in the policy of certain New England col¬ 
 onies in the making of town grants. The prudent policy of distributing new 
 land purely for the sake of settlement was abandoned, and instead both 
 Massachusetts and Connecticut sold whole townships to grantees who in¬ 
 tended not to settle but to resell at a profit. There followed a period (1730- 
 1740) of speculation in “wild lands,” which, although in the end it proved 
 disastrous to those who had bought large tracts, did nevertheless stimulate 
 pioneering. 13 A similar period of land speculation was inaugurated about 
 1760, when Governor Wentworth of New Hampshire sold the grants of 130 
 towns in Vermont, chiefly to speculators. 14 The settlers who took up these 
 lands soon discovered that the title to the whole tract was disputed by the 
 province of New York and violence and bloodshed resulted before the 
 matter was adjusted. 15 
 
 IN PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 In Pennsylvania, under the proprietary government, it was relatively 
 easy for pioneers to acquire vacant land. The price of land when purchased 
 from the land office fluctuated between £5 and £15 per 100 acres (i. e., between 
 is. and 3s. per acre), beside a small quitrent, and sales were for cash and 
 not on credit. However, the great majority of settlers who took up land 
 in the back country, especially in the period of great German immigration, 
 1718-1732, did not trouble to acquire a title, but simply squatted on unoccu¬ 
 pied land. During the first half of the eighteenth century the management of 
 the proprietary lands was in great confusion and the practice of squatting 
 became general. By 1726 it was estimated that there were 100,000 squatters 
 and of 670,000 acres occupied (1732-1740) over two-thirds were settled 
 without grants. 16 
 
 “ Squatting, though discouraged by the proprietors, as it defrauded them of quitrents, 
 soon became the most popular and regular method of acquiring land. Squatters’ rights 
 forced their way from presumptive titles to an established position, first as personalty and 
 finally as realty. They became the basis of land transfers through the customary aliena¬ 
 tion of improvements instead of the legal title. Toward the middle of the Eighteenth 
 Century the proprietors were forced to recognize them in the so-called settlement rights 
 as a legitimate mode of obtaining title to land. From this time they supplanted office 
 rights as the general basis of the acquisition and transfer of land throughout the 
 province.” 
 
 The lands thus occupied without title had eventually to be paid for with 
 interest, but the squatters were given the right of preemption and thus there 
 was virtually established a credit system of land purchase in Pennsylvania 
 which undoubtedly contributed greatly to the rapid settlement of the back 
 
 12 Judd, Hadley, 286. 
 
 13 Mathews, Expansion of New England, 81-84, 92, 101. 
 
 14 Turner, in Wisconsin Hist. Soc. Proceedings (1908), 193. 
 
 15 Beckley, Vermont, 66. 
 
 10 Ballagh in American Hist. Asso. Report (1897), 112. 
 
PIONEERING IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 73 
 
 country . 17 Not until 1769 were the affairs of the land office brought into a 
 semblance of order. The township plan after that date was more effectively 
 carried out, the size of grants was restricted, and actual settlement and 
 improvement were required . 18 
 
 IN NEW YORK. 
 
 The land system of colonial New York was less favorable to the small 
 settler than either that of New England or Pennsylvania, and largely on 
 that account the movement into the back country was less vigorous in that 
 province. We have already remarked the unusual number of large land 
 grants by the English governors at the end of the seventeenth century. The 
 practice continued until the Revolution. A tabulation of the “ more important 
 patents,” 1700-1775. shows that out of a total of 211 grants, 128, or 61 per 
 cent, were for tracts of between 1,000 and 10,000 acres, and 83 were over 
 10,000 acres. The largest patents granted (2) were for 100,000 acres each. 
 The average grant was 10,400 acres. 19 
 
 Tenant farming was in only a few cases successfully established on the 
 so-called manors of New York, and so the large holdings remained for the 
 most part uninhabited and uncultivated. Squatting was practiced on such 
 tracts, and the squatters at times could vindicate their titles in court, because 
 of conflicting grants and careless surveying, but in general the young farmers 
 looking for new land preferred to emigrate to a colony where fee-simple 
 grants were more readily obtained. In 1764 Lieutenant Governor Colden 
 wrote to the Lords of Trade: 20 
 
 “ Your Lordships have been informed of several extravagant Grants of Lands in this 
 province; three of them contain, as the proprietors claim, above a million of acres each, 
 several others above 200,000. All these were made without any previous Survey, as usual 
 in other cases, and without mentioning any quantity of land intended to be granted. 
 Tho these grants contain a great part of the province, they are made on trifling acknowl¬ 
 edgements. The far greater part of them still remain uncultivated, without any benefit 
 to the community, and are likewise a discouragement to the settling & improving the 
 lands in the neighbourhood of them, for from the uncertainty of their boundaries, the 
 Patentees of these great Tracts are daily enlarging their pretensions, and by tedious & 
 most expensive Law-suits, distress and ruin poor families who have taken out grants 
 near them; of all which, I propose to send to your Lordships particular proofs before 
 winter.” 
 
 And a year later he wrote: 21 
 
 “ The uncertainty of the Grant, both as to the quantity of the Land and boundaries 
 of the Tract granted, which in Law invalidates the grants of the Crown, turns greatly to 
 the advantage of the owners of these great Tracts, by the artifices they make use of to 
 inlarge their claims perpetually. Thereby they are in continual contention with the 
 Farmers contiguous to them, who have purchased Bona Fide, and improved the Lands; 
 
 and by the expence of Law Suits many of the most industrious Farmers are ruined.” 
 
 “ In 1774 only 1,000,000 acres of the 5,000,000 acres of the province were improved, and 
 the settlements were all east of Utica on the Mohawk, and were mainly confined to the 
 Hudson River, Manhattan, Staten and Long Islands.” 22 
 
 11 Turner, The Old West, Wisconsin Hist. Soc. Proceedings (1008), p. 21?. 
 lfe Ballagh, Am. Hist. Asso. Report, 1897, p. 112. 
 
 19 French, Gazetteer of New York, 49-52. 
 
 20 O’Callaghan, N. Y. Documents Relative to Colonial History, VII, 654. 
 
 21 Ibid., VII, 795. 
 
 22 Ballagh, loc. cit., p. no. 
 
74 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 LAND POLICY AFTER THE REVOLUTION. 
 
 After the Revolution the new States of Massachusetts, New York, and 
 Pennsylvania all began a liberal distribution of the vacant lands which thej 
 had inherited from the previous colonial governments. In Pennsylvania, 
 by the acts of 1780 and 1783, tracts in the northwestern part of the State, 
 known as the Depreciation and Donation Lands, were set aside for the sol¬ 
 diers of the Revolutionary War and were later opened to settlement. Western 
 lands were at that date not greatly in demand, and many of the soldiers sold 
 out their rights to speculators at low prices. 23 A land office was opened in 
 1781 and lands were sold at prices varying with the location from £3 to £30 
 for 100 acres. 24 In 1792 a general act was passed for opening the unsettled 
 lands in the Commonwealth for settlement and improvement. The price of 
 land was reduced, the maximum now being £7 10s. per 100 acres for land 
 north and west of the Ohio and Allegheny Rivers. A limit of 400 acies was 
 set on all grants, preemption rights on that amount being granted to settlers 
 already in possession. Actual settlement by purchasers was made a condition 
 for retention of title. 25 
 
 LAND SPECULATION IN NEW YORK. 
 
 In New York, also, vacant lands, the so-called Bounty Lands in the west¬ 
 ern part of the State, were distributed to Revolutionary soldiers. 26 A tract 
 of about 1,800,000 acres was laid out in square townships of 24,000 acres 
 which were divided into 200-acre lots. Private soldiers received 600 acres 
 and officers larger amounts in proportion to their rank. As in Pennsylvania, 
 large amounts of the Bounty Lands got into the hands of speculators, the 
 soldiers having sold out their rights at ridiculously low prices. 27 In 1786 
 an act was passed whose title significantly read “ An Act for the speedy sale 
 of the Unappropriated Lands within this state.” Having provided for laying 
 out townships of 64,000 acres, divided into lots of 640 acres each, the law 
 fixed a minimum price of 1 shilling per acre and required one-fourth of 
 the purchase price to be paid down and the balance within 60 days. Actual 
 settlement within 7 years was a condition for a valid title. 28 In 1791 the 
 act was amended so that, with certain exceptions, the State lands might be 
 sold by the commissioners of the land office “ in such parcels, on such terms, 
 and in such manner as they shall judge most conducive to the interest of 
 
 this State.” 29 Thus, of course, the 1 shilling minimum price was 
 
 abolished. An orgy of prodigal disposition of the state domain followed, 
 over 5,500,000 acres being sold in a single year, the State treasury receiving 
 only £412,173, or on an average is. 6d. per acre for the land. The largest 
 single tract sold contained 3,635,200 acres and brought only 8d. per acre. 30 
 
 23 Agnew, Northwest Pennsylvania, 28; Feree, Pennsylvania, 194-198. 
 
 24 Read, Abridgement of the Laws of Pennsylvania (1801), 208-219. 
 
 25 Ibid., 219—224. 
 
 26 By the acts of 25 July, 1782 and n May, 1784. See Laws of New York (Cook edition), 
 
 5th Session, 1782, chap. 77 , P- 521; 6th Session, 1784, chap. 63, p. 731. 
 
 27 Maude, Visit to Niagara, 38. 
 
 28 Laws of New York, 9th Session (1786), chap. 67, p. 334. 
 
 29 Ibid., 14th Session, chap. 42, p. 245. 
 
 30 O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New York, III, 1069-1083. 
 
PIONEERING IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 
 
 75 
 
 THE WILD LANDS OF MAINE. 
 
 Massachusetts, too, attempted to replenish her empty treasury after the 
 Revolution by land sales. The District of Maine, then a part of the State 
 of Massachusetts, was still largely unoccupied and contained millions of 
 acres of wild lands. The land system in Maine, as we have seen, had 
 differed from that of Southern New England in the greater frequency of 
 large giants directly to individuals. Titles had become uncertain owing to 
 the overlapping of grants, and settlement had been hindered. For this reason, 
 and also on account of the severe losses which the exposed Maine Coast suf- 
 feied during the French and Indian wars, settlement was hindered, and not 
 until after 1763 was progress made into the back country. 31 
 
 Beginning in i/Sj, however, a land office was established and a campaign 
 of land selling was inaugurated. In the years 1785-1792 something over 
 600,000 acres were disposed of at an average price of 41.4 cents per acre. 
 I n l 793 a sudden fever of land speculation raised the sales for that year 
 to over 2,000,000 acres, but the average price fell to 12^ cents per acre. 
 Hoping to check the speculative mania, the legislature in 1795 suspended 
 all sales. But speculation nevertheless continued, for the large tracts of land 
 which had been liberally granted in aid of educational institutions and for 
 internal improvements were now placed on the market in an effort to convert 
 them into cash. 32 
 
 Massachusetts had acquired in 1786 a 6,000,000-acre tract in Western New 
 \ ork in settlement of her claims in that region, and between 1787 and 1793 
 this entire tract was placed on the market and sold, mostly to companies 
 organized for the purpose of resale at a profit. About 2,500,000 acres were 
 taken in a single tract by Messrs. Gorham and Phelps and another large tract 
 was sold to the Holland Land Company. 33 
 
 LAND POLICY SUMMARIZED. 
 
 In summary, it is clear that the land policy of all the colonies from 1700 
 to 1775, with the exception of New York, favored rapid settlement of the 
 back country. After 1780, liberality was changed into reckless prodigality, 
 and under the stimulus of financial necessity great tracts were thrown on 
 the market. Much of the land was sold directly to middlemen, and other 
 tracts came into their hands indirectly by sale from the original grantees. 
 The temporary results were undoubtedly a great stimulus to emigration to 
 the frontier. The land companies exerted themselves to find settlers to whom 
 they could resell their holdings. Every settler on a new tract enhanced the 
 value of the unsold land. To stimulate sales, the land companies extended 
 long credits, whereas purchases directly from the States were usually for 
 cash or on from 2 to 12 months credit. In the long run, however, there 
 appeared glaring evils. In the haste to dispose of lands, surveys were care¬ 
 lessly made and disputed boundary-lines led to uncertain titles. A particu¬ 
 larly bad situation of this sort arose in Maine, where the settlers on the 
 
 Sullivan, Maine, 43, 44 ; Lincoln, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, IV, 140 
 2 Green leaf, Survey,,of Maine, 39 SH 40 I, 428. Felt, in Am. Statistical Asso. Collections, 
 75 ~ 7 o- 
 
 33 Turner, Holland Purchase, 325, 326, 401. 
 
76 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 so-called Kennebec Purchase, fearing to lose their lands and improvements, 
 were kept in a state of unrest for almost a generation, and were finally stirred 
 to armed insurrection before the conflicting claims were quieted. 34 Absentee 
 ownership, also, was introduced and complaints became frequent that the 
 progress of new communities was hindered by the indifference of absent 
 landowners to local improvements and by the existence of large tracts, held 
 out of cultivation. Finally, the system of long-time credit led to inevitable 
 disputes between the settlers and the land companies. The pioneer’s life 
 was arduous, as we shall see, and the task of clearing absorbed so much 
 of his energies for the first few years that he had little opportunity to 
 raise surplus crops. When he finally had a surplus, high transportation 
 costs often shut him off from a market. The result was that a large proportion 
 were unable to pay their annual installments as they fell due. The threat of 
 ejection led to violent antipathy to the land company, and in some cases to 
 violent action on the part of the settlers for the redress of their “ grievances.” 
 
 OTHER CAUSES OF EMIGRATION TO THE FRONTIER. 
 
 Combined with the economic motive, the demand for new soil, were 
 undoubtedly others more psychological in nature. Some men were unable to 
 fit into the rigid, Puritanical social and ecclesiastical systems. They emi¬ 
 grated in order to breathe the freer, more unconventional atmosphere of the 
 pioneer communities. Others were simply infected by the contagious spirit; 
 their friends had gone or were going; they too wanted to see the new 
 country and to live its new life. Dwight takes account of these and other 
 motives in the following passage from his Travels: 35 
 
 “ In the formation of Colonies, those, who are first inclined to emigrate, are usually 
 such, as have met with difficulties at home. These are commonly joined by persons, who, 
 having large families and small farms, are induced, for the sake of settling their children 
 comfortably, to seek for new and cheaper lands. To both are always added the dis¬ 
 contented, the enterprising, the ambitious, and the covetous. Many of the first, and some 
 of all these classes, are found in every new American country, within ten years after 
 its settlement has commenced. From this period, kindred, friendship, and former 
 neighbourhood, prompt others to follow them. Others, still, are allured by the prospect 
 of gain, presented in every new country to the sagacious, from the purchase and sale 
 of new lands: while not a small number are influenced by the brilliant stories, which 
 everywhere are told concerning most tracts during the early progress of their settlement.” 
 
 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PIONEER FARMING. 
 
 A general view of the life and work of the pioneer farmers may be gained 
 from the description by a French traveler 36 of what he saw in western Con¬ 
 necticut in i780: 
 
 “ I saw, for the first time, what I have since observed a hundred times; for in fact, 
 whatever mountains I have climbed, whatever forests I have traversed, whatever bye- 
 
 34 Gardiner, in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, II, 288-292; Felt, in Am. Statistical 
 
 Asso. Collections, I, 78. 
 
 35 Travels, II, 458 (edition of 1821). In the succeeding pages, 458-460, one may read 
 
 description of the successive stages in the settlement of new land, from pioneerin 
 to ultimate cultivation in well-settled communities, which has attained the rank of 
 classic in economic history. 
 
 30 Chastellux, Travels, 34. 
 
 nJ be 03 
 
PIONEERING IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 
 
 77 
 
 paths I have followed, I have never travelled three miles without meeting with a new 
 settlement, either beginning to take form or already in cultivation. The following is the 
 manner of proceeding in these improvements or new settlements. Any man who is able 
 to procure a capital of five or six hundred livres of our money, or about twenty-five 
 pounds sterling, and who has a strength and inclination to work, may go into the woods 
 and purchase a portion of one hundred and fifty to two hundred acres of land, which 
 se doin costs him more than a dollar or four shillings and sixpence an acre, a small 
 part of which only he pays in ready money. There he conducts a cow, some pigs, or a 
 full sow, and two indifferent horses which do not cost him more than four guineas each 
 To these precautions he adds that of having a provision of flour and cider. Provided 
 with this first capital, he begins by felling all the smaller trees, and some strong branches 
 of the large ones: these he makes use of as fences to the first field he wishes to clear; 
 he next boldly attacks those immense oaks, or pines, which one would take for the 
 ancient lords of the territory he is usurping; he strips them of their bark, or lays them 
 open all round with his axe. These trees mortally wounded, are the next spring robbed 
 ot their honours; their leaves no longer spring, their branches fall, and their trunk be¬ 
 comes a hideous skeleton. This trunk still seems to brave the efforts of the new colonist- 
 but where there are the smallest chinks or crevices, it is surrounded by fire, and the 
 flames consume what the iron was unable to destroy. But it is enough for the small trees 
 to be felled and the great ones to lose their sap. This object completed, the ground 
 is cleared; the air and the sun begin to operate upon that earth which is wholly formed 
 of rotten vegetables,. and teems with the latent principles of production. The grass 
 grows rapidly; there is pasturage for the cattle the very first year; after which they are 
 left to increase, or fresh ones are brought, and they are employed in tilling a piece of 
 ground which yields the enormous increase of twenty or thirty fold. The next year the 
 same course is repeated; when, at the end of two years, the planter has wherewithal to 
 subsist, and even to send some articles to market: at the end of four or five years he 
 completes the payment of his land, and finds himself a comfortable planter. Then’his 
 dwelling, which at first was no better than a large hut formed by a square of the trunks 
 o trees, placed one upon another, with the intervals filled by mud, changes into a hand¬ 
 some wooden house, where he contrives more convenient, and certainly much cleaner 
 apartments than those in the greatest part of our small towns. This is the work of 
 ree weeks or a month. His first habitation, that of eight and forty hours. I shall be 
 asked, perhaps, how one man or one family can be so quickly lodged; I answer, that in 
 America a man is never alone, never an isolated being. The neighbours, for they are 
 every where to be found, make it a point of hospitality to aid the new farmer. A cask 
 of cider drank in common, and with gaiety, or a gallon of rum, are the only recompense 
 for these services Such are the means by which North-America, which one hundred years 
 ago was nothing but a vast forest, is peopled with three millions of inhabitants; and such 
 is the immense, and certain benefit of agriculture, that notwithstanding the war, it not 
 only maintains itself where ever it has been established, but it extends to places which 
 seem the least favourable to its introduction. Four years ago, one might have travelled 
 ten miles in the woods I traversed, without seeing a single habitation.” 
 
 METHODS OF CLEARING. 
 
 In clearing the ground the first step was to cut down, grub out, and burn 
 the underbrush. Then the larger timber might be destroyed either by 
 girdling or by cutting it down and burning it. It is hard to distinguish the 
 two systems. both were used in the same localities and were sometimes 
 combined on the same tract. Cutting down the timber was probably the 
 prevailing method in northern New England, in fact it was sometimes called 
 the “ Yankee system,” 37 but girdling was also practiced in New England. 33 
 In the region originally settled by the Swedes, on both sides of the Delaware 
 
 37 Lorain, in Philadelphia Agric. Soc. Memoirs, III (1814), p. 112. 
 
 38 See Dwight’s description, Travels (1821 ed.), II, 125. 
 
78 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 River, girdling was the favored method . 39 In Pennsylvania, the thorough¬ 
 going German settlers in the southeast practiced the Yankee system. Dr. 
 Rush 40 wrote: 
 
 “ In clearing new land they do not girdle the trees simply, and leave them to perish in 
 the ground, as is the custom of their English or Irish neighbors; but they generally cut 
 them down and burn them. In destroying under-wood and bushes, they generally grub 
 them out of the ground; by which means a field is as fit for cultivation the second year 
 after it is cleared, as it is in twenty years afterwards.” 
 
 Elsewhere in Pennsylvania and in New York both methods of clearing 
 were practiced . 41 
 
 Girdling was more economical of labor at the beginning, but eventually 
 the dead trees fell and must be removed, and in falling they endangered the 
 lives of farmers and their stock. The type of pioneer who expected to 
 remain only a few years on the tract he had cleared, and then sell out and 
 move farther into the wilderness, usually practiced cutting and burning 
 instead of girdling. The ashes from his great piles of logs gave him, when 
 converted into potash, a cash crop in the first season, whereas his neighbor 
 who girdled his trees might have to wait several seasons before he had a 
 salable surplus. The fact that the humus in the soil was often destroyed by 
 his huge fires did not worry the “ exploiting ” pioneer who did not intend 
 to settle permanently and cultivate the land . 42 
 
 PIONEER CROPS AND TILLAGE. 
 
 On the land thus cleared the pioneer raised chiefly grain crops. Indian 
 corn was usually the first crop on new land, although under some circum¬ 
 stances wheat or rye was planted. Thus in northern Vermont and in the 
 Mohawk Valley wheat was more usually sown on new land, probably because 
 of favorable marketing conditions . 43 Rye was a favored crop on new land 
 in New Hampshire. Belknap wrote : 44 
 
 “ Of all grains, winter rye thrives best on new lands, and Indian corn, or barley, on 
 the old. Barley does not succeed well in the new land; nor is flax raised with any 
 advantage, until the land has been cultivated for some years. The same may be said 
 of oats and peas; but all kinds of esculent roots, are much larger and sweeter in the virgin 
 soil, than in any other.” 
 
 It was observed in the more northern districts and in the higher altitudes 
 that Indian corn did not yield as well on the new lands as on the old, and 
 it was claimed that the ground must first be prepared for corn by some other 
 crop. Belknap 45 explained the matter by reference to the date of planting. 
 In the regions where the growing-season was short, the clearing process 
 
 39 Acrelius, in Pennsylvania Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 147. 
 
 40 Account of the German Inhabitants of Pennsylvania (1789). Reprinted in Pennsyl¬ 
 
 vania German Society Proceedings and Addresses, XIX (1910), 58. 
 
 41 Cooper, Information Respecting America, 116-119; Lorain, Philadelphia Agric. Soc. 
 
 Memoirs, III (1814), p. 112. 
 
 42 On the whole subject of clearing, see Belknap, New Hampshire, III, 131-137- 
 
 43 Richard Smith, Journal, 19; Miller and Wells, Ryegate (Vermont), 193; Orleans 
 
 County (Vermont) Hist. Soc. Proceedings (1889-91), p. 39; Watson, Essex County 
 (New York), 479. 
 
 44 History of New Hampshire, III (1792), 136. See also Runnels, Sanbornton (New 
 Hampshire), I, 59. 
 
 45 New Hampshire, III (1792), 136. 
 
PIONEERING IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 79 
 
 postponed the date of planting so long that corn did not come to full matur¬ 
 ity. Potatoes were an eighteenth century innovation among pioneer crops. 
 Like maize, they were planted with the hoe, usually without plowing. The 
 seeds of wheat, rye, and other grains were raked in by hand or scratched 
 in with a harrow . 46 
 
 LIVESTOCK, HAY, AND PASTURAGE. 
 
 A grass crop often followed two years of grains, the seed having been 
 sown, perhaps, with rye or wheat, but the few animals which the pioneer 
 took out with him to his new home gathered most of their nourishment 
 from the woods and natural meadows. The supply of hay in new settlements 
 was often insufficient for winter fodder and cows went farrow and in some 
 cases literally starved to death. 4 ' The importance of livestock in pioneer 
 agriculture increased in regions where cattle could be successfully fattened 
 for market. In some regions of New Hampshire and Maine cattle were 
 driven into the new tract to be pastured there in advance of settlement. 
 Where there was but little underbrush the cattle browsed in the woodlands, 
 and meanwhile the settlers brought their cleared lands into mowing as soon 
 as possible. In New Hampshire many farmers in the old towns fatted 
 cattle for market on land in new settlements which they had cleared and 
 brought into grass . 48 
 
 THE IMPORTANCE OF BY-INDUSTRIES.—POTASH AND 
 
 MAPLE SUGAR. 
 
 The pioneer farmer was often engaged in accessory occupations which, 
 although furnishing him an important source of income, often interfered 
 with farming operations and hindered the development of good agricultural 
 practice. Fishing and hunting often took up a large share of his time, and 
 where there were suitable water courses for floating logs to the saw mills, 
 lumbering was a favorite occupation. In districts where much lumbering 
 was carried on, farming was generally in a bad state. Belknap 49 wrote: 
 
 “The best season for sawing logs is the spring, when the rivers are high; this is 
 also the time for ploughing and planting. He who works in the saw-mill at that time, 
 must buy his bread and clothing, and the hay for his cattle, with his lumber; and he 
 generally anticipates the profit of his labor. Long credit is a disadvantage to him; and 
 the too free indulgence of spirituous liquor, to which this class of people are much ad¬ 
 dicted, hurts their health, their morals and their interest. They are always in debt, 
 and frequently at law. Their families are ill provided with necessaries, and their 
 children are without education or morals.” 
 
 4(5 Lorain, in Philadelphia Agric. Soc. Memoirs, III (1814), p. 112; Cooper, Information 
 Respecting America, 113, 116-119; Notes on Lancaster (New Hampshire), in 
 Massachusetts Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d series, III, 98, note 2; Richard Smith, 
 Journal, 21. 
 
 47 Runnels, Sanbornton (New Hampshire), I, 60; Smith, Rev. Thomas, Journal, 266, 
 
 267, 269. 
 
 48 Belknap, New Hampshire, III, 135; Lincoln, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st 
 
 series, IV, 145; Coffin, in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, IV, 288. 
 
 49 New Hampshire, III, 261; see also Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, IV, 90, 149; 
 
 Kendall, Travels, III, 72-84; Watson, Essex County (New York), 478. 
 
80 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Where saw-logs could not be gotten to mills the making of potash for 
 sale was often an important by-industry. A “ potash house,” to which ashes 
 were brought by the farmers and converted into potash and pearl ash, was 
 usually found in new settlements in New England and New York, and less 
 frequently in Pennsylvania . 50 The method of manufacturing potash as then 
 practiced was described by La Rochefoucauld 51 as follows: 
 
 “ Large tubs, with a double bottom, are filled with ashes; the uppermost bottom, 
 which contains several holes, is covered with ashes, about ten or eleven inches deep, 
 while the under part of the tub is filled with straw or hay. Water, being poured over 
 the ashes, extracts the particles of salt, and discharges all the heterogeneous matter which 
 it may yet contain on the layer of hay or straw. The lie is drawn off by means of a 
 cock, and if it should not yet have attained a sufficient degree of strength, poured again 
 over the ashes. The lie is deemed sufficiently strong when an egg swims on it. I his lie 
 is afterward boiled in large iron cauldrons, which are constantly filled out of other 
 cauldrons, in which lie is likewise boiling .... This salt is of a black colour, and 
 called black potash. Some manufacturers leave the potash in this state in the cauldron, 
 and encrease the fire, by means of which the oil is disengaged from the salt in a thick 
 smoke, and the black potash assumes a grey colour, in which state it is packed up in 
 
 barrels for sale. . 
 
 “ Pearlash is potash purified by calcination. To this end the potash is put into a kiln, 
 constructed in an oval form, of plaster of Paris; the inside of which being made other¬ 
 wise perfectly close, is horizontally intersected by an iron grate, on which the potash 
 is placed. Under this grate a fire is made, and the heat, reverberated by the arched upper 
 part of the kiln, compleats the calcination, and converts the potash into pearlash , . 
 
 The process of calcination lasts about an hour.” 
 
 The apparatus necessary for this manufacture was inexpensive, the largest 
 outlay being for the purchase of the kettles in which the lye was boiled. The 
 products, pearlash and potash, were used to some extent in the household 
 in making soap, in scouring wool, and in bleaching and dyeing cloth. The 
 larger part of the output was sold, partly for use in glass-making and other 
 manufactures, and partly for export. 
 
 Maple sugar was another important by-product of pioneer agriculture. 
 Williams 52 wrote: 
 
 “ The manufacture of maple sugar is also an article of great importance to the state 
 [Vermont]. Perhaps two thirds of the families are engaged in this business in the 
 spring, and they make more sugar than is used among the people. Considerable quantities 
 are carried to the shop keepers; which always find a ready sale, and good pay. The 
 business is now carried on, under the greatest disadvantages: Without proper con¬ 
 veniences, instruments, or works; solely by the exertions of private families, in the 
 woods, and without any other conveniencies than one or two iron kettles, the largest 
 of which will not hold more than four or five pailfulls. Under all these disadvantages, 
 it is common for a family to make two or three hundred pounds of maple sugar in three 
 or four weeks.” 
 
 The production of maple sugar was found in the back settlements of New 
 England and New York, and in Pennsylvaia as well, though perhaps less 
 generally . 53 
 
 50 Williams, Vermont, II, 361; Graham, Descriptive Sketch of Vermont, 40; Cooper, 
 
 Information Respecting America, 143 1 Campbell, Travels, 268, 285. 
 
 51 Travels, 1799 Edition, I, 385. . , 
 
 52 Vermont, II, 363. For descriptions of the process of making maple sugar see Dwight, 
 
 Travels (1821 ed.), I, 40; Belknap, New Hampshire, III, II 3 - 
 
 53 Richard Smith, Journal 26; Mittleberger, Journey to Pennsylvania, Coxe, View 
 
 of the United States, 65. 
 
PIONEERING IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 81 
 
 THE PROGRESS OF PIONEER COMMUNITIES.—HARDSHIPS 
 
 OF PIONEERING. 
 
 The first years of a pioneer’s life were full of exhausting toil and often 
 marked b\ the most discouraging hardships. Clearing the woods w r as a slow 
 process. The typical settler would clear, perhaps, on the average from i to 
 3 acres a year. T hose who were exceptionally energetic or who had exception- 
 all} large families would do considerably better. In Concord, New Hampshire, 
 at the end of 5 years several of the settlers had as much as 12 acres cleared, 
 fenced, and ploughed, or in mowing. One settler with 5 grown sons had broken 
 up, cleared, and mowed more than 80 acres, besides erecting “ very consider¬ 
 able buildings. At the end of the first 10 years in another New England 
 town every settler had at least 15 acres cleared and some had 50 acres. 55 
 If all went well at the end of 4 or 5 years the settler might expect to be fairly 
 comfortably fixed, at least as regards food and shelter. In the meanwhile, 
 however, he and his family might have been facing death from starvation 
 and exposure. Until the first corn crop was harvested grain must be brought 
 in from outside. Of the Sandy River settlement in Ntaine, Allen wrote 1 56 
 
 ^ No corn could be had by the new settlers the first summer, nearer than Fort 
 Western (Augusta), 40 miles j several of them had to go on foot to that place and carry 
 a basket of corn on their backs, first to WInthrop to mill and then home to keep their 
 families from starving, many expedients were resorted to, to allay the cravings of 
 hunger, some lived for several days at a time on greens; some dug up their potatoes after 
 they were planted, cut out and replanted the eyes and ate the rest. After three or four 
 months, when green corn was fit to pick and potatoes large enough to dig, all were relieved 
 essentially. The months of May, June and July, 1781, formed the most distressing period 
 in the settlement of Sandy River. After the corn crop came off in the fall, almost every 
 one had a tolerable supply; one settler raised a little wheat that summer; but then there 
 was no mill within 40 miles, and no way to go to mill but on foot, till they could go by 
 sledding in the winter. Several prepared large samp mortars, 57 with a spring pole by 
 
 w ich a man could pound a bushel a day so as to make one half fit for bread; the other 
 half made good hominy.” 
 
 The situation described above is perhaps extreme, but it is abundantly 
 evident that if the pioneers had depended on the products of their fields and 
 on their domestic animals for food they would have had very little to eat. 
 As it was, meat was rarely tasted, unless it were game, and the nuts and 
 berries of the forest were welcome additions to brown bread, pea or bean 
 porridge, and baked pumpkin. 58 As the settlement grew older less reliance 
 was placed on the forest for food resources, except by the less thrifty and 
 industrious, who could not settle down to the regular tasks of farming. 
 
 The house of the pioneer, the often-described log hut, was neither a com¬ 
 fortable nor a hygienic dwelling, Belknap 59 wrote : 
 
 “ They erect a square building of poles, notched at the ends to keep them fast together. 
 The crevices are plaistered with clay or the stiffest earth which can be had, mixed with 
 
 54 Bouton, Concord, New Hampshire, 128-131. 
 
 55 Miller and Wells, Rye gate, Vermont, 96. 
 
 5G In Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, IV, 39. 
 
 57 The samp mortars used on Long Island are described in Furman, Long Island Antiaui- 
 
 ties, I, 227. 
 
 58 Miller and Wells, Ryegate, Vermont, 94, 190; Leonard, Dublin, New Hampshire 280, 
 
 283; Dwight, Travels (ed. 1821), II, 313. 
 
 69 New Hampshire, III (1792), 258; see also Leonard, Dublin, New Hampshire, 279, 28r. 
 
 7 
 
82 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 moss or straw. The roof is either bark or split boards. The chimney a pile of stones; 
 within which a fire is made on the ground, and a hole is left in the roof for the smoke to 
 pass out. Another hole is made in the side of the house for a window, which is occa¬ 
 sionally closed with a wooden shutter.Ovens are built at a small distance from the 
 
 houses, of the best stones which can be found, cemented and plaistered with clay 
 
 or stiff earth.” 
 
 In such “ dark, dirty and dismal ” habitations the pioneer family lived 
 for at least the first io or 15 years, and often much longer. In Chester, 
 New Hampshire, the first frame house was erected in 1732, 13 years after 
 the first settlement; 60 in Hallowell, Maine, most of the inhabitants were 
 still living in log huts in 1784, 61 about 25 years after the first settlement; 
 and in Ryegate, Vermont, settled in 1775, log houses were still occupied in 
 
 1865. 62 
 
 SUMMARY.—PIONEERING A PROCESS OF CAPITAL¬ 
 MAKING. 
 
 It would seem from the foregoing description that the economic struggle 
 on the frontier must have been more severe than in the older-settled com¬ 
 munities. The pioneer family undoubtedly worked harder, and for the first 
 few years at least enjoyed less in the way of comforts and satisfactions in 
 return for their efforts. Their houses were less comfortable, their food 
 and clothing were more scanty, and in general their standard of living was 
 lower. Judging by the pioneer’s consumption of economic goods, we should 
 conclude that his income was small and that on the whole there was little 
 
 profit in pioneer farming. # ••111 
 
 But such a judgment would be mistaken. The pioneer did indeed take 
 
 out only a meager income from his farm in the first 5 or 10 y ears > tnR 
 income taken out was often only a small part of the total income which 
 accrued during that period. In his first years the pioneer was chiefly engaged 
 in producing capital goods. There are occasional cases recorded of woodland 
 farming with considerable initial capital, where hundreds of acres were 
 cleared and brought into cultivation with the aid of indentured servants, 
 negro slaves, and hired laborers. 63 But as a rule the pioneer exhausted his 
 ready cash in the first payments on his land, and his entire stock of capital 
 which he took to his new home consisted of an axe, a gun, a few tools, 
 perhaps a plough, some flour, and a few head of livestock. With this meager 
 equipment he undertook a double-task: (1) the maintenance of his family 
 with the immediate necessities of life, or the production of consumption 
 goods, and (2) the clearing of land, erection of buildings, and the building of 
 roads' or, in other words, the creation of capital goods. It was because the 
 greater part of his time and energy were devoted to the latter kind of pro¬ 
 duction that his standard of living seemed low. 
 
 The pioneer farmer may be compared to a business corporation which 
 pursues a conservative dividend policy. Instead of paying out all of current 
 income to the stockholders, it puts a large share back into the business, thus 
 
 G0 Bell, in New Hampshire Hist. Soc. Collections, VII, 347. 
 
 01 North, Augusta, Maine, 189. 
 
 62 Miller and Wells, Ryegate, Vermont, 94. 
 
 63 American Husbandry, I, 109-121, 191-196. 
 
PIONEERING IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 83 
 
 increasing the value of its capital. The pioneer was engaged in literally 
 ‘ ploughing in his profits.” The income which he did not take out of his 
 enterprise steadily accrued and was shown in the increased value of his land. 
 
 The following quotation describes, perhaps in too optimistic language the 
 economic position of the pioneer farmer: 64 
 
 “Amidst the hard living and hard labor, that attends the forming a new settlement, 
 the settler has the most flattering prospects and encouragements. One hundred acres 
 of land in a new town, does not generally cost him more than he can spare from the 
 wages of one or two years. Besides maintaining himself, the profits of his labor will 
 generally enable a young man, in that period of time, to procure himself such a tract 
 of land When he comes to apply his labor to his own land, the produce of it becomes 
 extremely profitable. The first crop of wheat will fully pay him for all the expense he 
 has been at, in clearing up, sowing, and fencing his land; and at the same time 
 increases the value of the land, eight or ten times the original cost. In this way every 
 day s labor spent in clearing up his land, receives high wages in the grain which it pro- 
 cures, and adds at the same time a quantity of improved land to the farm. An acre of 
 land which in its natural state, cost him perhaps the half of one day’s labor, is thus in 
 one year made of that value, that it will afterwards annually produce him from fifteen 
 to twenty five bushels of wheat; or other kinds of produce, of equal value. In this way 
 the profits attending labor on a new settlement, are the greatest that ever can take place in 
 agriculture; the laborer constantly receiving double wages. He receives high wages in 
 the produce of his corn or wheat; and he receives much higher wages of another kind, 
 in the annual addition of a new tract of cultivated land to his farm. This double kind of 
 wages, nature with great benevolence and design, has assigned to the man of industry, 
 when he is first making a settlement in the uncultivated parts of America: And in 
 two or three years, be acquires a very comfortable and independent subsistence for a 
 family, derived from no other source b ut the earth, and his own industry.” 
 
 64 Williams, History of Vermont, II, 353 . 
 
Chapter VII. —Farming in the Older Settlements. 
 
 Crops and Tillage. 
 
 The farming of the older settlements in the eighteenth century continued 
 to be a mixed husbandry combining the cultivation of small areas of cereals 
 with the raising of livestock. The broad lines of distinction between New 
 England and the Middle Colonies which had been laid down in the seven¬ 
 teenth century were further emphasized by the eighteenth. . The grazing 
 industry was given more attention in New England, whereas m the Middle 
 Colonies, and particularly in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, wheat-growing 
 was of increasing importance. As far as its technical condition was concerned, 
 agriculture was almost everywhere in a bad state. Farming appeared at its 
 worst on the frontier, where the scarcity of labor and capital favored preda¬ 
 tory methods, and at its best in the neighborhood of the commercial towns, 
 where ready markets stimulated intensive use of the soil. The typical farming 
 of the eighteenth century, the subject of discussion in this and following 
 chapters, was to be found between these extremes. The majority of farmers 
 were not pioneers of the frontier nor market gardeners. The typical agri 
 culture of the period was conducted not on new but on old soil, on farms 
 that had been worn out by generations of bad tillage, and it was conducted 
 in regions away from tidewater, where markets were relatively inaccessible. 
 
 In general, judged by the best standards of their own time, the business 
 of the inland farmers at the end of the eighteenth century was ineffectively 
 and even carelessly managed. In only a few particulars had noticeable im¬ 
 provement been made over the primitive methods employed by the earliest 
 settlers. As soon as the pioneer stage had passed in a particular locality the 
 colonists had settled down in a routine husbandry similar to the practices of 
 English farmers of the seventeenth century, but in some ways showing 
 retrogression. In the century and a half intervening between the settlement 
 of New England and the opening of the nineteenth century, improvements 
 of far-reaching significance had been introduced in English agriculture, through 
 the work of Tull, BakewelJ, Townshend, Coke, and Arthur Young. The 
 knowledge of these changes had spread quickly to this side of the Atlantic, 
 and yet the bulk of the farmers had shown no disposition to adopt the new 
 methods. On their poorly cultivated fields little fertilizer of any sort was 
 used, their implements were rough and clumsy, livestock was neglected, and 
 the same grains and vegetables were raised year after year with little attempt 
 at a rotation of crops, until the land was exhausted. 
 
 CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM. 
 
 The apparent lack of intelligence and of a progressive spirit among north¬ 
 ern farmers drew severe comment from both native and foreign observers. 
 
 84 
 
FARMING IN THE OLDER SETTLEMENTS 
 
 85 
 
 General Warren of Massachusetts, writing in the American Museum 1 in 
 1786, drew a sharp contrast between the methods prevailing at home and in 
 England. He says: 
 
 “A man in England that farms 150 acres, would think a stock of £500 sterling neces¬ 
 sary ; three teams would be employed; four or five ploughs; barrows, wagons, carts, &c. 
 in proportion; 70 or 80 acres tilled; 8 or 10 labourers at work; 800 or 1000 loads of 
 manure annually collected; and perhaps three times more cattle, sheep, and hogs kept, 
 than are kept here on a farm that is naturally as good. A man in America that farms 
 150 acres, would think a stock of £100 sufficient. One miserable team; a paltry plough, 
 and everything in the same proportion; three acres of Indian corn, which require all 
 the manure he has; as many acres of half-starved English grain from a half-cultivated 
 soil, with a spot of potatoes, and a small yard of turneps, complete the round of his 
 tillage, and the whole is conducted, perhaps, by a man and a boy, and performed in half 
 their time; no manure but the dung from the barn, which, if the heaps are not exposed 
 to be washed away by the winter rains, may amount to 15 or 20 loads; and if they are 
 so exposed to much less, without any regret to the farmer. All the rest of the farm is 
 allotted for feeding a small stock. A large space must be mowed for a little hay for 
 winter; and a large range for a little feed in summer. Pastures are never manured, 
 and mowing lands seldom.” 
 
 Tench Coxe 2 observed a number of defects in the agriculture of the Middle 
 Atlantic States, including 
 
 “ innumerable instances of impoverished lands; precious bodies of meadow lands, in 
 the old settlements of some of the states, which remain in a state of nature; a frequent 
 inattention to the making or preserving of manure; as frequent inattention to the con¬ 
 dition of the seed grain evidenced by the growth of inferiour grain in fields of wheat, 
 and by the complexion of the flour in some quarters; the bad condition of barns, stables, 
 and fences, and in some places the total want of the former; the deficiency of spring- 
 houses or other cool dairies, in extensive tracts of country; the want of a trifling stock 
 of bees; the frequent want of orchards, and the neglect of those which have been planted 
 by preceding occupants; the neglect of the sugar-tree; the neglect of fallen timber and 
 fuel, accompanied with the extravagant felling of timber trees for fuel; the neglect of 
 household manufactures in many families; the neglect of making pot-ash; the non-use 
 of oxen; . . . .” [He concluded that] “farming, in the grain states, their great best 
 business, the employment most precious in free governments, is too generally speaking, 
 the least understood, or the least economically and attentively pursued, of any of the 
 occupations which engage the citizens of the United States.” 
 
 Although usually a staunch supporter of all New England institutions, 
 Dwight 3 was forced to admit that 
 
 “ the husbandry of New England is far inferior to that of Great Britain. The 
 
 principal defects in our husbandry, so far as I am able to judge, are a deficiency in the 
 quantity of labour, necessary to prepare the ground for seed; insufficient manuring; the 
 want of a good rotation of crops; and slovenliness in cleaning the ground. The soil is 
 not sufficiently pulverized; nor sufficiently manured. We are generally ignorant of what 
 crops will best succeed each other; and our fields are covered with a rank growth of 
 weeds.” 
 
 CROP MANAGEMENT. 
 
 Let us take up the principal criticisms in more detail as far as they relate 
 to field crops, reserving others for later chapters. First, as regards crop 
 management. The general practice was to sow grain crops successively on 
 the same land without manuring until it was exhausted and then to leave it 
 
 1 II, No. IV (1787), p. 347. 
 
 2 View of the United States (1794), 358. 
 
 3 Travels, I (1821 ed.), 108, 109. 
 
86 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 fallow, i. e., to grow up to weeds and bushes for a number of years until 
 it was thought to have rested sufficiently to produce more grain. Kalm 4 
 nQted (1748) that the land near Germantown, being tilled for several years 
 successively without being manured, eventually declined in fertility. 
 
 “ Its possessor therefore leaves it fallow, and proceeds to another part of his ground, 
 which he treats in the same manner. Thus he goes on till he has changed a great part of 
 his possessions into corn-fields, and by that means deprives the ground of its fertility. 
 He then returns to the first field, which now is pretty well recovered; this he again tills 
 as long as it will afford him a good crop, but when its fertility is exhausted, he leaves 
 it fallow again, and proceeds to the rest as before.” 
 
 Fallowing of this sort was observed by the author of American Husbandry 
 wherever he traveled in the northern colonies. Of the cropping system in 
 New York he remarked: 5 
 
 “ The general system is to crop their fields with corn, till they are absolutely ex¬ 
 hausted ; then they leave them, what they call fallow, that is, to run to weeds for several 
 years, till they think the soil has recovered somewhat of its fertility, when they begin 
 again with corn, in succession, as long as it will bear any, leaving it afterwards to a 
 fallow of weeds. If no spontaneous growth came, but such as cattle would freely eat, 
 the evil would not be great, because then the land would not have more to support 
 than it would gain by the dung, &c. of the stock supported. But the contrary is the 
 case: an infinite quantity of rubbish comes which no beast will touch, this seeds the land 
 in so constant of succession, that the soil is never without a large crop on it. The 
 extent to which this practice is carried would astonish any person used to better hus¬ 
 bandry : it is owing to the plenty of land; the farmers, instead of keeping all their 
 grounds in good order, and a due succession of valuable crops, depend on new land for 
 every thing, and are regardless of such management as would make their old fields 
 equal the value of the new ones.” 
 
 There was no regularly observed succession of grain crops. Wheat, maize, 
 rye, and the principal cereals were alternated on the larger fields, sharing 
 the land occasionally with small patches of oats, barley, and flax. The be¬ 
 ginning of a modern system of crop rotation had appeared as early as the 
 Revolution. The period of fallowing, which had ranged from 7 to 15 years, 
 was shortened to 1 or 2 years. In Massachusetts the land was usually broken 
 up after being in grass 3 or 4 years, and then cropped for 3 years. 6 In 
 preparation for some crops, flax, hemp, and wheat, a summer fallow was 
 not uncommon. A few experiments were made with the introduction of 
 new crops in the rotation, potatoes and clover. On a large farm on the Hud¬ 
 son River in 1775 a 6-year rotation was reported as follows: (1) potatoes, 
 (2) wheat, (3) potatoes, (4) wheat, (5) barley, (6) peas and clover. A 
 most important change which began after the Revolution was the introduc¬ 
 tion of the practice of sowing the fields in the years when they were to be 
 pastured with some kind of grass seed, often clover. 
 
 Schoepf 7 described the cropping system near Philadelphia as follows: 
 
 “ What with the quantity of land many farmers own, they cannot work the whole of 
 it properly, and therefore many acres lie fallow 5 - 6-7 years together. The usual practice 
 is to plant maize the first year; the second year wheat is sown along with English grass- 
 seeds, and after the wheat is off, the field is pastured for four or five years. At other 
 times they sow buckwheat (i bus. to the acre) after wheat, or it may be turnips.” 
 
 4 Travels, I, 185. 
 
 5 1, 126; see also I, 53, 17U 
 
 6 Massachusetts Agricultural Repository, I, II (1807), p. 28. 
 
 7 Travels (1783-84), I, 130. 
 
FARMING IN THE OLDER SETTLEMENTS 
 
 87 
 
 Cooper 8 descril>ed a 5-year rotation in use in Lancaster County, Pennsyl¬ 
 vania, in 1794 in which clover occupied 2 years. 
 
 The tillage of American fields was an especial object of the scorn of 
 English observers. 9 The author of American Husbandry wrote of New 
 England: 
 
 “ Worse ploughing is nowhere to be seen.Thus, in most parts of the province, 
 
 is found shallow and unlevel furrows, which rather scratch than turn the land; and of 
 this bad tillage the farmers are very sparing rarely giving two ploughings if they think 
 the crop will do with one; the consequence of which is their products being seldom near 
 so great as they would be under a different management/’ 
 
 Eliot had been convinced of the value of deeper ploughing and had 
 attempted to popularize his discoveries, but for the mass of farmers furrows 
 were probably not more than 4 or 6 inches deep. 10 The preparation of 
 ground for the various crops is described in the consideration of those crops. 
 
 FERTILIZERS AND SOIL AMENDMENTS. 
 
 The failure of the colonial farmers to rotate crops was one reason for the 
 rapid exhaustion of their lands. Another cause was their neglect to replace 
 organic material, to keep up the humus content of the soil. The animal 
 manure which in their mixed husbandry was always available was uniformly 
 neglected. * 11 If used at all it was applied sparingly to only a few crops, chiefly 
 to maize and potatoes. In explaining the neglect of manuring, we must keep 
 in mind that south of New York most of the livestock ran at large all the 
 year through, and even in New England the period of pasturage extended 
 over 9 or 10 months of the year. 12 Consequently the amount of barnyard 
 and stable manure which could be collected was small in proportion to the 
 number of stock kept. Nevertheless, the failure to utilize the available supply 
 astonished contemporary observers. Harriot relates 13 that on the farm 
 which he purchased on Long Island there were “ some hundred loads of 
 rich manure which had been collecting for several years, to the great damage 
 of the buildings.” This accumulation was looked upon by his neighbors 
 as an encumbrance merely, and the former owner advised him to move his 
 barn, as this would be an easier way out of the difficulty than moving the 
 manure. A similar state of affairs was described by La Rochefoucauld 14 
 in Lebanon, Connecticut. 
 
 Besides barnyard manures, organic materials in the form of fish and rock- 
 weed were utilized by farmers in the shore towns. The use of rockweed in 
 Maine was described by General Lincoln 15 as follows: 
 
 “ This rockweed makes a most excellent manure, is well calculated to bury under the 
 furrow, or to spread, in the month of April, on our meadows. A dressing of about 
 
 8 Information Respecting America, 137. On the introduction of clover see also Strick¬ 
 
 land, Observations, 42. 
 
 9 I, 81. 
 
 10 Tilton in American Museum, V, 376. 
 
 11 American Husbandry, I, 143; Kalm, Travels, I, 102; Scot, Geographical Description 
 
 of Pennsylvania, 23. 
 
 12 See p. 107. 
 
 13 Struggles Through Life, II, 216. 
 
 14 Travels, I, 516. 
 
 15 In Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, IV, 144. 
 
88 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 ten loads upon an acre will last for three years. In that period it comes again to per¬ 
 fection on the rock, so that the returning wants of the lands will find a continual supply, 
 from the same source. After a storm, large quantities of this manure will be found 
 washed up to highwater mark, whence it is easily carted upon the lands. But the most 
 usual mode of obtaining it, is by pulling or cutting it from the rocks, and loading it into 
 carts, where that can be done; where it cannot, it may be loaded into scows. The supply 
 of rockweed is immense, for it generally grows, in these counties, on all the shores 
 which are washed by the sea.” 
 
 The farmers along Long Island Sound made liberal use of whitefish for 
 fertilizer. In June and July the fish were taken in seines in immense quanti¬ 
 ties; 10,000 of them to the acre was considered a liberal application. 
 Dwight 16 wrote: 
 
 “ These fish are sometimes laid in furrows, and covered with the plough. Sometimes 
 they are laid singly on the hills of maize, and covered with the hoe. At other times 
 they are collected in heaps, formed with other materials into a compost; carted upon 
 the ground; and spread in the same manner, as manure from the stable. A single net 
 has taken 200,000 in a day. They are sold for a dollar a thousand; and are said to 
 affect the soil advantageously for a considerable length of time.” 
 
 After 1750 calcareous materials—limestone, marl, and finally gypsum— 
 began to come into use as soil amendments. Kalm 17 noted the use of lime¬ 
 stone near New Brunswick, New Jersey, in 1748: 
 
 “ The people however pretend that this stone is a very good manure, if it is scattered 
 upon the corn-fields in its rubbish state, for it is said to stifle the weeds: it is therefore 
 made use of both on the fields and in gardens.” 
 
 In Pennsylvania, in the tract between the Susquehanna and Schuylkill 
 Rivers, Pownall 18 reported: “ Every farmer has a Limekiln burnt for the 
 dressing of his Land, and they raise a great deal of Wheat.” Lime-burning 
 was a by-industry of pioneering on the Maine coast 19 but the product seems 
 to have been exported rather than used by farmers. The marl deposits of 
 New Jersey were known but little utilized before the end of the eighteenth 
 century. 20 
 
 A most important innovation was the use of calcium sulphate, known 
 variously as gypsum, plaster of Paris, and land plaster. Credit for the intro¬ 
 duction of gypsum from Europe has been given to the German immigrants 
 to Pennsylvania, probably because the new “ fertilizer ” was used only in 
 the neighborhood of Philadelphia. 21 According to Richard Peters, 22 however, 
 gypsum was brought to America a few years before the Revolution by a 
 Mr. Barge of Philadelphia, and was first used by the German farmers some 
 10 or 12 years thereafter. 
 
 The “ gentlemen farmers,” men primarily interested in the professions and 
 in politics, such as Logan and Peters in Philadelphia and Chancellor Living¬ 
 ston in New York, who were taking a keen interest in agricultural improve¬ 
 ment, experimented extensively with gypsum and wrote enthusiastically of its 
 
 16 Travels, II, 511, 515, III, 303. See also N. Y. Soc. for Promotion of Useful Arts, 
 
 Transactions, I (2d. ed., 1801), 231. 
 
 17 Travels, I, 231. 
 
 18 Topographical Description (1775), p. 28. - 
 
 19 Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, IV, 23. 
 
 20 Philadelphia Agric. Soc. Memoirs, V, 4. 
 
 21 Strickland, Observations, 44. 
 
 22 Philadelphia Agric. Soc. Memoirs, I (1815), pp. 163, 166. 
 
FARMING IN THE OLDER SETTLEMENTS 
 
 89 
 
 merits.- 3 In at least two regions—the Connecticut Valley and Southeastern 
 Pennsylvania gypsum was in general use by farmers on grass lands and on 
 grain crops. Schoepf 24 wrote in 1783 : 
 
 “ About Philadelphia and Germantown, Whitemarsh, Lancaster, and York the use of 
 plaister tor grass and plow-land has recently become a favorite practice, because there 
 is less trouble involved than in the collecting, lading, hauling, and spreading of the 
 common dung of cattle—trouble which the farmer here does not willingly submit to.” 
 
 In Pladley, Massachusetts, and in East Windsor, Connecticut, Dwight 
 
 found that the use of gypsum had greatly increased crop yields and raised 
 land values. 25 
 
 INFLUENCE OF THE NEW YORK MARKET. 
 
 In towns near New York City the presence of a ready market stimulated 
 intensive cultivation and the use of large quantities of a variety of manures. 
 Sweepings from the city streets were used to produce large crops in New 
 Jersey towns and in Westchester County, as well as on Western Long 
 Island. 26 On the sandy soil of the latter gypsum was a failure, but the farm¬ 
 ers set to work to renew their depleted soils from a variety of other sources. 
 Dwight was greatly impressed with the energy which they displayed He 
 wrote: 27 J 
 
 ‘‘Within this period [i. e., 1789-1804] the inhabitants, with a laudable spirit of enter¬ 
 prise, have set themselves to collect manure, wherever it could be obtained. Not content 
 with what they could make, and find, on their own farms, and shores, they have sent 
 their \essels up the Hudson, and loaded them with the residuum of potash manufactories * 
 gleaned the streets of New-York; and have imported various kinds of manure from New- 
 Haven, New-London, and even from Hartford. In addition to all this, they have swept the 
 bound; and covered their fields with the immense shoals of white-fish with which in the 
 beginning of summer its waters are replenished. No manure is so cheap as this, where 
 the nsh abound.’ none is so rich: and few are so lasting.” 
 
 THE GRAIN CROPS. 
 
 Indian corn, whose importance in the seventeenth century we have al¬ 
 ready remarked, was still the predominant cereal at the end of the eighteenth 
 century. In New England it was “the grand product of the country on 
 which the inhabitants principally feed”; 28 Dwight wrote 23 that “maize is 
 nearly as valuable to this country as all other kinds of corn united, and 
 \ields a crop much more certain, and much more extensively useful than any 
 
 H er . The importance of Indian corn in relation to other cereals 
 
 in the older communities of New England is indicated by table 8, compiled 
 from the Massachusetts valuation returns of 1801. 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 20 
 
 Philadelphia Agric. Soc . Memoirs, I (1815), pp. 166-180; New York Society for 
 
 1 (,792) ’ pp - 34 - 6; Lo « an > 
 
 Travels, I, 196. 
 
 Travels, I, 352; II, 279 (1821 ed.). 
 
 N. Y. Soc. for Promotion of Useful Arts, Transactions, I (2d. ed., 1801), p 2 t8 
 Travels, III, 303 (1821 ed.). 0 ' 
 
 American Husbandry, I, 50. 
 
 Travels (1821 ed.), II, 73. 
 
90 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Table 8 . _ Grain crops in six counties of Massachusetts, 1S01. 
 
 Grain. 
 
 Hampshire 
 
 County. 
 
 Berkshire 
 
 County. 
 
 Worcester 
 
 County. 
 
 Middlesex 
 
 County. 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 P. ct of 
 total. 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 P. ct. of 
 total. 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 P. ct. of 
 total. 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 P. ct. of 
 total. 
 
 All grains . 
 
 Indian corn .... 
 
 Rye . 
 
 Barley . 
 
 Oats . 
 
 Peas and beans. 
 Wheat . 
 
 525 722 
 310.787 
 120,468 
 
 I,Ol 6 
 
 73,043 
 
 2,640 
 
 17,768 
 
 IOO 
 
 59-1 
 
 22.9 
 
 0.2 
 
 13-9 
 
 0.5 
 
 34 
 
 309,356 
 
 156312 
 
 56479 
 
 933 
 
 66,308 
 
 2,962 
 
 26,362 
 
 IOO 
 
 50.5 
 
 18.3 
 0.3 
 
 21.4 
 1.0 
 8.5 
 
 599,799 
 
 386,130 
 
 75,932 
 
 9,053 
 
 105,324 
 
 4,669 
 
 18,691 
 
 IOO 
 
 644 
 
 12.7 
 
 1.5 
 
 17-5 
 
 0.8 
 
 3-i 
 
 376,6l4i 
 
 276,929 
 
 64 943 
 13,430 
 16,597 
 4,215i 
 500 
 
 IOO 
 73-6 
 17.2 
 3-6 
 44 
 1.1 
 
 0.1 
 
 Grain. 
 
 Norfolk County. 
 
 Essex County. 
 
 Summary. 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 P. ct. of 
 total. 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 P. ct. of 
 total'. 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 P. ct. of 
 total. 
 
 All grains .... 
 Indian corn .. 
 
 Rye . 
 
 Barley . 
 
 Oats . 
 
 Peas and beans 
 Wheat . 
 
 140,414 
 
 Il 8 , 02 I 
 
 11,178 
 
 8,105 
 
 2 174 
 885 
 51 
 
 100 
 
 84 .I 
 
 8.0 
 
 5-8 
 
 1-5 
 
 0.6 
 
 • • 
 
 239,3692 
 
 200 , 6 l 8 
 
 14,512 
 
 14,634 
 
 7,890 
 
 630^ 
 
 1,085 
 
 IOO 
 
 83.8 
 
 6.1 
 
 6.1 
 
 3-3 
 
 0.3 
 
 0.4 
 
 2,191 275 
 1,448,797 
 343,512 
 47,171 
 27L336 
 
 l 6,002 
 
 64,457 
 
 IOO 
 
 66.1 
 
 15-7 
 
 2.2 
 
 12.4 
 
 0.7 
 
 2.1 
 
 In the Middle States Indian corn was an important source of human and 
 animal food, but, owing to the competition of wheat a successful cash crop, 
 it did not occupy the predominant position which it held in New Englan . 
 
 CULTIVATION OF MAIZE IN NEW ENGLAND—VARIETIES. 
 
 The method of cultivation of maize in New England was described by 
 Dwight 31 as follows: 
 
 Maize is planted in hills, from three to four feet apart, in a manner resembling a 
 quincunx. The number of stalks in a hill should be not more than four nor less than 
 three The ground is afterwards broken, sometimes with a harrow, made in the form 
 of a triangle, and sometimes with a plough; each drawn by a single horse. In s.ony 
 grounds a larger plough is used; and is drawn by a yoke of oxen. The ground 
 then cleaned with the hoe. The process is repeated at least three times, and not un re- 
 quently four: at the last of which the earth is raised to the height of from four to six 
 inches, around the corn, and is denominated a hill; whence every planting is called a 
 hill of corn. The hill is made, to give a better opportunity for the roots, which, when 
 the stalk is grown to a considerable height, shoot from it several inches above the 
 surface, to insert themselves in the ground with more ease, and less hazard of failure. 
 These roots are called braces; because they appear to be formed for the sole purpose 
 of supporting the stalk.” _. 
 
 so American Husbandry, I, 160; Watson, Buckingham and Solebury (Penn.) in Hist 
 
 Soc. of Penn. Memoirs, I, 306. 
 
 31 Travels (1821 ed.), I, 108. See also Douglass, British Settlements, 11 , 204. 
 
FARMING IN THE OLDER SETTLEMENTS 91 
 
 Much of our information regarding Indian corn in New England in this 
 
 period is derived from Dwight’s 32 careful observations. He catalogued the 
 following varieties: 
 
 Names. 
 
 Color. 
 
 Varieties. 
 
 Rows of kernels. 
 
 Canada corn . 
 
 Yellow . 
 
 two 
 
 1 8 
 
 1 12 
 
 8 
 
 12 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 / 81 sweet, 
 
 1 1 2/ insipid. 
 
 S 12 upwards, shaped 
 
 l like a gourd seed. 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 Flint . 
 
 f Yellow I 
 
 < Rhip >. 
 
 two { small } • • • • 
 one 
 
 Nantucket . 
 
 iRed J 
 
 Yellow . 
 
 Chicken . 
 
 Yellow . 
 
 one 
 
 Sweet. 
 
 White . 
 
 one 
 
 Long-Island . 
 
 White . 
 
 two 
 
 Guinea . 
 
 White .. 
 
 one 
 
 Virginia . 
 
 White . 
 
 Carolina . 
 
 White . 
 
 one 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 Yellow . 
 
 one .... 
 
 --- J 
 
 
 "The earliest, and smallest, of these is the Chicken corn; and the next the eight 
 rowed Canada. The next after these is the Sweet. All these may in a favourable season 
 be planted so early as to furnish seed for a second crop, which will come to perfection 
 the same season, at New-Haven. The Chicken corn rarely exceeds the height of five 
 feet; the Canada seven; and the Sweet eight. The Nantucket differs little from the 
 Canada, except that it is later. The ears of the Chicken corn are scarcely more than 
 four inches in length; and its produce is trifling in quantity and value. The Sweet 
 
 °l Sh 1 7! 1 e ed i C ? rn T * S ° ^ a ) led ’ becaus e, when it is ripe, the kernels are remarkably 
 shrivelled, and the Long-Island Sweet, which is large, and comparatively late, are, when 
 in the milk, the most delicious of all culinary vegetables. 
 
 “The Flint corn grows to the height of ten feet; and'is the heaviest, the most nutri- 
 tious, and most productive of all the species. 
 
 "The Carolina, and Missouri, grow at New-Haven to the height of fifteen feet; but 
 the season is rarely long enough to bring either of them to perfection.” 
 
 In a system of agriculture so extensive in character the amount of labor 
 spent m the tillage of maize seems extraordinary. The explanation lies partly 
 in the fact that Dwight was undoubtedly describing the practices of the best 
 farmers. Jared Eliot 33 had observed : 
 
 Indian Corn seldom is tended as it ought to be; if there be any ploughing between 
 
 the Rows it is shallow just so as to kill Weeds, but not so as to make a great Quantity 
 ot soft mellow Earth. J 
 
 The author of American Husbandry 34 remarked in 1775 that although 
 ploughing between the furrows had become a usual practice in some parts of 
 JNew England, cross-ploughing was practiced “ only by good farmers.” How¬ 
 ever, maize was recognized as an exhausting crop, and as little or no manure 
 was applied to the land, it had become evident that good tillage was essential 
 11 any kind of a crop was to be obtained. 
 
 32 Travels (1821 ed.), II, 311. 
 
 33 Field Husbandry (1760), 121. 
 
 34 I, 50 . 
 
92 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 MAIZE IN NEW SWEDEN. 
 
 Acrelius, in his History of New Sweden,_ gave an account of maize which 
 indicates the general methods prevailing in the region of Delaware Bay. 
 
 He wrote: 35 ^ 
 
 « Maize is planted at the end of April or the beginning of May. Four furrows are 
 plowed dose L one another, and then five or six steps from these four other furrows 
 and so over the whole field. The plowing is done in the month of March. For the 
 planting is used a broad hoe, wherewith the earth is opened to the de Pth «f three or four 
 inches into which are cast five grains of corn, which are then covered with the hoe. 
 Sometimes also they add two Turkish beans, which thrive very well with the ™,ze 
 and run up its stalks. Each place thus planted is called a hill. An equal distance 
 kept between each hill, so that the rows may be straight either lengthwise or cmsswise 
 As soon as the young plant comes up it is plowed over, and even harrow ^' S° t at 
 mav be free from weeds. When the plants are half an ell 36 high, the ground is hoed 
 up around them; and. again when they are two ells high In the monthi of JfP te ™ er ’ 
 when the maize has obtained its greatest growth, although not ripe, the strongest blades 
 are cut off for fodder. They then plow between the rows of corn sow wheat and 
 harrow it in; and this, in the next year, gives a full crop. By the end of Octobe 
 ears are ripe, pulled off on the field, and carried home. The stocks and roots are to 
 up during the winter, when the ground is loose, to make the fields clean. 
 
 Cultivation by ploughing and cross-ploughing was noted hy Strickland in 
 
 N g o r k 3 ^ 
 
 Manasseh Cutler wrote in his diary when near Philadelphia: 38 “ In some 
 places I saw fields of corn, the rows of which I judged to be a mile m length. 
 The people do not hoe their corn at all, but plow it both ways.” 
 
 In the Middle Colonies other grains—wheat, rye, or oats—were often 
 sowed in the furrows between the rows of corn, a practice which not on v 
 interfered with tillage, but hastened the exhaustion of the soil. 39 Cornstalks 
 were fed to cattle in all regions, and in the Middle Colonies the blades were 
 utilized as well. The blades, as Acrelius wrote, were picked off before the 
 ears were ripe and the stalks piled in stacks and fed during the winter. 40 
 
 WHEAT— SHIFT FROM OLD TO NEW SOILS IN NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 Wheat had become during the eighteenth century more and more a special 
 crop. In some parts of New England it had begun to fail before 1700 and 
 from 1700 to 1750 there was a noticeable shifting of production from the 
 older towns to the newer settlements in the north and west. Eliot in 1747 
 remarked of Connecticut that “ many are inclined to remove to new places 
 that they may raise wheat, 41 and again, in 1754? he wrote: 42 
 
 “It is high Time something were done; our old Towns raising very little wheat, it is 
 purchased at the new Towns, and these new Towns will be old in Time; and then what 
 shall we do unless some better Way can be fou nd to manage our old Land. . 
 
 35 In Pennsylvania Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 149 - . , 
 
 36 The Swedish ell (aln) is equal to nearly 2 English feet; but it can scarcely be so 
 
 much as here used by our author, as is evident from what he says of the height ol 
 potatoes (4 ells) when hilled. He no doubt means inches. (Note by the translator.) 
 
 37 Observations, 39. 
 
 39 ^American Husbandry, I, 134, 143 5 Acrelius, in Hist. Soc. Penn. Memoirs, XI, 149 i 
 
 Tilton, in American Museum, V, 376- , _ f1 
 
 40 Kalm, Travels, I, 159; American Husbandry, I, 99; Judd, Hadley, 356; Mass. Society 
 
 for Promoting Agriculture, Papers (1807), pp. 17, 18, 19. 
 
 41 Field Husbandry, 24. 
 
 42 Ibid., 119- 
 
FARMING IN THE OLDER SETTLEMENTS 
 
 93 
 
 By the end of the century the wheat crop had practically disappeared from 
 eastern Massachusetts (see table 8, p. 90), and wheat bread had become prac¬ 
 tically unknown on farmers’ tables throughout most of New England. 
 Wheat was an important crop only in western Connecticut and Massachu¬ 
 setts, and in Northern Vermont. 43 Of the latter region we read: 14 
 
 In the absence of a stable currency, the standard of value for many years, before and 
 after 1800, was a bushel of wheat, the staple product of the farms, for which there was 
 a steady demand and a more nearly average value, one year into another, than anything 
 else. Taxes were paid in wheat, the minister’s salary and the school master’s wages 
 were computed in it, and notes are extant to be paid in wheat, which sometimes amounted 
 to hundreds of bushels. It is impossible to state, or even to estimate, the amount of wheat 
 raised in Ryegate, but it amounted to many thousands of bushels. On some of the large 
 farms hundreds of bushels were raised annually.” 
 
 SUCCESS OF WHEAT IN THE MIDDLE COLONIES. 
 
 In the Middle Colonies, on the other hand, wheat was cultivated with 
 continued success throughout the eighteenth century. Acrelius wrote of the 
 lower Delaware River region in 1759: 45 “ Wheat is the land’s chief product.” 
 Douglass claimed in 1749 that New Jersey raised more wheat than any of 
 the English colonies in America. 40 The author of American Husbandry 
 called wheat the grand article ” of the province of Pennsylvania and con- 
 mended highly the quality of wheat exported from New York, where it 
 grew particularly well on Long Island and in the Mohawk Valley. 47 
 
 As New England grew more and more regularly dependent on outside 
 sources for her wheat-supply, the export trade from* Pennsylvania and New 
 York increased, greatly stimulating the growing of wheat as a cash crop in 
 the latter region. 48 
 
 BLACK STEM-RUST IN NEW ENGLAND.—LEGISLATION 
 
 AGAINST BARBERRIES. 
 
 A part at least of the responsibility for the failure of the wheat crop in 
 New England may be assigned to the so-called blast or mildew, a parasitic 
 fungus growth now recognized as the black stem-rust. Since its first appear¬ 
 ance about 1660, it spread rapidly, and by the end of the eighteenth century 
 it was generally prevalent wherever wheat had been cultivated for a number 
 of years. The cause of the blight was uncertain. Farmers believed that 
 barberry bushes had some connection with the “ blasting ” of grain, since 
 they had observed that the grain in the neighborhood of such bushes was 
 most likely to be affected. 49 Acting upon this knowledge they secured the 
 passage of legislation for the destruction of barberries. Connecticut, the 
 first State to act, passed a law in 1726 50 which, after reciting in guarded 
 
 43 American Husbandry, I, 52; Dwight, Travels (1821 ed.), I, 376. 
 
 41 Miller and Wells, History of Ryegate (Vermont) , 97. 
 
 43 Penn. Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 148. 
 
 46 British SettlemeJits, II, 293. 
 
 47 I, 157; 97- 
 
 48 See pp. 142-144. 
 
 49 Dwight gives a number of instances of this kind which had come to his knowledge. 
 
 Travels (1821 ed.), I, 381-383. 
 
 50 Conn. Colony Public Records, VII, 10. 
 
94 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 language that “ the abounding of barberry bushes is thought to be very 
 hurtful,” granted power to the town meetings to take steps to eradicate them. 
 It is not known how many towns took action under this law or that of 1779 
 which amended it, but New Haven at least did so, appropriating $200. in the 
 year 1796 for the destruction of barberry bushes within its limits with 
 resulting benefit to the wheat crop. 51 
 
 Meanwhile Massachusetts and Rhode Island had both enacted similar 
 legislation. In the preamble to the act of 1754 the legislators of the former 
 colony made the bold statement that “ it has been found by experience that 
 the blasting of wheat and other English grain, is often occasioned by bar¬ 
 berry bushes.” Their procedure, however, against the obnoxious plants was 
 quite as timid as that of Connecticut. They did, it is true, order 52 
 
 “ That whoever, whether community or private person hath any barberry-bushes 
 standing or growing in his or their land within any of the towns in this province he 
 or they shall cause the same to be extirpated or destroyed on or before the tenth day 
 of June Anno Domini, one thousand seven hundred and sixty.” 
 
 But the law imposed no penalty for non-compliance, providing merely 
 that if the owner of land failed to remove his barberries any person might 
 enter and remove the bushes, collecting from the owner for his services. The 
 law expired by limitation in 1764. 
 
 It remained for Rhode Island to pass an act compelling barberry eradica¬ 
 tion. In 1766 this colony had passed special legislation for the Town of 
 Middletown, which was so cumbersome in its machinery as to be doomed 
 to failure. In 1772 there followed a much more effective piece of legislation, 
 which provided: 53 
 
 “ That if any Freeholder in this Colony shall apply to any Person having Barberry 
 Bushes growing in his Field or Inclosure to destroy them, and the Owner of the Land 
 shall neglect or refuse to cut them annually, or otherwise destroy them, he shall pay as 
 a Fine, the Sum of Ten Pounds Lawful Money.” 
 
 Although the farmers and their representatives had become so convinced 
 of the destructive effects of the barberries that they had incorporated their 
 views into legislation, the learned men of the community were skeptical. 
 Dwight, who gave much thought to the causes of the blast, eventually re¬ 
 jected the barberry theory. Although he recognized that barberries and rust 
 often were found in the same areas, as for instance in the eastern counties 
 of Massachusetts, yet he also discovered other areas where barberries were 
 absent and yet the grain was destroyed. His own explanation was that the 
 use of barn-yard manure forced the wheat too rapidly during the early stages 
 of its growth. 54 The sequel, of course, has shown that the practical men 
 were right, the theorists wrong. Investigations of European botanists, pub¬ 
 lished in 1870, show conclusively that the barberry acts as a host to the 
 wheat parasite in certain stages of its growth. 55 
 
 51 Dwight, Statistical Account of New Haven, 64. 
 
 52 Ch. X, Acts of 1754, in Mass. Temporary Acts and Laws, 1755, p. 153. 
 
 53 Rhode Island Laws, August 1772, p. 46, quoted by Davis in Col. Soc. Mass. Publica¬ 
 
 tions, XI, 92. 
 
 64 Travels (1821 ed.), II, 340-345. 
 
 55 American Journal of Science, 2d series, XLIX (1870), p. 406. See also Stakman, in 
 U. S. Dept. Agric., Yearbook (1918), 75-100. 
 
FARMING IN THE OLDER SETTLEMENTS 
 
 95 
 
 SEED SELECTION—WINTER VS. SPRING WHEAT. 
 
 The destruction of barberries was not alone relied upon in combating the 
 rust. Experiments were made in seed selection with a view to getting a 
 variety which would mature quickly. It was remarked by Hutchinson 56 in 
 1764 that the wheat which matured earliest suffered least from the blast and 
 on that account spring wheat suffered more than grain sown in the autumn. 
 He mentioned a new variety of wheat recently introduced from Portugal 
 as less subject to the blast than the varieties usually grown. Jared Eliot 57 
 had mentioned somewhat earlier “a sort of Summer Wheat brought into 
 Lse, not subject to Blast as the sort we had formerly among us.” 
 
 Winter grain became, in the latter half of the eighteenth century, more 
 generally sown than summer grain, not only in New England but in the 
 Middle Colonies as well, 58 and this was in part at least owing to the prev¬ 
 alence of the rust. Shoepf 59 wrote of the farmers in Bedford County, 
 Pennsylvania: 
 
 “They (the farmers) must always get their winter wheat into the ground before the 
 end of August, because otherwise the following year it will not be large and strong 
 enough to be safe against the mildew.” 
 
 The failure of wheat crops in New England is not to be attributed entirely 
 to the rust or to the Hessian fly, which followed. The author of American 
 Husbandry 60 remarked: 
 
 They say they cannot grow good wheat; that they do not grow good wheat I am 
 sensible, but I attribute it to their throwing it into such systems as this, 1 maize, 2 maize, 
 3 wheat, 4 oats, 5 wheat, &c. &c. In which case, the wheat may be thin, thrivelled, and 
 husky, without its being the fault of the climate; I am of opinion, under such culture, 
 it would be the same in Britain.” 
 
 The Middle Colonies also suffered from both of these pests. But with the 
 initial advantage of better soil, the Pennsylvania and New York farmers 
 ga\e their wheat fields better tillage and developed crops which more success¬ 
 fully withstood the attacks of parasites and insects. 
 
 THE HESSIAN FLY.—ITS ORIGIN.—EFFECTS OF ITS RAVAGES. 
 
 Another destructive enemy of the wheat crop was the Hessian fly, a pest 
 which first made its appearance on Long Island during the Revolution. A 
 contemporary writer claimed that it was introduced in the beds of Hessian 
 mercenaries or in the provender for their horses. 61 No great injuries to 
 the wheat crop were reported until 1785 or 1786, when it spread into New 
 Jersey. By 1788 it had crossed the Delaware and caused great destruction 
 in the eastern counties of Pennsylvania. In 1797 the fly was found west of 
 the Allegheny Mountains. 62 By 1800 it had spread throughout Connecticut 
 
 66 History of Massachusetts, I, 485, note. 
 
 57 Field Husbandry, 53. 
 
 58 Acrelius, in Penn. Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 148; Kalm, Travels, I, 166; American 
 
 Husbandry, I, 97, 157; Schoepf, Travels, I, 44. 
 
 59 Travels, I, 224. 
 
 60 I, 77- 
 
 61 Bordley, Essays and Notes, 242. 
 
 62 American Museum, I, 531; IV, 47; Philadelphia Agric. Soc. Memoirs, V, 143; 
 
 Letters of Phineas Bond, in Am. Hist. Asso. Report (1897), p. 456. 
 
96 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 and was steadily working its way into the back country of New England 
 and New York. 63 
 
 In some districts, notably on Long Island, the farmers gave way before 
 the pest, replacing wheat with rye. Elsewhere methods were devised to 
 restrict its ravages. It was discovered that the first sharp frost killed^ the 
 adult insect and consequently late sowing was practiced. In Connecticut, 
 by 1811, the date of planting had been shifted from the third week in August 
 
 to the last week in September or the first of October. 04 
 
 Changes also occurred in the varieties of wheat cultivated. In Connecticut, 
 
 before the fly appeared, says Dwight: 65 
 
 “the white bald wheat was almost exclusively cultivated. This was much the best 
 wheat ever known in New-England. It was less exposed to injuries from the frost, or 
 the blast, than any other. It yielded more by the acre; the grain was heavier; the flour 
 was whiter, and better tasted; and the bread fresh and moist much longer. This wheat 
 was, more than any other, the favorite food of the fly; and has, therefore, been for 
 many years disused. The yellow-bearded wheat has been substituted for it extensively. 
 Several other kinds have been also sown, with different success. 
 
 In the Middle Colonies spelt (T. sativum var. spelta ), a variety of wheat 
 raised by the Germans for horse-fodder and for bread, was found to be more 
 
 resistant to the fly than other varieties. 66 
 
 Indirectly the Hessian fly rendered good service to wheat cultivation. It 
 was discovered that the crops planted on the well-manured and more thor¬ 
 oughly cultivated ground suffered less. Increased attention was given to 
 fertilization and tillage, resulting in some instances in increased yields per 
 
 acre. 67 
 
 TILLAGE OF WHEAT. 
 
 Wheat and other small grains were often sown in the furrows when Indian 
 corn was cultivated, the land thus requiring no especial preparation for the 
 succeeding crop, or, after the Indian corn had been harvested, the stubble 
 was ploughed under and the seed sown and harrowed in. If wheat was to 
 be sown on grass land, a summer fallow often intervened. The land was 
 broken up in the fall, or in the early spring, and ploughed once or twice 
 before fall when the grain was sown and harrowed in. In the autumn the 
 cattle were often pastured on the sprouting grain. 68 
 
 RYE. 
 
 Rye was a widely distributed crop. It was grown on practically every farm, 
 being confined principally to sandy and gravelly soils. In New England, on 
 account of the decline of wheat-growing, rye flour and Indian meal made 
 the standard “rye and Injun ” bread of the farm families. The thrifty 
 Germans of Pennsylvania, although growing large crops of wheat for market, 
 
 03 Dwight, Travels (1821 ed.), I, 495 Hfi 300-302. 
 
 64 Dwight, Statistical Account of New Haven, 22. 
 
 65 Cltm 
 
 66 N. Y. Soc. for Promotion of Useful x\rts, Transactions, IV, pt. II (1819), p. 126. 
 
 67 Ibid., 1 /pt. I, 57; Bordley, Notes and Essays, 30, 243. 
 
 68 Acrelius, in Penn. Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 148; Tilton, in American Museum, V, 370; 
 
 Schoepf, Travels, I, 130. 
 
FARMING IN THE OLDER SETTLEMENTS 
 
 97 
 
 raised rye for their bread-flour. 69 Rye, as well as wheat and corn, was in 
 demand at local distilleries for the production of whisky and gin. Rye seems 
 to have been chiefly used for distillation. Strickland wrote: 70 
 
 “ All the back country of America is very favourable to the growth of rye; crops, 
 producing from twenty to thirty bushels, are commonly met with; this grain is entirely 
 consumed in the distillation of whisky, chiefly for the consumption of the Irish frontier- 
 men, except among the Germans in Pennsylvania, who use it for bread.” 
 
 Rye straw, as well as that of barley and oats, was used to supplement hay 
 as winter fodder for livestock. 
 
 MINOR GRAINS—BARLEY, OATS, BUCKWHEAT. 
 
 The author of American Husbandry wrote: 71 
 
 “ Barley and oats are very poor crops, yet do they cultivate both in all parts of New 
 England: the crops are such as an English farmer, used to the husbandry of the eastern 
 parts of the kingdom, would think not worth standing; this I attribute entirely to climate, 
 for they have land equal to the greatest productions of those plants.” 
 
 The barley of New England, although regarded there as “ a poor crop/’ 
 was highly esteemed in the Middle States and was exported to New York 
 and Philadelphia, where it was brewed for beer. 72 Oats, grown chiefly for 
 feeding, horses, were also bad; “ lean, chaffy, and of a dark Colour.” 73 
 Strickland wrote: 74 
 
 “ I never saw any oats that would be marketable in England, except some in the 
 German tract in Pennsylvania, and they would admit of comparison with such only 
 as we should esteem very moderate.” 
 
 Only where Scotch settlers were numerous were oats grown for the pro¬ 
 duction of oatmeal. 75 Buckwheat was generally cultivated in New York and 
 New Jersey, but was not much regarded in New England or in Pennsylvania. 
 It was often sown as a catch crop on land from which winter grain had been 
 harvested. The land was ploughed and the seed harrowed in. Buckwheat was 
 fed to horses, and was also used for fattening poultry and swine. In some 
 sections as in New Jersey buckwheat cakes were already a familiar dish on 
 the farmer’s table. 76 In Pennsylvania some farmers had begun at the end 
 of the century to plough under buckwheat as a green manure. 77 
 
 POTATOES. 
 
 The introduction in the last half of the eighteenth century of the general 
 cultivation of potatoes marked an important step in American agricultural 
 history. In New England the first cultivators of potatoes were the Scotch- 
 
 69 Rush in Penn. German Soc. Proceedings and Addresses, XIX (1910), 62. 
 
 70 Observations (1794), 47; see also Cooper, Information Respecting America, 122; 
 
 Temple and Sheldon, Northdeld, Massachusetts, 342; Watson, Essex County, New 
 York, 435; Pennsylvania Archives, 1st series, V, 229. 
 
 71 1, 53. 
 
 72 Belknap, New Hampshire, III, 142. 
 
 73 Douglass, British Settlements, II, 207. 
 
 74 Observations (1794), 48. 
 
 75 Miller and Wells, Ryegate, Vermont, 190. 
 
 76 American Husbandry, I, 100, 135, 165; Acrelius, in Penn. Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 149; 
 
 Cooper, Information Respecting America, 138; Schoepf, Travels, I, 194. 
 
 77 Bordley, Essays and Notes, 52. 
 
 8 
 
98 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Irish immigrants, who came in 1718-' 8 The natives took up the new crop 
 reluctantly. 
 
 “ They [potatoes] were kept as a rarity, to eat with roast meat. They were at first 
 planted in beds, as beets and carrots. Three bushels of them were considered a large 
 crop for one farmer’s family.” 79 
 
 After the Revolution potatoes came into general use as food in New Eng¬ 
 land, and perhaps somewhat later in New York and Pennsylvania. The 
 peculiar adaptation of Maine soil and climate for potatoes was discovered 
 before the end of the century. 80 The method of cultivating potatoes on the 
 Delaware was described by Acrelius 81 as follows: 
 
 “ Potatoes are quite common, of two kinds—the Irish and the Maryland. The Irish 
 are also of two kinds: the first round, knotty, whitish, mealy, somewhat porous. They 
 are planted thus; upon a smooth and hard ground a bed of dung is formed. Portions 
 of this are thrown upon the potatoes, which are then covered with ground of even the 
 poorest kind. When the stalks have come up about four ells high, they are again hilled 
 up with the same kind of earth, in order to strengthen the roots, which are thus con¬ 
 siderably increased in number. The other kind is long, branching, thick, reddish, juicy, 
 and more porous. For these a long ditch, the depth of a spade, is dug; the bottom of 
 which is covered with manure, set with pieces of potatoes, and covered over with earth. 
 When the stalks come up, they are treated as those above mentioned.” 
 
 In New England potatoes were planted in much the same manner as 
 Indian corn. 82 
 
 “ The ground being broken up, but not harrowed, a large hole was made by cutting 
 out a piece of the sod the whole depth of the ploughing. Into the bottom of this hole 
 was thrown a shovelful of dung, if so much could be spared, then a scanty portion of 
 seed, which lay far below the surface of the ground, over which was made an enormous 
 hill which must receive considerable addition at hoeing. In this way, with double the 
 necessary labor, something like half a crop was obtained.” 
 
 FLAX. 
 
 The cultivation of small patches of flax had become increasingly general 
 during the eighteenth century. In part this was owing to the increased pro¬ 
 duction of linen textiles in the farm homes, a branch of industry which was 
 greatly stimulated by the immigration of the Scotch-Irish. But flax was 
 grown not only for the fiber but for the seed, one of the few products which 
 could be marketed. A part of the seed was crushed in local oil-mills, and 
 considerable quantities were exported to Europe. 83 In Fairfield County, Con¬ 
 necticut, the soil proved well adapted to flax, and it became a special crop in 
 that region. From a single township about 20,000 pounds of seed were 
 annually exported. 84 
 
 TOBACCO. 
 
 Farmers addicted to the use of tobacco continued to raise small quantities 
 in their gardens for their own use. The consumption and cultivation of 
 
 78 Judd, Hadley, 358. 
 
 79 Felt, Ipswich, 40; see also Lyman, Easthampton, Massachusetts, 67; Temple, Whately, 
 
 Massachusetts, 76. 
 
 80 Sewall, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, III, 9; Ripley, in the same, 1st 
 
 series, IX, 141; Allen, Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, VII, 272. 
 
 81 In Penn. Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 150. 
 
 82 Wheeler, Brunswick, Maine, 220; see also Mass. Soc. for Promoting Agric. Papers 
 
 (1807), p. 21. 
 
 83 See p. 134. 
 
 84 Dwight, Travels (1821 ed.), Ill, 519. 
 
FARMING IN THE OLDER SETTLEMENTS 
 
 99 
 
 tobacco increased after the Revolution and in a few localities, as in the towns 
 in the Connecticut Valley, occasional exports of tobacco gave promise of its 
 future commercial importance. 85 
 
 PEAS. 
 
 The cultivation of field peas as a forage crop had declined, owing to the 
 ravages of the pea-bug in New England, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, 
 but peas were still successfully grown in northern New York. 86 
 
 GARDEN VEGETABLES. 
 
 The eighteenth century farmers paid little attention to gardens. They dug 
 up and fenced a small piece of ground near their houses and then left its care 
 to the women of the household, already overburdened with the household 
 industries. The Germans of Pennsylvania gave more attention to gardens, 
 but, in general, only a few varieties of vegetables appeared on the farmers’ 
 tables. Turnips, onions, and cabbages were grown most generally and were 
 occasionally fed to animals. Onions in a few localities, such as Wethersfield, 
 Connecticut, and Barnstable, Massachusetts, were an important cash crop. 87 
 In the neighborhood of the coast towns a greater variety of vegetables was 
 grown for market. 88 
 
 FRUIT. 
 
 In New England apples were by far the most abundant fruit. Dwight 89 
 catalogued the following varieties: 
 
 “ Pome royal, Golden Apple, Jennetin, Newtown pippin, Fall pippin, October pippin, 
 Golden pippin, Bellet bonne, Green Russet, Yellow Russet, Red Russet, Gilliflower, 
 Plum Apple, Early Seek no further, Late Seek no further, Spitzenberg, Pearmain, 
 Holden Sweeting, Green Sweeting, Greening.” 
 
 Apples were utilized chiefly for making cider, which had become “ the 
 
 common drink of all its inhabitants, rich and poor alike.In the 
 
 cellars of the well-to-do houses a barrel of cider was always on tap, and 
 pitchers of it were brought up at every meal and in the morning and eve¬ 
 ning.” 90 Even children were given diluted cider when milk was scarce. 91 
 Besides the domestic consumption, which was truly prodigious, there was an 
 export market for cider and cider brandy, as well as for apples, in the West 
 Indies. Under such conditions it is not surprising to find individual farmers 
 making 25, 50, or more barrels of cider each year. 92 The Massachusetts 
 valuation returns for 1767 give 33,436 barrels as the quantity of cider pro¬ 
 duced in Middlesex County in that year, amounting to seven barrels for each 
 
 85 Lees, Journal (1768), p. 10; Trumbull, Hartford County, Connecticut, I, 215; Judd, 
 
 Hadley, 375. 
 
 86 Kalm, Travels, I, 173; American Husbandry, I, 100; Judd, Hadley, 355. 
 
 87 Dwight, Travels (1821 ed.), 226; Kendall, Travels, II, 129. 
 
 88 Rush, in Penn. German Society Proceedings and Addresses, XIX, 65; Dwight, Travels 
 (1821 ed.), II, 498; Deane, New England Farmer, 2d ed., 40, 352. 
 
 89 Travels, I, 44, 45. 
 
 90 Adams, Three Episodes in Massachusetts History, II, 686. 
 
 91 Earle, Home Life in Colonial Days, 148, 161. 
 
 92 Diaries of Rev. Timothy Walker, in N. H. Hist. Soc. Collections, IX, 166; American 
 
 Husbandry, I, 56. 
 
100 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 family or 1.14 barrels per capita. Not all the apples were crushed for cider. 
 Besides those consumed in their natural state, large quantities were sliced and 
 dried for winter use. In especially good years there still remained a surplus 
 which was fed to cattle and swine. Peaches were grown more successfully 
 in the region around New York and in New Jersey and Pennsylvania than 
 farther to the northward. Every farmer had peaches and apples in abun¬ 
 dance, so that after the demands of his family had been met and passers-by 
 had helped themselves liberally and the swine had eaten what they could, 
 there was still a remainder which rotted on the ground. Orchard fruit, as 
 well as melons, constituted an important part of the summer diet of the 
 people of the Middle Colonies. Peaches were sliced and dried in Pennsyl¬ 
 vania, as apples were in New England and were also made into peach 
 brandy. 03 
 
 In general, there was little systematic cultivation of fruit in this country 
 before the year 1800. Once the trees were set out little attention was paid 
 to orchards. As a result they became infested with worms and throughout 
 New England there was complaint that the old orchards were dying out. 
 “ Choice varieties of apples, pears, peaches and cherries were known only 
 to a few careful cultivators, and the number of varieties of these was quite 
 limited as compared with the present day.” 94 Only a few leaders in agri¬ 
 cultural practice gave any attention to pruning and grafting or to the de¬ 
 struction of insect enemies. 95 In Pennsylvania and New Jersey greater care 
 was taken of orchards. There trees were not only grafted and pruned, but 
 the orchards were occasionally plowed and seeded with maize, rye, or oats. 96 
 Several large orchards and nurseries had been developed in the Middle Colo¬ 
 nies, in one of which, that of Thomas Young of Oyster Bay, New York, 
 there were over 27,000 apple trees. 97 
 
 SPECIAL CROPS—HEMP AND SILK. 
 
 The attempts to grow hemp throughout the northern colonies in the 
 eighteenth century need explanation, for the amount of labor necessary in 
 the cultivation of this crop and for the preparation of the fiber for market 
 would seem to have doomed the experiments to failure from the beginning. 
 But the northern farmers were bent upon finding an agricultural staple, some¬ 
 thing which could be sold to a wide market like the tobacco of Virginia; and 
 besides, there was the stimulus of the bounties offered by the English and 
 colonial governments. 98 Although grown with more success in the Middle 
 Colonies, particularly in New Jersey, than in New England, hemp was 
 never raised in quantities sufficient for the supply even of domestic ship¬ 
 yards. The failure of hemp to become an important crop was owing to its 
 
 93 Kalm, Travels, I, 70, 72; American Husbandry, I, 156; Acrelius, in Penn. Hist. Soc. 
 
 Memoirs, XI, 151; Weld, Travels, I, 91. 
 
 94 Flint, in Maine Board of Agric., 19th Annual Report, 115. 
 
 95 Dwight, Travels (1821 ed.), I, 76; Belknap, New Hampshire, III, 140. 
 
 96 Acrelius, in Penn. Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 152. 
 
 97 Furman, Long Island Antiquities, I, 91; Dwight, Travels (1821 ed.), Ill, 322. 
 
 98 Lord, in J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and Pol. Science, extra volume, XVII, 83-86. 
 
FARMING IN THE OLDER SETTLEMENTS 
 
 101 
 
 inability to compete with grain crops for the limited supply of fertile land. 
 The author of American Husbandry 99 observed of Pennsylvania: 
 
 “P is not want of good land in certain quantities, nor of climate, that prevents the 
 export of hemp, but the demand for it at Philadelphia, which exceeds, for home consump¬ 
 tion, what the province can raise. Improvements might be made, of which more here¬ 
 after that would enable Pennsylvania to export hemp; but without a change in certain 
 branches of rural economy, they never will raise this commodity for exportation. A 
 people increasmg at such an amazing rate, makes the necessaries of life so dear, that no 
 o er husbandry answers so well, that is, they possess not a staple that will pay them 
 for a neglect of wheat and common provisions.” y 
 
 A similar situation prevented the realization of visionary dreams of the 
 production of raw silk. Mulberry trees were common, and it was easy to 
 show that silk worms could be fed and silk reeled from the cocoons. Various 
 amilies did it, and in some sections, as for example in eastern Connecticut, 
 enough silk was produced to attract attention. But the high price of labor 
 
 proved an insuperable difficulty to the establishment of silk culture a« a 
 branch of northern farming. 100 
 
 CROP YIELDS. 
 
 Although no comprehensive statistical information is available, a general 
 idea of the yield per acre of the various field crops may be obtained from 
 the comments of the most reliable observers. 101 As regards maize, 20 to 25 
 bushels an acre seems to have been considered an average crop on fairly 
 good soil; crops of 40 to 50 bushels were sometimes secured under favorable 
 conditions. Dwight’s estimate of the average crop for Connecticut was 25 
 bushels, which is the same as Strickland’s for New York. 
 
 Under the prevailing system of cultivation a fair average wheat crop in 
 the Middle Colonies was probably between 10 and 15 bushels, although usu¬ 
 ally nearer the lower figure. Strickland estimated the average yield in New 
 York at 12 bushels and in Pennsylvania and New Jersey at only 6 bushels. 
 Under better than average conditions, as on new land in the Hudson and Mo¬ 
 hawk Valleys, or among the German farmers of Pennsylvania, crops of 20 
 to 30 bushels might be obtained. The best crops reported anywhere were 
 those of 40 to 50 bushels on land heavily manured with fish on Long 
 Island. In New England the average yield seems to have been higher than 
 in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, but this is probably owing to the fact that 
 there wheat was grown only on the more fertile soils. Dwight put the average 
 Connecticut at 15 bushels and Belknap stated that in New Hampshire 
 20 bushels was considered “ a paying crop ” on the common uplands, although 
 actually less was often obtained. Rye averaged from 10 to 15 bushels. The 
 
 data on the minor cereals and on flax and potatoes are too fragmentary to 
 be of value. 
 
 99 I, 162; see also 102, 137, 151. 
 
 100 Kalm, Travels, I, 123; American Husbandry, I, 165, 179; Coxe, View of U. S., 93; 
 
 Dwight, Travels (1821 ed.), I, 361. 
 
 101 Dwight, Travels (1821 ed.), I, 108; Strickland, Observations, 39, 42, 44; Belknap, 
 
 New Hampshire III, 136; American Husbandry, I, 98, 99. 100, 135, 15 7 , 160, 166; 
 ouglass, British Settlements, II, 208; Cooper, Information Respecting America, 
 a A hin - gt T n ’ Le !l ers ° n Agriculture, 38, 72, 83; Schoepf, Travels, I, 130; Phila- 
 elphia Agric. Soc .Alemoirs, I (1815), p. 991 Tilton, in American Museum V, 379; 
 Mass. Society for Promoting Agric. Papers (1807), 14-19; N. Y. Soc. for Promo¬ 
 tion of Useful Arts, Transactions , I (2d ed., 1801), (1798), 240. 
 
Chapter VIII. —Grazing and Livestock. 
 
 HAY AND PASTURAGE. 
 
 The seeding of tilled uplands with the so-called artificial grasses during the 
 interval between grain crops marked an important step in crop management 
 over the old system of weed fallow. It was a step of great significance also 
 from the point of view of the livestock industry, for the creation of the 
 so-called artificial meadows provided the farm animals with a very necessary 
 addition to their scanty and unreliable forage. As the stocks of cattle increased, 
 the pasturage afforded by the natural grasses in the woods and meadows 
 tended to bfcome exhausted. KalmA reported in 1748 that the pasturage in 
 the older settlements in Pennsylvania and New Jersey was failing, assigning 
 as a reason-the great increase in cattle which devoured the annual grasses so 
 rapidly that they had no opportunity to ripen and seed themselves. U 
 account of the persistence of the practice of burning the woods the timber 
 forage was also unsatisfactory and declining. The worn-out til age lands 
 which had been abandoned, either permanently or temporarily, to a weed 
 fallow furnished a poor sort of pasture, often appropriately termed brush 
 pasture Perhaps one-half the area of the farm was devoted to a vast pasture 
 lot “impoverished and skinned,” producing weeds, sour grass, bayberry 
 
 bushes, and briers. 
 
 “ On this their ill-fated horses, cows, oxen, and sheep are promiscuously turned ear y 
 in the 1 season before there is a bite: but they nibble off the scanty growth of rubbish 
 as it rises. Here they continue till winter: sometimes through the winter, so that the 
 ground becomes poached and trod to a dead closeness. 2 
 
 Hav was cut chiefly from the natural meadows and the salt marshes 
 Large quantities of coarse hay, chiefly the variety known as Carex, could 
 thus be obtained with little effort, but as livestock increased these sources 
 proved unreliable and after a drought cattle often suffered from lack of 
 
 fodder. Eliot wrote (1747) : 
 
 “ The scarcity and high price of hay and corn is so obvious, that there are few or 
 none Ignorant of it, at least here, and I suppose nearly the same other where, or worse, 
 for sundry Vessels have been in these Towns from other parts, to load with sedge- 
 irrass to supply their want of fodder at home. This scarcity hath been gradually in¬ 
 fusing upon us for sundry Years past. It is evident that the necessary stock of the 
 Country hath out-grown the meadows, so that there is not hay for such a stoc as e 
 present increased number of people really need: such an high price of hay, takes off 
 
 much from the profit of raising and keeping stocks. . « 
 
 “ This scarcity of Hay I account for in this manner: Our first Planters who settled 
 down by the Sea, and those who settled by the large Rivers and Intervale Lands, found 
 so much salt Marsh by the Sea-side, and those on the Rivers and Intervale found so much 
 mowing Ground more than they had Occasion for, that they Improved only such Parts 
 as were best and nearest at hand, and let the Rest lie, and when by the increase ot 
 People they wanted more, they ma de use of what had been before Neglected, without 
 
 1 Travels, I, 129; 134, 155- 
 
 2 Bordley, Essays and Notes, 143 - 
 
 102 
 
GRAZING AND LIVESTOCK 
 
 103 
 
 any tho’t or care to provide more; and Meadows not being easily or speedily bro’t too 
 many are drove to great Straits. This may be one Reason why some inland Towns 
 
 are better provided than some of the other Towns, as considering at first what thev 
 had to trust to.” 8 
 
 In Lew Jersey the author of American Husbandry noted the excessive 
 reliance in marsh hay, remarking that the result was that “ in no province 
 are all the four-footed animals worse treated.” 4 
 
 IRRIGATION OF MEADOWS. 
 
 The iirigation of meadows had begun in the German settlements in Penn¬ 
 sylvania befoie 175 °> an( I by the end of the century was a general practice 
 there. Watered meadows ” were also found in a few localities in New Eng¬ 
 land and in New York. The areas of the natural meadows were enlarged by 
 diverting the brooks which flowed through them from .their original channels, 
 conducting them along the hillsides and then distributing the water by lateral 
 ditches as widely as possible over the lowlands. Such improvements often 
 entailed large investment of capital. But the resulting increase in the hay 
 crops seem to have justified the expense. In Pennsylvania “ farms were 
 valued in proportion to the quantity of land capable of irrigation,” and the 
 watered meadows were so highly regarded that “ when the original tracts 
 came to be divided, the rights thereto were carefully set forth in the title- 
 deeds, generally giving the use and control of the stream to the owners of 
 the several tracts a certain number of days in each week alternately.” 5 
 Another improvement of the mowing land was the draining of the salt 
 marshes along the Delaware River by means of dikes and tide gates. Many 
 thousand acres, according to Acrelius, 6 were thus reclaimed in the years 1745— 
 1760. The land when dry was ploughed, seeded with grain and afterwards 
 laid down to clover or other English grass. The undertaking did not prove 
 a permanent success, because of the difficulty in keeping the dikes intact. 
 
 CULTIVATED GRASSES—CLOVER AND TIMOTHY. 
 
 Of greater significance than either irrigation or drainage enterprises was 
 the making of the so-called “ artificial meadows,” i. e., the seeding of upland 
 mowing with timothy, red clover, and other English grasses of the eighteenth 
 century. English grasses were not unknown before 1700, having been sown 
 usually by accident and occasionally by design. The progress of the eigh¬ 
 teenth century consisted in the increased sowing of such grasses on tilled 
 ground and in the substitution of selected seed for the sweepings of haymows. 
 We find occasional references to clover growing in fields before the Revolu¬ 
 tion. Kalm 7 observed (1749) that 
 
 “ Red Clover was sown in several places on the hills without the town [New York] 
 The country people were now employed in mowing the meadows. Some were already 
 
 * Field Husbandry, 21, 23; see also Buck, Bucks County, Penn., 56. 
 
 J38. See also Mass. Agric. Repository, II (1807), p. 29. 
 
 K Lancaster County, Penn., 347. See also American Husbandry, I, 
 166; Kalm, Travels, I, 308; Chastellux, Travels, 306; Dwight, Travels (1821 
 11,^ 2u5« 
 
 ! L? His , t - Soc. Penn. Memoirs, XI, 154. See also Kalm, Travels, I, 330, 333. 
 
 1 Travels, II, 224. ' ’ 00 ’ °‘ 5 ' 5 
 
 100, 
 
 ed.), 
 
104 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 mown; and the dry clover was put under cover, in order to be carried away the first 
 opportunity.” „ ,, 
 
 Acrelius 8 found Pennsylvania farmers in i 7 S 9 sowing clover-seed after 
 they have harrowed in their wheat to make the crop stronger. te rapi ^ 
 spread of clover culture dates, however, after the Revolution. Watsoi 
 rives 1780 as the date of the first improvement of upland fields by clover 
 in the neighborhood of Philadelphia. In Lancaster and Bucks Counties it 
 was hardly known before 1800. 10 Watson wrote: 11 
 
 « It became a w onder to see men making grass, and hauling it in from upland fields. 
 Every body was delighted to see the effect of this new era m farming. The aged^ow ca 
 
 LcrToS as Inadequate to provide his frugal living then, unless he had also a good 
 portion^o^natural meadow to supply his stock. It soon came to be -cpenenced hat fifty 
 acres of land, well tilled, produced enough to fill a barn of double the size before used. 
 
 A grass frequently seeded with clover was variously known as timothy 
 in the Middle Colonies and Herd’s grass in New England. It was used as a 
 hay plant near Portsmouth, New Hampshire, as early as 1720 and was taken 
 to New York and other colonies by one Timothy Hanson, w ence 1 s na 
 After 1750 it is frequently mentioned. Although long supposed to have 
 been indigenous in America, it is now recognized as an Old World p 
 growing naturally in England and known there as cats-ta.l grass. To the 
 America farmers, however, belongs the credit of having first lecogn z d 
 value of timothy and having introduced its cultivation as a forage crop. 
 The author of American Husbandry was impressed with the large crop of 
 timothy hay grown in New England, and Strickland 13 was even more en- 
 
 thusiastic. He wrote: 
 
 “ Timothy grass is extensively cultivated in the middle and northern states of the 
 American Union and I apprehend it to be the same as the phleum pratense , Cat s-tail 
 grass of European botanists. I have frequently seen extraordinary crops ot it, growing 
 thickas it could stand on the ground, three or four feet in height, and in some ins ^ an 
 coarse as wheat straw; however, in this state, as it is cut before maturity, and as in the 
 climate of America hay is always well cured, however succulent at the time of cutting, 
 "prefer“to evS other kind of hay, and thrive better upon it I cannot therefore 
 but think it worthy of some fair experiments in this country. No other grass approaches 
 it in produce; and it is particularly useful when mixed with red clover, in preventing 
 it from falling too close to the ground. ’ 
 
 The introduction of cultivated grasses, although of such recent date, by the 
 opening of the nineteenth century had caused less reliance on the meadows 
 for hay. In Pennsylvania, wrote Bordley 14 in 1801: 
 
 “the irrigated and bottom meadow lands are now thought lightly of, in comparison 
 w th the very high estimation they were in before clover came into field culture Still 
 irrigated -rounds are, as they ever will be, very valuable: but so sure and plentiful are 
 clover crops that the Pennsylvania farmers are less solicitous about meadows. Till 
 lately a farm without irrigat ed or bottom meadow, was never much valued. Now, pur 
 
 s In Hist. Soc. Penn. Memoirs, XI, 154 - 
 
 9 Annals of Philadelphia, II, 66 (1844 ed.). 
 
 10 Buck, Bucks County, 56; Ellis and Evans Lancaster County, 349 - 
 
 11 Annals of Philadelphia, II, 66 (1844 ed.). VTT ✓ _ c \ n T 
 
 12 Piper and Bort, in Journal Am. Society of Agronomy, VII (1915), P- x - 
 
 13 Observations, 63. 
 
 14 Essays and Notes, 31, note. 
 
GRAZING AND LIVESTOCK 
 
 105 
 
 chasers are less anxious for those articles, as they are sure of abounding in clover and 
 hay from the arable upland.” 
 
 Table 9 indicates the relative importance for Massachusetts of the various 
 sources of the hay crop. In reading the figures for yields per acre, one should 
 keep in mind the taxpayers’ natural tendency to understatement. 
 
 Table 9. — Hay—English upland, fresh meadow, and salt marsh — acreage, tonnage and 
 
 yield per acre, six counties in Massachusetts, 1801. 
 
 [From Massachusetts valuation returns.] 
 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. ct. of 
 acreage. 
 
 Tons. 
 
 Tons per 
 acre. 
 
 Hampshire County: 
 
 
 
 65,410 
 
 O.83 
 
 Total hay crop. 
 
 79J52 
 
 IOO 
 
 English upland . 
 
 46,941 
 
 59-3 
 
 4L799 
 
 .99 
 
 Fresh meadow . 
 
 32,211 
 
 40.7 
 
 23,6ll 
 
 •73 
 
 Salt marsh . 
 
 0 
 
 0.0 
 
 0 
 
 0.0 
 
 Berkshire County: 
 
 
 
 
 .87 
 
 Total hay crop. 
 
 39,275 
 
 IOO 
 
 33,999 
 
 English upland . 
 
 28,558 
 
 72.7 
 
 25,774 
 
 .90 
 
 Fresh meadow . 
 
 10,717 
 
 27-3 
 
 8,225 
 
 •77 
 
 Salt marsh . 
 
 0 
 
 0.0 
 
 0 
 
 0.0 
 
 Worcester County: 
 
 
 
 83,084 
 
 .82 
 
 Total hay crop. 
 
 101,291 
 
 IOO 
 
 English upland . 
 
 47,680 
 
 47.1 
 
 39,748 
 
 .83 
 
 Fresh meadow . 
 
 53,611 
 
 52.9 
 
 43 336 
 
 .81 
 
 Salt marsh . 
 
 0 
 
 0.0 
 
 0 
 
 0.0 
 
 Middlesex County: 
 
 
 
 50,156 
 
 
 Total hay crop. 
 
 70,920 
 
 IOO 
 
 •71 
 
 English upland . 
 
 30,737 
 
 43.3 
 
 21,061 
 
 .69 
 
 Fresh meadow. 
 
 37,691 
 
 53-2 
 
 26,902 
 
 •7i 
 
 Salt marsh . 
 
 2,492 
 
 3-5 
 
 2,193 
 
 .88 
 
 Norfolk County: 
 
 
 
 24,238 
 
 
 Total hay crop. 
 
 41,369 
 
 IOO 
 
 •59 
 
 English upland . 
 
 22.156 
 
 53-3 
 
 11,292 
 
 •51 
 
 Fresh meadow . 
 
 16,613 
 
 40.2 
 
 11,007 
 
 .66 
 
 Salt marsh . 
 
 2,700 
 
 6.5 
 
 L939 
 
 .72 
 
 Essex County: 
 
 
 
 39 , 4 i 6 
 
 
 Total hay crop. 
 
 54,901 
 
 IOO 
 
 •72 
 
 English upland . 
 
 22,826 
 
 41.6 
 
 14584 
 
 .64 
 
 Fresh meadow . 
 
 17,463 
 
 31.8 
 
 12,270 
 
 •70 
 
 Salt marsh . 
 
 14,612 
 
 26.6 
 
 12,562 
 
 .86 
 
 Summary: 
 
 386,908 
 
 
 296,303 
 
 
 Total hay crop. 
 
 IOO 
 
 •77 
 
 English upland . 
 
 198,798 
 
 514 
 
 154,258 
 
 .78 
 
 Fresh meadow . 
 
 168,306 
 
 43.5 
 
 125,351 
 
 •70 
 
 Salt marsh . 
 
 19,804 
 
 5.1 
 
 16,694 
 
 .84 
 
 NUMBER AND KINDS OF LIVESTOCK KEPT 
 ON TYPICAL FARMS. 
 
 Neat cattle, horses, swine, and poultry were kept on all farms, and sheep, 
 as well, on a great many. The equipment of livestock on typical farms in 
 eastern Massachusetts appears to have been 1 or 2 horses, 1 or 2 yoke of oxen, 
 15 head of cattle, including 5 dairy cows, about as many swine as cows, and, 
 on half the farms a flock of 10 to 20 sheep. 15 In Bucks County, Pennsylvania, 
 
 15 Mass. Agric. Soc. Papers (1807), p. 35. 
 
106 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 it was estimated (1791) that a farm of 200 acres would on the average sup¬ 
 port 12 head of cattle, including 5 milch cows, 20 store sheep, 10 hogs, and 
 10 dozen poultry. 16 
 
 From the Chester County, Pennsylvania, tax lists for 1765, table 10 has 
 been compiled, showing the number of horses, cattle, and sheep on the aver¬ 
 age farm, 
 
 Table 10. —Livestock on farms / Chester County, Pennsylvania, 1765. 
 
 [From tax lists in Pennsylvania Archives, 3d series, XI, 1—1 33-1 
 
 Total number of farms taxed... 
 
 Average acreage . 
 
 Horses: 
 
 Total number reported. 
 
 Farms reporting . 
 
 Per cent of all farms. 
 
 Average number of horses re¬ 
 ported . 2.7 
 
 a According to the law of 1785 all horses and cattle 
 does not state age of livestock to be taxed. 
 
 Cattle: 
 
 Total number reported. 10,846 
 
 Farms reporting . 2,934 
 
 Per cent of all farms. 89.1 
 
 Average number of cattle re¬ 
 ported . 37 
 
 Sheep: 
 
 Total number reported. 14,042 
 
 Farms reporting . 1,967 
 
 Per cent of all farms. 597 
 
 Average number of sheep re¬ 
 ported . 7- 1 
 
 over 3 years were taxable. Previous act (1762) 
 
 3,293 
 
 135 
 
 8,022 
 
 2,944 
 
 89.4 
 
 The Massachusetts valuation returns for 1771 for four towns in the 
 Connecticut Valley give the following results. 
 
 Table ii. —Livestock on farms in 
 
 [From Massachusetts valuation r 
 
 Total number of farms taxed... 400® 
 
 Horses, over 3 years. 426 
 
 Average per farm. 1.06 
 
 Oxen, over 4 years. 539 
 
 Average per farm. 1.35 
 
 a Estimated on basis of population and number 
 
 ur towns in the Connecticut Valley. 
 rns, 1771, in Judd, Hadley, 385 -3 
 
 Cows, over 3 years. 9*4 
 
 Average per farm. 2.28 
 
 Sheep, over 1 year.2 388 
 
 Average per farm. 8.46 
 
 Swine over 1 year. 601 
 
 Average per farm. 1.50 
 
 families. 
 
 The largest number of horses on any farm was 4, of oxen 6, of cows 9, and 
 of sheep 40. In comparing the Pennsylvania figures with those for Massa¬ 
 chusetts, the oxen and cows in table 11 should be added together, giving an 
 average of 3.6 per farm or practically the same figure as for cattle in Penn¬ 
 sylvania. Figures for 215 farms in Falmouth, Maine, 1760, show on the 
 average 1 horse per farm, 2 oxen, 3 or 4 cows, 9 or 10 sheep, and 1 or 2 
 swine over one year. 17 
 
 There were a few regions in which the grazing industry had become spe¬ 
 cialized where livestock farming was carried on on a large scale. In the 
 Narragansett country (Washington County, Rhode Island) about the middle 
 of the eighteenth century we find farms ranging from several hundred to 
 several thousand acres, supporting 20 to 40 horses, 25 to 50 dairy cows, and 
 several hundred sheep each. 18 
 
 16 Washington, Letters on Agric. (Knight ed.), 73. 
 
 17 MSS. in Mass. Archives, Boston, Mass. 
 
 18 Updike, Narragansett Church, I, 216. 
 
GRAZING AND LIVESTOCK 
 
 107 
 
 In the back country of Pennsylvania the range system of cattle raising 
 was pursued. The author of American Husbandry wrote: 19 
 
 “ Many of the planters, especially in the back parts of the province, where the wild 
 tracts are adjoining, keep great stocks of cattle: some of them have from forty to sixty 
 horses; and four or five hundred head of horned cattle, oxen, cows, bulls, calves, and 
 young cattle; they let them run through the woods, not only in summer, but also in 
 winter; which is a circumstance that makes them very inattentive to the providing 
 winter food 
 
 THE CARE AND MANAGEMENT OF LIVESTOCK. 
 
 The eighteenth century farmers showed little advance over the first settlers 
 in their care of livestock. The lack of adequate winter shelter and of a suit¬ 
 ably balanced winter ration were still glaring faults. Combined with lack 
 of selection in breeding, the result was small, semi-starved, ill-formed, and 
 unproductive animals. Kalm 20 wrote (1748) : 
 
 “ All the cattle has been originally brought over from Europe. The natives have 
 never had any, and at present few of them care to get any. But the cattle degenerates 
 by degrees here, and becomes smaller. For the cows, horses, sheep, and hogs, are all 
 larger in England, though those which are brought over are of that breed. But the 
 first generation decreases a little, and the third and fourth is of the same size with the 
 cattle already common here. The climate, the soil, and the food, altogether contribute 
 their share toward producing this change.” 
 
 The exceptions to this general condemnation occurred in localities where 
 production for a market was important. Just at the end of the century there 
 was improvement by importation of cattle, sheep, and horses, but this episode 
 belongs to the agricultural progress of the nineteenth century. 
 
 NEAT CATTLE. 
 
 Cattle were housed in New England and New York State during the 
 winter months. Belknap 21 reported : 
 
 “ Cattle are housed from the beginning of November, .... By the beginning of 
 May, the grass is sufficiently grown for cattle to live abroad; good husbandmen do 
 not permit them to feed till the twenty-first of May; but scarcity of fodder obliges the 
 poorer sort to depart from this rule.” 
 
 In southern New England the pasturage season was longer, and in towns 
 along the Sound may have extended the year through. 22 In Pennsylvania and 
 New Jersey stables and cowhouses were seldom seen, and the cattle as a 
 rule were left out all winter to pick up their living in the woods. 23 There 
 were exceptions. Acrelius 24 wrote: 
 
 “ A good housekeeper has a stable with thin sides for the horses, and sheds for the 
 cattle and sheep built near the barn, and standing out in the stable-yard, so that they 
 may be protected there when the weather is severe.” 
 
 Better care of livestock was one of the many features which distinguished 
 the farming of the thrifty Germans from that of their English neighbors. 
 
 19 I, 166; see also Acrelius, in Hist. Soc. Penn. Memoirs, XI, 154. 
 
 20 Travels, I, 102. 
 
 21 New Hampshire, III, 19. 
 
 22 Coffin, Tour to Rhode Island, in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, IV, 270. 
 
 23 Kalm, Travels, II, 50; American Husbandry, I, 99, 132, 164. 
 
 24 In Hist. Soc. Penn. Memoirs, XI, 155. 
 
108 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 They kept less stock, but kept them better. The German barns, which will 
 be described later were well known at the end of the eighteenth century. 
 Rush 25 wrote: 
 
 “ They keep their horses and cattle as warm as possible in winter, by which means 
 they save a great deal of their hay and grain; for those animals when cold, eat much 
 more than when they are in a more comfortable situation.” 
 
 Hay remained the chief winter feed for cattle, but owing to the practice 
 of sowing clover and timothy on uplands, it was better hay and there was more 
 of it. In addition, cattle were given cornstalks and the straw of rye and 
 other small grains. Potatoes and other root crops are occasionally men¬ 
 tioned as food for cattle, but seem to have been used to a very limited extent. 26 
 A distinction was already made between the food of stock which were being 
 fattened and that of other animals. Bordley 2 ‘ wrote: 
 
 “ In America we keep cattle through the winters, on straw, maize fodder, and husks, 
 giving them water; and fatten on hay, and cut straw with meal; or as in Maryland, with 
 maize fodder and broken ears of maize, in the winter: on grass in summer. 
 
 CATTLE RAISING AND BEEF FATTENING. 
 
 In general, the farmers did not specialize in any particular branch of 
 livestock industry. Their cattle were not only dual but triple purpose animals. 
 They furnished motive power for plowing and hauling, as well as meat and 
 dairy products. Beef was “ salted down,’’ chiefly for home consumption, 
 but in many localities a small amount could be marketed. The animals 
 slaughtered were chiefly old cows and worn-out oxen weighing perhaps 400 to 
 500 pounds dressed. 28 However, in a few regions specialization had devel¬ 
 oped. In the back country of Pennsylvania and the uplands of Virginia and 
 North Carolina range cattle were raised which were driven overland to the 
 neighborhood of Philadelphia, where they were fattened for market. Tilton 29 
 described the stall-feeding industry in upper Delaware as follows: 
 
 “ Some few farmers have the large English breed of cattle; but the most prevailing 
 are of the smaller kind. These are bred in the greatest number on the marshes and 
 forests of the two lower counties; from whence they are driven in large droves to the 
 county of Newcastle, where the most cultivated meadows abound, and they are grazed 
 and stall-fed for the markets of Wilmington and Philadelphia. Fattening cattle, during 
 the warm weather, run at large in grazing grounds, changing them occasionally, from 
 field to field; in the winter, such as are stall-fed are put each into a separate stall and 
 fed with the most luxuriant hay. There is a prevailing opinion, that beef is firmer and 
 in all respects better, when fatted upon grass than upon grain.” 
 
 On the bog meadows and marshes of eastern New Jersey the farmers 
 raised cattle for sale to graziers. 
 
 The hills of northern New England were well adapted to cattle raising, and 
 droves from Vermont and New Hampshire were taken overland to New 
 
 25 In Penn. German Soc. Proceedings and Addresses, XIX, 62. 
 
 26 Allen, Vermont, in Vt. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 484; Wheeler, Brunswick, Maine, 221 ; 
 
 American Husbandry, I, 164. 
 
 27 Essays and Notes, 159. 
 
 28 Rev. Timothy Walker’s Diaries, in N. H. Hist. Soc. Collections, IX, 139, 169. 
 
 29 American Museum, V, 381. 
 
GRAZING AND LIVESTOCK 
 
 109 
 
 York and to Boston, and occasionally to Philadelphia. In Hadley and neighbor¬ 
 ing Connecticut River towns the stall-feeding of oxen for the Boston market 
 had begun as early as 1700. 30 
 
 The development of a large and strong race of cattle was the ambition 
 of the New England graziers, because of their value as draft animals. 
 Burnaby leported that the largest oxen in America were raised in Rhode 
 Island, some of them weighing 1600 to 1800 pounds. 31 Of more reliability 
 aie the records of a meat packer in Northampton, Massachusetts, about the 
 
 year 1750, which showed the average dressed weight of 12 oxen to be 767 
 pounds. 32 ' ' 
 
 DAIRYING. 
 
 Butter and cheese were made on all farms for home consumption and in 
 some localities, especially in New England, for export as well. Owing to 
 lack of careful methods, the butter was usually poor, and in the absence 
 of refrigerating facilities had to be heavily salted. In northern Vermont the 
 Scotch settlers were successfully producing a good grade of butter before 
 1800, which was sold in Boston. 33 
 
 Windham and Litchfield Counties in Connecticut and the Narragansett 
 country in Rhode Island produced cheese in large quantities for export to the 
 
 southern States and the West Indies. Of the town of Goshen, Connecticut 
 Dwight 34 wrote: 
 
 It is, perhaps, the best grazing ground in the State: and the inhabitants are probably 
 more wealthy, than any other collection of farmers in New-England, equally numerous. 
 I he quantity of cheese, made by them annually, is estimated at four hundred thousand 
 pounds weight. Butter is also made in great quantities. The houses are good farmers’ 
 
 . ouses - There are a few in a superiour style. The inhabitants are distinguished for 
 industry, sobriety, good order, and good morals.” 
 
 On the extensive Rhode Island farms, dairying was a commercial industry 
 by the middle of the eighteenth century. Douglass 35 wrote: 
 
 “The most considerable Farms are in the Narragansett Country. Their highest Dairy 
 oi one harm commumbus annis milks about no Cows, cuts about 200 Load of Hav 
 makes about 13 000 Wt of Cheese, besides Butter; and sells off considerably in Calves 
 
 wf ? l ^, ocks - A from 73 milch Cows in five Months made about 
 
 Ts! m° T C eeS . e i besides Cheese in a Season, one Cow yields one Firken of Butter, 
 /o to 80 Wt. In good Land they reckon after the rate of 2 Acres for a Milch Cow.” 
 
 The scale on which the industry was conducted is shown by the following 
 gures from Updike: 36 Farm A, 700 acres, 42 cows, annual product, 9,200 
 pounds of cheese; farm B, 350 acres, 36 cows, 8,000 pounds of cheese; farm 
 C, 100 cows, 13,000 pounds of cheese. Tradition asserts that the recipe for 
 
 30 Judd, Hadley, 368 . On this subject see also Schoepf, Travels, I, 213; Strickland 
 
 Travels ( l821 ed *)> n » 458; Belknap, New Hampshire, 
 *43, Dean, Atlas of Vermont, 7; Smith, New Jersey, I, 487. 
 
 31 Travels, 123. / 
 
 32 Quoted in Thompson, History of Stock Raising, ch. II, 40. (MS. in U. S. Dept, of 
 
 Agriculture, Washington, D. C.) v y 
 
 33 Miller and Wells, Rye gate, Vermont, 193. 
 
 34 Travels (1821 ed.), II, 374. 
 
 35 British Settlements, II, 100. 
 
 36 Narragansett Church, I, 219. 
 
110 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Narragansett cheese was brought from Gloucestershire and was the same as 
 that for the celebrated Cheshire cheese. 
 
 SHEEP. 
 
 Sheen became of steadily increasing importance in northern agriculture in 
 the eighteenth century, particularly in New England. In general, that sec¬ 
 tion was showing greater adaptation to grazing than to tillage, and within 
 New England there were localities where sheep-raising was more pro a e 
 than other branches of the livestock industry. On the islands off the coast 
 of southern New England and in Rhode Island, although the forage was 
 hoarse the winters were not severe and besides the surrounding ocean saved 
 the expense of inclosures and shepherding. In localities such as Martha s 
 Vineyard, Nantucket, and in the Narragansett country where the floe s 
 numbered several thousands, 37 wool became a commercial product, but in 
 general, both in New England and in the Middle Colonies sheep were raised 
 as a Dart of the self-sufficient farm economy, and not as a business. ey 
 produced wool for the manufacture of homespun textiles and not for sale. 
 Richard Peters wrote to Washington of sheep raising in Pennsylvania. 
 
 “ It is a profitable article, so far as you can extend it, but noi great■ be u e "e 
 
 1 A it. and if the business was more extensively carried on, the profit would De 
 
 f -F I know none who have tried the sheep business that have 
 
 kn rrTeded “ FoldfnVis very well, but it requires labour; and the sheep, crowded together 
 here have often perished. I cannot ascertain how many an acre will support; for none 
 ar kept! wkhTn my knowledge, but in small numbers and as a variety in a farmers 
 stock. They are close feeders, and destroy pasture prodigiously. 
 
 Wool and not mutton was the object of sheep-raising. The meat could 
 not be successfully preserved by salting or smoking, and consequently there 
 was no export market. The farmers didn’t like the taste of fresh lamb or 
 mutton, probably because of their own negligence in slaughtering. Ih 
 typical sheep of the period were small, long-legged, narrow in the breast 
 and back, and also slow at arriving at maturity. They may have stood 2j 
 feet high and weighed when dressed from 10 to 15 pounds per quarter, or 
 in exceptional cases 20 pounds. They yielded on the average from 2 to 3 
 pounds of coarse, short-staple wool at a shearing. 39 Of the quality of Amer- 
 ican wool Burnaby 40 wrote : 
 
 <* Upon the best inquiry I could make, I was not able to discover that any one had 
 ever seen a staple of American wool longer than seven inches ; whereas in the counties 
 of Lincoln and Leicester, t hey are frequently twenty-two inches long. ___ 
 
 37 Wright, Wool Growing and the Tariff, 2.. 
 
 33 Washington, Letters on Agriculture (Knight ed.), 86. > q 
 
 39 Tilton, in American Museum , V, 382; Strickland, Observations, 59 . M o S ,', S rj wW 
 
 Papers 1807, p. 38. U. S. Dept. Agriculture, Special Report on Sheep Industry 
 
 (1892), p. 74- 
 
 40 Travels, 136. 
 
GRAZING AND LIVESTOCK 
 
 111 
 
 Attempts to improve the breed of sheep by importation of rams from Eng¬ 
 land were made as early as 1760 and, notwithstanding a drastic prohibiten 
 
 on the part of the English government, a small number were smuggled into 
 the country. 41 b& 
 
 SWINE. 
 
 familT 7 SWine Snd fattened 4 or 5 hogs, which supplied his 
 
 ‘ ly with salt pork an essential article of their diet, and left a small 
 
 suip us for sale.. In New England a growing export trade in barreled pork 
 was developing in the eighteenth century and large quantities were sold for 
 the provisioning of the fishing fleets. Swine were fed on dairy and kitchen 
 vaste in the summer or allowed to run at large in the woods. 
 
 in hfj°h n a S l he f ac ° rns ’ b « ech - n uts, &c. begin to fall, they are driven to the woods 
 m large herds, to feed on them. The delicacy, taste and nutrition of these nuts are 
 particularly suited to the palate of these animals, so that in a short time they srrow 
 to a great size. The hog prefers the beech-nut to any other and the effect o/th-n 
 
 a r good n s C wine year « “ gr ° Wth “ d ** henCe a g °° d beech nut “V be called 
 
 After harvest the swine were shut up and those which were to be slaugh¬ 
 tered were fattened for a few weeks, principally on Indian corn, with the 
 iron sometimes of potatoes or other root crops, peas, and beans. The 
 
 " S “?‘S'r? t0 Slau f hter h °S s at 18 months, when they would weigh 
 m the Middle Colonies and in most parts of New England about 200 pounds. 
 
 eastc y n Mas s a ohusetts the usual weight was given as from 250 to 400 
 pounds, but probably hogs of over 300 pounds were unusual. Some farmers 
 kept their hogs over two winters, others slaughtered at 8, 10, or 12 months. 43 
 
 DRAFT ANIMALS—OXEN AND HORSES. 
 
 In New England the ox remained the chief reliance of the farmers as a 
 working animal. Up to 1750 there were few sleighs or wheel vehicles light 
 enough for horses to draw, and they were used chiefly for riding. In the 
 alter half of the century the use of horses increased. For light tasks, such 
 as cultivating corn and harrowing, they were used alone and for heavier 
 work together with oxen, the horse often being the leader of the team. At 
 he beginning of the nineteenth century oxen were still about 50 per cent more 
 numerous than horses in eastern Massachusetts, but their declining importance 
 is clearly evident from the figures given in table 12. 
 
 In Connecticut in 1796 there were 36,791 oxen 4 years old and upward 
 an 37 > 9°7 worses 3 years old and upward, giving a ratio of 103 oxen to 100 
 
 41L °Jh “I' SC ? E ^? t ’ Field Husbandry, 14. The law referred to is 8 Elizabeth 
 
 T he P e ? alt y imposed by this act “for conveying any sheep alive 
 out of this Realme was, for the first offence the loss of the offender'sEntire estate 
 
 offence^he penak^was ^death. bSS ° f * “ ** se^d 
 
 A-llen, in Vt. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 483. 
 
 Notes, 186; Washington, Letters on Agriculture (Knight ed.) 
 u;’ feeler, Brunswick, Maine, 221; Diaries of Rev. Timothy Walker in N h’ 
 Hist Soc. Collections, IX 143, 169; Belknap, New Hampshire, III 145’ American 
 Husbandry, I, 55; Mass. Agric. Soc. Papers (1807), p. 39. ' 45 ’ /imerican 
 
112 
 
 agriculture in northern united states 
 
 horses II Is significant that horses outnumbered oxen in the three counties 
 where on account of fertile soil and relatively easy access to markets, the 
 beginnings of commercial agriculture were most evident. On Long sand 
 bofh oxen and horses were used frequently in the same team. During t 
 Revolution, when the British had commandeered horses and oxen, unspayed 
 
 Table 12 .—Horses and oxen in three counties in Massachusetts, 1767 and 1801. 
 
 [From Massachusetts valuation returns.] __ 
 
 -- - 
 
 County. 
 
 Horses, 3 years old and 
 over. 
 
 Oxen, 4 years old and 
 over. 
 
 Ratio, oxen to ioo 
 horses. 
 
 1767. 
 
 1801. 
 
 1767. 
 
 1801. 
 
 1767. 
 
 i8ox. 
 
 ATiddleceY . 
 
 3492 
 
 2,156 
 
 3,451 
 
 5,230 
 
 3,064 
 
 3 909 
 
 6,028 
 
 2,969 
 
 4,930 
 
 8,367 
 
 3,824 
 
 5,540 
 
 172 
 
 137 
 
 143 
 
 l60 
 
 125 
 
 142 
 
 iVIlUUiCDCA . 
 
 XT/^-rfolk . . . 
 
 Essex . 
 
 Qummcirv . 
 
 9,099 
 
 12,203 
 
 13,927 
 
 17,731 
 
 153 
 
 145 
 
 j . 
 
 cows were used in the yoke, but only a few farmers continued this practice 
 when the emergency had passed. In New York, New Jersey, and Pennsy - 
 vania the disappearance of oxen was taking place so rapidly after the Revolu¬ 
 tion as to occasion serious alarm to the “agricultural economists of the 
 day A writer in the American Museum stated. 
 
 “ Formerly it was the custom, in several of these states, to P lou s!l, an f d f har ™" n ‘'; e e 
 land! aTweU as convey their produce to market, by means of oxen. That frugal mode 
 
 Table 13.— Horses and Oxen in Connecticut Counties, 1796- 
 
 [From MS. tax lists in comptroller’s office, Hartford, Connecticut.] 
 
 County. 
 
 Horses, 3 years 
 old. 
 
 Oxen, 4 years 
 and over. 
 
 Ratio: Oxen to 
 100 horses. 
 
 Hartford . 
 
 5,878 
 
 5,816 
 
 98.9 
 
 NTpiv Haven . 
 
 4,293 
 
 4,689 
 
 IO9.2 
 
 
 4452 
 
 4,448 
 
 I07.I 
 
 Fairfield . .. 
 
 6,300 
 
 6,255 
 
 99-3 
 
 \AJindViam . 
 
 4,493 
 
 4,686 
 
 104.3 
 
 87.9 
 
 T itchfield . ,. 
 
 7,570 
 
 6,656 
 
 A/fiddleneY . 
 
 i ,943 
 
 3,016 
 
 155-2 
 
 Tolland . 
 
 2,162 
 
 2,341 
 
 108.3 
 
 ^Itate total ...... 
 
 36,791 
 
 37,907 
 
 103.0 
 
 wJ LCllC LW LIAa. • • • 
 
 
 
 . God rarriace is at this time almost wholly discontinued; and such is the force of 
 custom and prfjudice, that I know many persons who would sooner carry their ar 
 to market on their own shoulders, than be seen driving an ox team. 
 
 A few years later a correspondent from Burlington, New Jersey, summed 
 up the case against horses as follows: 
 
 “The first cost and charges of maintaining horses upon a f , ar ™’HmelTth^expeLe 
 most moderate calculation, be computed at less than twice or three times thejM>__ 
 
 44 HI (1788), p. 455 - 
 
GRAZING AND LIVESTOCK 
 
 113 
 
 attending a number of oxen, sufficient to perform the same labour. Horses are, from 
 their nature, a more precarious property—subject to a greater variety of accidents and 
 diseases, and, when past labour, occasion a heavy loss to the proprietors of them. On 
 the contrary, a well-trained ox increases in value until he be nine or ten years old ; and 
 the profit from his labour in the mean time, amply repays the farmer every expense 
 incurred in raising and training him to service: and when no longer capable of labour, 
 instead of subjecting his owner to a heavy loss by death, he yields a handsome profit! 
 If therefore an ox, when fatted for beef at ten years old, will produce a sum equal to 
 the expense of maintaining him until that period, it follows, as an obvious truth, that all 
 his labour is a clear profit to the farmer,” 45 
 
 THE NARRAGANSETT PACERS. 
 
 The breeding of horses seems to have been carried on rather generally. 
 The export of horses to the West Indies from southern New England con¬ 
 tinued an important branch of trade until the Revolution, and horse raising 
 was there a branch of the livestock industry of comparable importance with 
 sheep and cattle raising. Mules were also raised for export in Windham and 
 Worcester Counties. The small, hardy animals shipped from Connecticut 
 ports and from New York often included Canadian horses which had been 
 brought overland in the winter and fattened before export in the spring 
 and summer. 40 
 
 The eighteenth century saw the development of two celebrated breeds of 
 horses in the northern colonies, the Narragansett pacers of Rhode Island 
 and the Conestoga horses of Pennsylvania. The pacers were of uncertain 
 origin, by some they were said to have been imported from Andalusia, in 
 Spain. They were a small hardy breed remarkable for their peculiar and 
 comfortable gait and for their fleetness. MacSparran, 47 a Rhode Island 
 clergyman, wiote: I have seen some of them pace a Mile in little more than 
 two Minutes, a good deal less than three. ’ After the Revolution, the pacers 
 diminished rapidly in numbers, and by 1800 the breed was practically extinct. 
 They had been exported rapidly to the West Indies, perhaps faster than 
 they were raised. The pacers were used exclusively as saddle animals and 
 never in harness, but improvement of roads and the increased demand for 
 horses for teaming in the Revolution made the raising of trotting horses more 
 profitable. 48 
 
 CONESTOGA HORSES. 
 
 The Conestoga horses, “ the finest draft animals on the continent in the 
 colonial age,” were developed by the German farmers of Pennsylvania from 
 stock originally brought over by English settlers. The name was taken from 
 
 45 American Museum, VIII (1790), 43. On the relative use of oxen and horses see 
 Belknap, New Hampshire, III, 260; Judd, Hadley, 367; Gardiner, in N. Y. Hist. 
 Soc. Collections, Publication fund series, II, 256; N. Y. Soc. for Promotion of 
 Useful Arts Transactions, I (2d ed., 1801), 31; Franklin, Writings, VII, 434; Good¬ 
 rich, Statistical Account of Ridgefield, Connecticut. 
 
 40 Benedict Arnold was engaged in this trade. See Chastellux, Travels, 166 and note. 
 Eliot, Field Husbandry, 16; American Husbandry, I, 58. 
 
 47 In Updike, Narragansett Church, III, 36; Phillips/ Horse Raising in Colonial New 
 
 England, 291 et seq. 
 
 48 Updike, Narragansett Church, III, 37, note; Douglass, British Settlements, II, 214; 
 
 Phillips, Horse Raising in Colonial New England, 291 et seq. 
 
 9 
 
114 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 a stream in Lancaster county, the site of a settlement of Swiss Mennomtes. 
 They were a strong, large, breed, whose excellence was a matter of frequent 
 comment. Rush 43 wrote: “A German horse is known in every part of^the 
 state; indeed, he seems to ‘ feel with his lord, the pleasure and the pride o 
 
 his extraordinary size or fat.” . 
 
 Toward the end of the century there occurred two events of first class 
 
 importance in the history of American horse-raising the importation of the 
 
 thoroughbred Messenger from England to Philadelphia in 1788 and the 
 
 foaling of Justin Morgan, the sire of the Morgan breed, in West Spring e , 
 
 Massachusetts, in 1793. The improvement of American stock which resulted 
 
 belongs, however, to the next period of our history,__ 
 
 49 In Penn. German Soc. Proceedings and Addresses, XIX, 60. 
 
Chapter IX. —Farm Management and Household 
 
 Economy. 
 
 ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF COLONIAL AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Two economic characteristics stand out prominently in colonial agricul- 
 tuie. (i) its extensive character, that is, the thinness of the application of 
 labor and capital on a large extent of land, and (2) its self-sufficiency, mean- 
 ing by that term not complete isolation from commercial relations, "but pro- 
 duction, as a rule, for home consumption rather than for sale. 
 
 Contemporary observers had often remarked in the eighteenth century 
 that farms were too large. General Warren’s comparison 1 2 * of English and 
 American farming laid emphasis on the small amount of capital employed 
 in this country, and as early as 1760 the author of the appendix to Eliot’s 
 Field Husbandry 2 had observed: 
 
 (< I take leave to mention an Error, which, I think, many Husbandmen are guilty of; 
 vis, in undertaking to open too large Tracts of Land at once for Improvement; by which 
 Means the Expence of inclosing, of perhaps fifty Acres, amounts to a large Sum of 
 Money and Quantity of Labour, which, a small Part of, expended on five Acres well 
 cultivated, would yield a much larger Profit; for it is not the Quantity, but Quality of 
 Land which must fill the Farmers Barn.” 
 
 The farmers of Pennsylvania, too, were “ land poor.” The author of 
 American Husbandry 3 remarked : 
 
 It is. very evident that this must necessarily be the system while the settlers spend 
 half their fortune in buying the land, that is, in paying the province fees for it: if a 
 man has an hundred pounds in his pocket, and was able with it to cultivate properly 
 forty or fifty acres; and he takes three or four hundred, which in patent fees costs him 
 half his fortune, he then plainly lessens his ability to cultivate, while his cultivation ought 
 to increase greatly.” 
 
 SIZE OF FARMS. 
 
 The typical farm in New England in this period ranged from 100 to 200 
 acres, sometimes including as much as 300 acres in the newer sections and fall¬ 
 ing to 50 to 100 acres in more intensively cultivated areas. 4 The conditions in 
 Chester County were probably fairly typical of the older settlements in the 
 Middle Colonies. There the tax returns 5 for 1765 from 3,293 farms show 
 an average size of 135 acres. Even within this county there was a consider¬ 
 able variation in farm acreage. In the five towns nearest Philadelphia 196 
 farms averaged only 114 acres each, whereas in five towns on the western 
 
 1 Quoted on p. 85. 
 
 2 P. 160. 
 
 3 1,373. 
 
 4 Dickinson, View of Massachusetts, 7; Mass. Soc. for Promoting Agriculture, Papers 
 
 (1807), p. 10. 
 
 5 Chester County Tax Lists, in Pennsylvania Archives, 3d series, XI, 1-137. 
 
116 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 border of the county 460 farms had an average acreage of 156. On the fron¬ 
 tier, where, as we have seen there was much land speculation, there were 
 large holdings which, however, were generally not cultivated as farms. The 
 actual farming on the frontier was, as a rule, on a small scale. 6 In general, 
 however, the larger farms were to be found in the back country and the 
 smaller in the neighborhood of the coast towns. 
 
 An exception to this rule was the Narragansett country, now Washington 
 County, Rhode Island, where in the first half of the eighteenth century live¬ 
 stock raising and dairy farming had been developed on a large scale. There 
 the uncertainty of land titles, owing to the boundary dispute between Con¬ 
 necticut and Rhode Island, had prevented community settlement. A few 
 individuals had secured extensive grants of land on which they grazed large 
 herds of cattle and flocks of sheep. Although the average holding was possibly 
 not over 300 acres, farms ranging from that figure to several thousands of 
 acres were not uncommon. 7 
 
 FARM LABOR. 
 
 The contention that colonial farms were too large was based not merely 
 on the consideration of acreage but on acreage in relation to the available 
 supply of farm labor and farm equipment. In the eighteenth century, as in 
 the seventeenth, the northern farmer relied chiefly on his own labor and that 
 of his family. The cooperation of several family groups, a relic of pioneer 
 days, was frequent in harvesting, corn-husking, barn-raising, etc. 
 
 In New England only men as a rule were to be seen in the fields, the 
 women of the family assisting only occasionally in harvest time. Women 
 looked after the dairy, the poultry, and the kitchen garden. Among the Ger¬ 
 man settlers in New York and Pennsylvania the women not infrequently 
 worked in the fields along with their husbands or brothers. Dwight 8 records 
 his astonishment at first observing this phenomenon “ near Hudson, New 
 
 York.” 
 
 “Immediately after I left Hudson’s, I was presented with a prospect entirely novel 
 to me. Ten women, of German extraction, were arranged in front of a little building, 
 busily employed in dressing flax. In my childhood I had seen women, in a small number 
 of instances, busied in the proper labour of men; particularly in raking hay immediately 
 before a shower, when the pressing nature of the case demanded extraordinary exertions. 
 Even this I had not seen for thirty years. Women in New England are employed only 
 in and about the house, and in the proper business of the sex. I do not know, that I 
 was ever more struck with the strangeness of any sight, than with the appearance, and 
 business, of these German females.” 
 
 In New England a farmer could occasionally employ a poorer neighbor 
 whose small farm did not demand all his time. The Scotch-Irish immigration 
 after 1720 increased the supply of labor, but as in the seventeenth century 
 the easy accessibility of cheap new land drew away the landless men, both 
 native and foreign, and prevented the formation of a regularly dependable 
 group of farm laborers. Another circumstance which kept farm labor high 
 
 6 Ballagh, in Am. Hist. Asso. Report (1897), P- 1 ^. __ , DO „ TT ... ATnr 
 
 7 Channing, in J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and Pol. Set., IV (1886), No. 3; Updike, Nar¬ 
 
 ragansett Church, 1 ,215-217. . .. , 
 
 s Travels (1821 ed.), Ill, 205. See also Rush, in Penn. German Society, Proceedings and 
 Addresses, XIX, 66; Davis, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, 717. 
 
FARM MANAGEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY 
 
 117 
 
 in New England was the competition of the fisheries and shipping with 
 agriculture. 
 
 THE REDEMPTIONERS. 
 
 In the Middle Colonies the larger influx of immigrants, English, Scotch- 
 Irish, and Germans, produced the class of redemptioners, or indentured 
 servants, who were used extensively as farm help. Kalm 9 describes them 
 as follows: 
 
 “ These new-comers are very numerous every year: there are old and young ones, 
 and of both sexes; some of them have fled from oppression, under which they supposed 
 themselves to have laboured. Others have been driven from their country by persecution 
 on account of religion; but most of them are poor, and have not money enough to pay 
 their passage, which is between six and eight pounds sterling for each person; therefore 
 they agree with the captain that they will suffer themselves to be sold for a few years, 
 on their arrival. In that case the person who buys them, pays the freight for them, but 
 frequently very old people come over, who cannot pay their passage, they therefore 
 sell their children, so that they serve both for themselves and for their parents: there 
 are likewise some who pay part of their passage, and they are sold only for a short time. 
 From these circumstances it appears, that the price of the poor foreigners who come 
 over to North America is not equal, and that some of them serve longer than others; 
 when their time is expired, they get a new suit of clothes from their master, and some 
 other things: he is likewise obliged to feed and clothe them during the years of their 
 servitude. Many of the Germans who come hither, bring money enough with them to 
 pay their passage, but rather suffer themselves to be sold, with a view that during their 
 servitude they may get some knowledge of the language and quality of the country, 
 and the like, that they may the better be able to consider what they shall do when they 
 have got their liberty. Such servants are taken preferable to all others, because they 
 are not so dear; for to buy a Negroe or black slave, requires too much money at once; 
 and men or maids who get yearly wages, are likewise too dear; but this kind of servants 
 may be got for half the money, and even for less; for they commonly pay fourteen 
 pounds, Pennsylvania currency, for a person who is to serve four years, and so on in 
 proportion. Their wages therefore are not above three pounds Pennsylvania currency 
 per annum. This kind of servants, the English call servings. When a person has bought 
 such a servant for a certain number of years, and has an intention to sell him again, lie 
 is at liberty to do so; but he is obliged, at the expiration of the term of the servitude 
 to provide the usual suit of cloaths for the servant, unless he has made that part of the 
 bargain with the purchaser. The English and Irish commonly sell themselves for four 
 years, but the Germans frequently agree with the captain before they set out, to pay 
 him a certain sum of money, for a certain number of persons; as soon as they arrive 
 in America, they go about and try to get a man who will pay the passage for them. In 
 return they give according to the circumstances one, or several of their children to 
 serve a certain number of years, at last they make their bargain with the highest 
 bidder.” 
 
 WAGES OF FARM LABOR. 
 
 Data on farm wages are of course fragmentary. The most complete 
 figures available are those collected by Strickland, 10 which have been sum¬ 
 marized in table 14. 
 
 In New York 1 bushel a day was the payment for cradling wheat; in New 
 England a bushel of maize was given for a day’s work at harvest. In addi¬ 
 tion to these money wages, laborers received food and either cider or rum to 
 
 9 Travels, I, 388. The passage in American Husbandry, I, 169, appears to be merely 
 
 a paraphrase of Kalm. 
 
 10 Observations, 28. 
 
118 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 drink. Richard Peters wrote to Washington 11 in 1792 of wages around 
 Philadelphia as follows: 
 
 “ Our wages for hirelings, by the day, are commonly 2s. in winter, and 2s. 6d. nine 
 months in the year, for common days-work on a farm, and every thing found, as to 
 eating and drinking. The same man will hire, and find himself, at 3s. and 3s. 6d. per 
 day; for a reaper 3s. to 3s. 9d. and found ; and the same for cutting grass; reaping, by the 
 acre, I have never had done under 5s. but the price is generally 7s. 6d. the labourers 
 
 finding themselves. As to mowing, or what we call cradling grain, we pay a 
 
 man 5s. to 6 s. per day, and found; and the days’s work about the same with Mr. Young’s 
 statement, viz. two or two acres and a half per day. Mowing per acre 5s. to 6s. and a 
 pint of rum. Labourers find themselves food. 
 
 “ The yearly hire of a good labourer in Pennsylvania I think sixty dollars, or 22A 10s. 
 currency, and found, clothing excepted.” 
 
 Such wages were regarded as abnormally high by European observers. 
 The author of American Husbandry 12 remarked that in buying labor “ one 
 shilling will do as much in England as half a crown in New England.” 
 Wages were high not only in money but in money’s worth, and it was this 
 
 Table 14.— Farm wages for agricultural labor. 
 
 
 New York. 
 
 New 
 
 England. 
 
 New Jersey 
 and 
 
 Pennsylvania. 
 
 By the month: 
 
 In summer .. 
 In winter ... 
 By the day: .... 
 Foreman . 
 
 is. 5 d. 
 
 is. id. 
 
 2 S. 
 
 £14 per year. 
 
 2 S. 
 
 is. 3d. 
 
 2 s. 7 d. 
 
 £18 15s. ... 
 
 2 S. 
 
 is. 9id. 
 
 2 S. 3 d. 
 
 £24 
 
 circumstance which made the acquisition of an independent position so 
 easy. In Vermont, wrote Williams: 13 
 
 “ in agriculture, the laborer can procure seventy dollars a year for his work; equal in 
 value to one hundred and twenty bushels of wheat. In the busy seasons of the year, 
 the common price of a day’s labor is half a dollar; in the winter not more than half 
 this sum. All kinds of labor are in the usual proportion to that of agriculture. Of 
 these wages it will take twenty dollars, to procure comfortable clothing; the remainder 
 the laborer is able to reserve for other purposes. Thus by laboring for another for two 
 or three years, the laborer becomes independent, and works afterwards upon his own 
 land or stock.” 
 
 SLAVES IN NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 It has long since been established by economic historians that the failure 
 of northern farmers to utilize negro slaves as agricultural laborers rested 
 upon economic and not on moral or religious grounds. Experiments with negro 
 and Indian slave-labor were made in the first settlements. It became clear, 
 however, that the slave system would not yield a profit where general agri¬ 
 culture was pursued simply for a living, or for a narrowly limited market. 
 However, in one northern county, that unique region of large dairy and sheep 
 farms, the Narragansett country in Rhode Island, the negro slave was an 
 important figure. In the town of South Kingston, in 1730, from one-third 
 
 11 Washington, Letters on Agriculture (Knight ed.), 84. 
 
 12 I, 73. 
 
 13 Vermont, II, 367. 
 
FARM MANAGEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY 119 
 
 to one-half of the population were negroes and Indians. In 1774 there were 
 3,761 slaves in Rhode Island in a total population of about 60,000, but by 
 1790 the number had decreased to less than i,ooo. 14 It seems doubtful 
 whether the blacks were essential to the successful conduct of large-scale 
 agriculture in the Narragansett country. In the gay and luxurious life of 
 the planters many house-servants were necessary, and it may be that most 
 of the slaves were thus employed rather than as field hands. 
 
 LAND UTILIZATION. 
 
 From the scarcity of labor in comparison to the cheapness of land it 
 resulted naturally that only small parts of the farms were actually in tillage 
 and that the cultivation of these small patches of plowed land was superficial 
 and negligent. The true explanation of the well-recognized facts of bad 
 tillage was forcefully presented by Washington 15 in a letter to Arthur Young. 
 He wrote: 
 
 “ An English farmer must entertain a contemptible opinion of our husbandry, or a 
 horrid idea of our lands, when he shall be informed that not more than eight or 
 ten bushels of wheat is the yield of an acre; but this low produce may be ascribed, and 
 principally too, to a cause which I do not find touched by either of the gentlemen whose 
 letters are sent to you, namely, that the aim of the farmers in this country, if they can 
 be called farmers, is, not to make the most they can from the land, which is, or has 
 been cheap, but the most of the labour, which is dear; the consequence of which has been, 
 much ground has been scratched over and none cultivated or improved as it ought to 
 have been: whereas a farmer in England, where land is dear, and labour cheap, finds it 
 his interest to improve and cultivate highly, that he may reap large crops from a small 
 quantity of ground.” 
 
 The small proportion of farm land under tillage in the older parts of 
 New England is shown by the data in table 15, taken from the Massachusetts 
 Valuation Returns 16 of 1801: 
 
 Table 15. —Land utilization, six counties in Massachusetts, 1801. 
 
 [From Massachusetts valuation returns.] 
 
 County. 
 
 Total taxable. 
 
 Tillage. 
 
 English up¬ 
 land mowing. 
 
 Fresh meadow 
 and 
 
 salt marsh. 
 
 Pasture. a 
 
 Woodland and 
 waste. b 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct. 
 
 Hampshire .. 
 
 920,647 
 
 100 
 
 59,080 
 
 6.4 
 
 46,941 
 
 5 -i 
 
 32,211 
 
 3-5 
 
 156,120 
 
 17.0 
 
 626,295 
 
 68.0 
 
 Berkshire ... 
 
 475 U 47 
 
 100 
 
 28,320 
 
 6.0 
 
 28,558 
 
 6.0 
 
 10,717 
 
 2.2 
 
 86,827 
 
 18.3 
 
 320,725 
 
 67-5 
 
 W orcester.. . 
 
 811,122 
 
 100 
 
 3L786 
 
 3-9 
 
 47,680 
 
 5-9 
 
 53 , 6 ll 
 
 6.6 
 
 188,624 
 
 23-3 
 
 489,421 
 
 60.3 
 
 Middlesex... 
 
 433,766 
 
 100 
 
 27,507 
 
 6.3 
 
 30,737 
 
 7 -i 
 
 40,183 
 
 9.3 
 
 112,555 
 
 25-9 
 
 222,784 
 
 51.4 
 
 Norfolk. 
 
 217,800 
 
 100 
 
 9,6l8 
 
 4.4 
 
 22,056 
 
 10.1 
 
 19,312 
 
 8.9 
 
 56,640 
 
 26.0 
 
 110,174 
 
 50.6 
 
 Essex. 
 
 24UI33 
 
 100 
 
 14,416 
 
 6.0 
 
 22,826 
 
 9-5 
 
 32,075 
 
 13.3 
 
 106,590 
 
 44.2 
 
 65,226 
 
 27.0 
 
 Summary. . 
 
 3,099,615 
 
 100 
 
 170,727 
 
 5-5 
 
 198,798 
 
 6.4 
 
 188,109 
 
 6.1 
 
 707,356 
 
 22.8 
 
 1,834,625 
 
 59.2 
 
 a Includes “proprietor’s commons,” see p. 55. 
 
 b Includes unimproved and unimprovable lands as well as town commons. 
 
 14 Updike, Narragansett Church, I, 201-209; Channing in J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and 
 
 Pol. Science, TV (1886), No. 3, p. 10. 
 
 15 Letters on Agriculture (Knight ed.), 32. 
 
 16 MSS. in Mass. Archives, Boston, Mass. 
 
120 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 It appears from the tables that in eastern Massachusetts a hundred acre 
 farm would contain from 4 to 6 acres of land in crops and in addition 8 or 
 10 acres of upland grass land which was occasionally ploughed. About the 
 same quantity of land was permanently in grass, i. e., in natural meadows. 
 
 Table 16.— Land utilization, Connecticut, 1796. 
 
 [From MS. tax lists in comptroller’s office, Hartford, Connecticut.] 
 
 County. 
 
 All taxable 
 land. 
 
 Tillage. 
 
 Upland mow¬ 
 ing and clear 
 pasture. 
 
 Meadow. b 
 
 Brush 
 
 pasture.® 
 
 Uninclosed 
 
 land. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct. 
 
 of 
 
 to¬ 
 
 tal. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct.of 
 
 to¬ 
 
 tal. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct.of 
 
 to¬ 
 
 tal. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct.of 
 
 to¬ 
 
 tal. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct.of 
 
 to¬ 
 
 tal. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. 
 
 ct.of 
 
 to¬ 
 
 tal. 
 
 Hartford .... 
 
 303,737 
 
 IOO 
 
 53,888 
 
 17.7 
 
 54,680 
 
 18.O 
 
 12,130 
 
 4.0 
 
 79,538 
 
 26.2 
 
 103,504 
 
 34-1 
 
 New Haven.. 
 
 235,915 
 
 100 
 
 30,844 
 
 i 3 -i 
 
 61,363 
 
 26.O 
 
 20,073 
 
 8.5 
 
 79,377 
 
 33-6 
 
 44,260 
 
 18.8 
 
 New London. 
 
 246,526 
 
 IOO 
 
 21,403 
 
 8-7 
 
 66,717 
 
 27.I 
 
 10,592 
 
 4-3 
 
 97 U 55 
 
 39-4 
 
 5 o, 66 i 
 
 20.5 
 
 Eairfield. 
 
 23 U 473 
 
 IOO 
 
 50,243 
 
 21.7 
 
 43,699 
 
 18.9 
 
 23,677 
 
 10.2 
 
 66,116 
 
 28.6 
 
 47,740 
 
 2 .6 
 
 Windham.... 
 
 288,886 
 
 IOO 
 
 25 U 39 
 
 8.8 
 
 55,630 
 
 19-3 
 
 24,285 
 
 4.4 
 
 84,732 
 
 29-3 
 
 99,101 
 
 34-3 
 
 Litchfield .... 
 
 283,011 
 
 IOO 
 
 45,645 
 
 11.9 
 
 74,081 
 
 19-3 
 
 16,399 
 
 8 • 4 
 
 77.918 
 
 20.3 
 
 168,968 
 
 44-1 
 
 Middlesex ... 
 
 140,875 
 
 IOO 
 
 13,020 
 
 9-3 
 
 35,233 
 
 25.O 
 
 8,034 
 
 5-7 
 
 47,660 
 
 33-8 
 
 36,929 
 
 26.2 
 
 Tolland. 
 
 158,247 
 
 IOO 
 
 14,010 
 
 8.9 
 
 34,196 
 
 21.6 
 
 7,277 
 
 4.6 
 
 47,354 
 
 29.9 
 
 55,412 
 
 35-0 
 
 Summary 11 .. 
 
 1,988,668 
 
 100254,189 
 
 12.8 
 
 425,595 
 
 21.4 
 
 122,465 
 
 6.2 
 
 579,847 
 
 29.1 
 
 606,573 
 
 30.5 
 
 a Including fractions of acres. 
 b Includes all other mowing land. 
 c Includes boggy, meadow, not mowed. 
 
 The remainder of the farm, 70 or 80 acres, was divided between woodland 
 and pasture in proportions determined largely by physiographic features. 
 The distinction between pasture and woodland was probably not of great 
 importance. Cattle and swine, as we know, were frequently turned loose to 
 pick up their living in the woods. Moreover, as old fields were exhausted 
 they were allowed to grow up to woods, being used meanwhile for pasture. 
 This fact is clearly brought out in the distinction in the Connecticut tax 
 lists between “ clear pasture ” and “ brush pasture.” 
 
 In Connecticut, table 16 shows unusually large proportions of plowing land 
 in two counties: in Hartford, where there was much easily tilled sandy loam 
 in the river valleys, and in Fairfield, where the accessibility of the New York 
 and West India markets had encouraged vegetable-raising and flax-growing. 
 In this State the percentage of land unimproved, i. e., woodland or semi- 
 wooded, included about two-thirds the total acreage. 
 
 For the Middle Atlantic States we have not been able to obtain similarly 
 detailed statistics. In general, it seems evident that on account of the greater 
 importance of grain cultivation larger percentages of farm areas were de¬ 
 voted to tillage. In the fragmentary data which Washington gathered about 
 179°, in reply to Arthur Young’s inquiries, we find a report from Bucks 
 County, Pennsylvania, 17 in which the figures of table 17 are given as typical 
 of that region. 
 
FARM MANAGEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY 121 
 
 Table 17. 
 
 
 Acres. 
 
 P. Ct. 
 
 Total farm acreage... 
 
 
 
 Acres in tillage. 
 
 
 100 
 
 37-5 
 
 Acres in pasture. 
 
 75 
 
 Acres in orchard, garden, etc 
 
 50 
 
 Tn 
 
 25.0 
 
 5-0 
 
 7-5 
 
 25.0 
 
 Acres in meadow.... 
 
 
 Acres in woodland... 
 
 I 5 
 
 
 5 ° 
 
 his neighborhood, about 6 miles f romPhiMe^a, 
 
 Sn”n“3,:d ar * b,e '“ d " d 9 »" “*"• ““ '5 £ 
 
 FARM IMPROVEMENTS—INCLOSURES. 
 
 The problem of fencing was primarily a labor problem. In the early set- 
 ements and for a considerable part of the eighteenth century the growing 
 crops were guarded from livestock by the practice of pasturage in common 
 under community herdsmen. But as settlement became denser and the com- 
 mon fields were divided, fences became indispensable. In New England 
 
 w5f T , Were USl L a ” y ind ° Sed dther b ? PO^-and-rail fences or by stone 
 walls In piling up these monuments of back-breaking toil the farmers ac¬ 
 complished a double purpose, at the same time setting up a protection for 
 
 r J Cr ° P .^ and . nddmg fields of a hindrance to cultivation. In the Middle 
 Co omes the distinctive form of inclosure was the worm fence composed of 
 rails of chestnut or oak. The worm fence was a labor-saving devic e P but its 
 pentme windings consumed extravagant quantities of timber so that in the 
 
 SS5& *'•" fence, or privel Z£, w £ 
 
 FARM BUILDINGS. 
 
 The log huts of the first settlers disappeared from the older communities 
 during the eighteenth century. In New England they were superseded first 
 I?' framed houses, wooden buildings of one story, measuring 
 about 16 by 24 feet on the ground and containing from one to three rooms 
 better class of houses, erected only by the more prosperous farmers, were 
 
 n ' VO f fr0n h sI ° plng down to one story in the rear. The main 
 
 pa t of the house would measure, perhaps, 40 by 20 feet, and the rear ell 
 
 which was used for a kitchen, 20 by 20. Enormous chimneys of brick and 
 stone extended through the house, furnishing flues for the open fireplaces 
 
 siv bmlt t . f 6 y W (T ° f he f ting and C00king ' Sucb houses were 
 solidly built, with frames of heavy oak timbers, some of them 18 inches in 
 
 diameter. The sides had a double sheathin g, rough boarding covered wi* 
 
 is on Agriculture (Knight ed.), 72. 
 
 18 Ibid., 81. 
 
 "o&T’edSTl.Vs, 37S 65 ’ U ’ 53 ‘ 561 AmeHcan Husbandry, I, 74, 167; Dwight, Travels 
 
122 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 thin lapped clapboards. The roofs were of long rent shingles fastened with 
 
 '^The'tean-to kitchen often connected with the barn by a long woodshed, 
 where the huge piles of logs were stored for winter consumption. The barn 
 proper was sometimes placed at right angles with the house and shed to 
 afford a sheltered space for a barn-yard. It was built of heavy timber cov¬ 
 ered with wide pine boards. An open space in the center provided a driveway 
 as well as a threshing-floor. 
 
 “On one side of the threshing floor of the barn were the stables for the: horses and 
 cattle and upon the other the great haymow. On the scaffold over the stables the horse 
 hay ’was garnered, and upon the ‘ little scaffold’ over the far end of the barn floor Were 
 nicely piled the bound sheaves of wheat, rye or barley, the butts all placed outward 
 to hinder the entrance of the mice. Over the great beams were scaffolds made of 
 round poles and pieces of waste lumber, generally, in such condition as to 
 class man trap. On this scaffold was heaped the crop of oats, all awaiting the thra sh'ng 
 by the hand flail, the use of which generally began about Thanksgiving time. Who, 
 raised on a farm, does not remember the miseries of the boy who mowed away the y, 
 about the time the mow hole was filled and pitching over the great beams commenced. 
 The hot hole of Calcutta was no comparison to it.” 21 
 
 FARM BUILDINGS OF GERMAN SETTLERS IN PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 In the Middle Colonies farm buildings of brick and stone were more fre¬ 
 quently seen than in New England. Among the German settlers of Pennsyl¬ 
 vania farm buildings were particularly commodious and substantial. In the 
 second generation they usually abandoned their log huts and moved into two- 
 story stone houses. The latter had pitched roofs with cornices running 
 across the gables and around the first story. 
 
 “ Many of them were imposing structures, having arched cellars underneath, spacious 
 hallways, with easy stairs, open fireplaces in most of the rooms, oak-paneled partitions, 
 
 and windows hung in weights ” 22 
 
 The German settlers used large close stoves for heating instead of fire¬ 
 places, thus economizing fuel and increasing comfort. The original.barns 
 and stables of rough logs were early replaced by stone structures in the 
 German settlements; in other localities they persisted until the end of the 
 eighteenth century. The so-called Swisser barns introduced by the Germans 
 were soon adopted as models by the English and Scotch-Irish farmers and 
 became a familiar feature of the landscape in southeastern Pennsylvania. 
 
 Bordley 23 wrote: 
 
 “ Farmers in Pennsylvania have a commendable spirit for building good barns, which 
 are mostly of stone. On the ground floor are stalls in which them horses and oxen are 
 fed with hay, cut-straw, and rye-meal; but not always their other beasts. Roots ar 
 seldom given to t heir live-stock, being too little thought of. The second floor with 
 
 20 Nourse, Harvard, Massachusetts, 7C-100; Davis, Wallingford, Connecticut, 406; 
 
 2 iThomp°so963- See also Walker, House and Farm of 
 
 the First Minister of Concord, New Hampshire, 1 7 - 
 
 22 Ellis and Evans, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania,. 349 - . . , . 
 
 23 Notes and Essays 134; see also Scot, Geographical Description of Pennsylvania, 24, 
 ' Ellis and Evans’Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, 348; Buck, Bucks 
 
 vania 35* Rush in Penn. German Society, Proceedings and Addresses, XIX, 54, 02, 
 Acrelius,’ in Penn. Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 156; Kalm, Travels, I, 223, II, wS. 
 
 275 , 285 , 
 
FARM MANAGEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY 123 
 the r o° f , contains their sheaves of grain, which are thrashed on this floor A part of 
 
 WTO'S ?£££?&£&■ - " a 
 
 within the house, it is built thirty-six to fortv f \ -a S1Vm ? f 00 ™ to turn wa Sgons 
 may be requisite ’to the desU or size of t ° fa rm ‘ he length is given that 
 
 Of sheds tacked to their modern barns Their ^ ' i l arG " 0t many lnstances 
 
 admit of them* and room is P-ainerl h n i • e ,° building, of late, does not well 
 
 stories, having'deep sides or Ditch Th^ linder one roof > covering one or more 
 
 no more to JverXet * C ° S ‘‘ y ^ ° f but * «»* 
 
 the next thirteen feet * th bottom to top. The ground story seven or eight feet high; 
 
 pitche^up^and^ere^thrashed'out.” S ° ^ “ t0 WWch in the * 
 
 TOOLS AND IMPLEMENTS. 
 
 Littlt; it any improvement had been made in farm implements until the 
 very close of the eighteenth century. The woodwork of the carts ploughs 
 yokes, and other farm implements was usually made at home. The fron 
 
 £ ’ C ^ nS ’ aXeS / bil1 h00ks ' sc y thes - as a s blades of the 
 
 die vilL r n f ° , ° rks and P itchforks > were hammered out by 
 
 the village blacksmiths. Shovels were made of wood with the edge shod with 
 
 iron. In general, such tools were heavy, clumsy and ill-contrived for their 
 
 purposes. The two-wheeled cart was still the chief means of summer trans- 
 
 r° n e / arm ’ and tHe S ! ed m Wlnter - In Pennsylvania much teaming was 
 done w h heavy wagons, but in New England four-wheeled vehicles^vere 
 practically unknown before the Revolution. 24 
 
 PLOWS. 
 
 For the important business of plowing the eighteenth century farmers 
 
 were but poorly equipped. An implement extensively used was the Carev 
 plow, which has been described as follows : 25 * 
 
 “ The land-side and the standard were made of wood, and it had a wooden mould 
 board, often roughly plated over with pieces of old saw-plate, tin, or sheet-iron. It had 
 a clumsy wrought-iron share, while the handles were upright held in place bv two 
 wooden Pins. It took a strong man to hold it, and about^o^ble the strength of t am 
 
 nT/r'an f 0 V h f Same am0Unt 0f work - The ‘bar-share plough/ sometimes 
 called the bull plough, was also used, a flat bar forming the land-side with an im¬ 
 mense clump of iron, shaped like half a lajice-head, into the upper part of'which a kind 
 of colter was fastened, which served as a point. It had a wooden mould-board fitted to 
 the iron-work in the most bungling manner. A sharp-pointed shovel, held with the 
 everse side up and drawn forward with the point in the ground, would give an idea 
 
 snnfH WOrk ’i lhen there W u S t 1 he ‘ shovel pl° u gh/ in very general use in th e g middle and 
 uthern colonies; a roughly-hewn stick was used for a beam, and into this another 
 
 stick was framed upon the end of which there was a piece of iron, shaped a little like 
 b/am ” > ’ P01nted Sh ° Ve ' ^ tW ° r ° Ugh hand ' eS Were nailed or pinned t0 ‘ he sides of the 
 
124 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The wooden plows were not heavy, but the friction was nevertheless 
 excessive and the drawbar pull was correspondingly great. 1 he iron plating 
 was rough and uneven, and a still greater defect was poor design. 
 
 "The share and mould-board were so attached as to make too blunt a "'edge Its 
 action was not uniform, and it was difficult to hold, requiring constant watchfulness 
 and great strength to prevent it from being thrown out of the ground. To plough to 
 any considerable depth it was necessary to have a man at the beam to bear down. . 
 
 With such unwieldly instruments, two men or a man and a boy, using 2 
 or t horses or 4 or 6 oxen, could scratch over 1 or 2 acres a day. Lighter 
 plows of the same general design as those already described were sometimes 
 used for cultivating between the rows of Indian corn.- The experiments 
 with improved forms of mold-boards and with cast-iron shares which were 
 
 Fig. —Colonial plow with wooden moldboard. 
 
 TViiq nlow now preserved in the National Museum, Washington, D C., was used 
 by Henry Lamprey, who settled in Kensington, New Hampshire, in 1732. Note the s rip 
 of iron plating on the moldboard and the iron share and colter. 
 
 in progress at the very end of the century yielded tangible results in the early 
 decades of the next century. 28 
 
 HARROWS. 
 
 Besides the plow, the harrow was practically the only implement to which 
 animal power was applied. Harrows with wooden or iron teeth were used for 
 pulverizing and leveling ploughed land, for covering seed, and for weeding 
 between the rows of Indian corn. Acrelius 29 wrote: 
 
 “The harrow is three-cornered and heavy. The traces are fastened to it with a link, 
 which makes a convenience in turning. A pair of horses before the harrow, and a 
 
 26 Flint, in Maine Board of Agric., 19th Annual Report (1874), pp. hi, 119. 
 
 27 On plows and plowing see Chase, Old Chester, N._H., 426; Acrelius, m Pe . • 
 
 Soc Memoirs . XI, 147; Roberts, Fertility, 44 ; Deane, New England farmer (2d 
 
 28 N C< ^Y. for Promotion of Useful Arts, Transactions, I (2d ed., 1801), i 73 > 
 
 Bordley, Essays and Notes, 47 1 - 
 
 29 Penn. Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 148. 
 
FARM MANAGEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY 125 
 
 boy on the horse’s back, smooths the field into fine and even pieces without any great 
 trouble. Sometimes two harrows are fastened together after the same team.” 
 
 In New England, according to Deane 30 two kinds of harrows were used, 
 square and triangular, or “ bifurcate,” the former for old and clear grounds 
 and the latter where stumps and other obstacles were numerous. 
 
 “ The square harrow is armed with sixteen, or with twenty five tushes, or teeth. The 
 sharper these teeth are, the more they will pulverize the soil. If they be steeled at the 
 points, they will hold their sharpness the longer, and stir the ground more effectually. 
 And the cost of doing it is so little, that it is surprising to see that it is so generally 
 neglected by our farmers. 
 
 “ Some use harrows with wooden teeth, but they are of so little advantage to the 
 land, unless it be merely for covering seeds, that they may be considered as unfit to be 
 used at all. The treading of the cattle that draw them, will harden the soil more, 
 perhaps, than these harrows will soften it.” 
 
 HARVESTING, THRESHING AND CLEANING GRAIN. 
 
 The methods employed and the implements used in harvesting, threshing, 
 and cleaning grain were but little advanced over those of the ancient Israel¬ 
 ites. Wheat, and sometimes other small grains, was still reaped with a sickle. 
 (See Fig. 4.) Grass and occasionally grain as well was cut with a scythe. 
 An important innovation in the Middle Colonies in the latter part of the 
 century which was not known in New England until after 1800, was the 
 grain cradle. 
 
 “ This consisted of a broad scythe, with a light frame of four wooden fingers attached 
 corresponding in shape and nearly of the same length. With this the grain could be 
 cut and at the same time gathered, and by a dexterous turn to the left the reaper could 
 throw it in a swath, ready to be raked and bound into sheaves.” 31 
 
 With such primitive tools harvesting was a slow business. Richard Peters 
 estimated that a reaper or mower would not average more than three-fourths 
 
 30 New England Farmer (2d ed., 1797), p. 142. 
 
 31 Eby, in Ellis and Evans, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, 349. 
 
126 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 of an acre a day and in heavy grain or grass not more than half an acre. In^ 
 cradling grain 2 or 2 \ acres was considered a day’s work. 32 Tilton 33 wrote: 
 
 “ A man can cut an acre of wheat with a sickle in a day; cradle four times as much 
 V* oats or barley; and mow an acre of green grass with a naked scythe.” 
 
 In New England grain was usually threshed with the flail; in the Middle 
 Colonies the flail was used to some extent, but the more general practice 
 was to tread out the grain with horses. 
 
 “ ‘ They hauled their grain on sleds to the stacks, where a temporary threshing floor 
 was erected.’ On these floors the grain was thrashed out by horses, which were driven 
 in a circle, and after the heads were deemed to have been well cleared of the seed the 
 straw was thrown to one side with forks and the grain swept up, ready for another 
 lot of bundles to be unbound and submitted to a like process. In the barns, however, 
 the thrashing was usually done with the flail, and on a still day the sound of the heavy 
 thump of the oaken breaker on the floor, which acted like a drum, could be heard a 
 long way off.” 34 
 
 The threshing of barley with horses was an innovation in Rhode Island 
 at the end of the century. 
 
 “When a barley heap is to be thrashed, previous care is taken to have it placed on a 
 hard and level plat. A quantity of barley in the sheaf is then laid in a circular train 
 to be trampled upon by horses. Sometimes three or four horses are ridden round upon 
 the barley by boys; at other times a man stands in the centre of the circle, and with 
 the reins in one hand, and a whip in the other, drives two or three pairs of young horses 
 round upon the barley; whilst another person is employed with a rake to turn the 
 barley, and expose it properly to the action of the horses’ feet. When the grain of one 
 layer is thus thoroughly beaten from the straw, the latter is raked into an heap without 
 the circle, and the former into an heap within. Another layer of barley forms a new 
 sheet for the horses, and the driver on the heap of grain recommences the operation 
 of driving them round. This manner of thrashing has been practised in this town four 
 or five years, and succeeds so well, as to render the flail almost useless. In this way 
 the grain is both effectually separated from the straw, and separated more expeditiously 
 and cheaply than by the method ordinarily used in Massachusetts. Two men and six 
 horses will thrash an hundred bushels of barley in one day.” 35 
 
 Winnowing was performed by throwing the grain against the wind and 
 running it through sieves. In some places large willow winnowing-fans were 
 used. Experiments with horsepower threshing machines had begun about 
 1780, but practicable development and introduction of such devices did not 
 result until considerably later. 36 
 
 SELF-SUFFICIENT FARMING. 
 
 Self-sufficiency was a striking and important characteristic of the colonial 
 farm. The farm family produced for themselves food, clothing, house fur¬ 
 nishings, farm implements, in fact practically everything they needed. 
 
 “ From his feet to his head the farmer stood in vestment produced on his own 
 farm. The leather of his shoes came from the hides of his own cattle. The linen and 
 woolen that he wore were products that he raised. The farmer’s wife or daughter braided 
 and sewed the straw hat on his head. His fur cap was made from the skin of a fox he 
 shot. The feathers of wild fowl in the bed whereon he rested his weary frame by night, 
 
 32 In Washington’s Letters on Agriculture (Knight ed.), 84. 
 
 33 In American Museum, V, 380. 
 
 34 Ashmead, Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 208. 
 
 35 Notes on Compton, R. I. (1803), in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, IX, 200. 
 
 36 Bordley, Essays and Notes, 511. 
 

 FARM MANAGEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY 127 
 
 were the results acquired in his shooting. The pillow-cases, sheets and blankets, the 
 comfortables, quilts and counterpanes, the towels and table cloth, were home made. 
 His harness and lines he cut from hides grown on his farm. Everything about his ox 
 yoke except staple and ring he made. Ilis whip, his ox gad, his flail, axe, hoe and fork- 
 handle, were his own work. How little he bought, and how much he contrived to supply 
 his wants by home manufacture would astonish this generation.” 37 
 
 Under a system of mixed husbandry one would naturally expect the farm 
 to produce its own food-supply, but the extent to which this rule was carried 
 is surprising. Nourse 38 wrote: 
 
 ‘ The. ordinary food of the farmer’s family, though abundant, was of the simplest, 
 demanding the sauce of good appetite and sound digestive powers. Tables ‘groaned,’ but 
 chiefly under the weight of ‘ bean porridge hot and bean porridge cold,’ brown bread, 
 hominy or hasty-pudding and milk, pork, salt beef boiled, salt and fresh fish, succotash 
 and the commonest vegetables in their season. Molasses and honey sufficed for sweet¬ 
 ening, sugar being costly, and rarely used except in sickness or in entertaining guests. 
 The top shelf at the village store held a row of white cones wrapped in purple paper. 
 One of these loaves,’ weighing eight or ten pounds, w r as about a year’s supply of sugar 
 to the ordinary family. The paper wrap was carefully saved and utilized in the 
 dyeing of yarn.” 
 
 The beef and pork were supplied by the farm animals slaughtered, usually 
 by the farmer himself, and dried, salted or pickled by the farm women. The 
 latter also made butter, cheese, and lard. Bread was the product of the 
 farmer s own grains, ground at the local grist mill and baked in his own ovens. 
 
 I\ot only the staples of diet, but many of the condiments which made it 
 palatable, were supplied from the farm. The making of maple sugar and sirup 
 was a part of the routine of inland farms, the sugaring-off time coming con¬ 
 veniently at the end of winter, when other outdoor operations were at a 
 standstill. Honey was another substitute for cane sugar, bees being con¬ 
 sidered an important adjunct of every well-managed farm. Practically the 
 only articles on the farmers’ tables which were not “ home made ” were salt, 
 molasses, rum, tea, and coffee. Salt was of course indispensable, and rum 
 was a beverage rivaling cider in its popularity. Hence these two were im¬ 
 portant articles in internal trade. Tea, coffee and chocolate, being of recent 
 introduction, were not generally used by farmers until after the Revolution. 
 Toward the end of the century their use was rapidly increasing. 39 
 
 THE HOUSEHOLD TEXTILE INDUSTRY. 
 
 In the matter of clothing the colonial farm was quite as self-sufficient as 
 in diet. The age of homespun is a title very appropriately applied to this 
 period to indicate the importance of the domestic textiles in rural economy. 
 Throughout the eighteenth century it is the practically unanimous testimony 
 of official and unofficial sources that the country people were clad in mate¬ 
 rials of their own “ manufacture.” 40 
 
 37 Hedges, in Suffolk County, N. Y., Bicentennial, 42. 
 
 38 Harvard, Massachusetts, 100; see also Draper, Spencer, Massachusetts, 74; Tilton, in 
 
 American Museum, V, 382; Hedges, in Suffolk County, N. Y., Bicentennial, 43. 
 
 39 Felt, Ipswich, Massachusetts, 28; Acrelius, in Penn. Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 158; 
 
 Dwight, Travels, IV, 353 (1821 ed.) ; Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, 
 
 III, 13. 
 
 40 O’Callaghan, Doc. Hist, of N. Y., I, 734; Connecticut Hist. Soc. Collections, V, 445; 
 
 Acrelius, in Penn. Hist. Soc. Memoirs, XI, 157; Rush in Penn. German Soc. Pro¬ 
 ceedings and Addresses, XIX, 64; Morse, American Geography, 3d ed., 1792, p. 216. 
 
128 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The abundance and variety of homespun materials appears from Hamil¬ 
 ton’s description. 41 He wrote in 1790: 
 
 “ Great quantities of coarse cloths, coatings, serges, and flannels, linsey woolseys, 
 hosiery of wool, cotton, and thread, coarse fustians, jeans, and muslins, checked and 
 striped cotton and linen goods, bed ticks, coverlets and counterpaines, tow linens, coarse 
 shirtings, sheetings, towelling and table linen, and various mixtures of woolen and 
 cotton, and of cotton and flax, are made in the household way, and, in many instances, 
 to an extent not only sufficient for the supply of the families in which they are ma.de, 
 but for sale, and even, in some cases, for exportation. It is computed in some districts 
 that two-thirds, three-fourths, and even four-fifths of all the clothing of the inhabitants, 
 are made by themselves.” 
 
 If we could have examined the wardrobes of the farm men and women 
 piece by piece, we should have found everything of household manufacture, 
 except a few bits of Sunday finery, hard-earned and long-treasured, a broad¬ 
 cloth coat, a beaver hat, shoe-buckles, a silk gown, or a few ribbons. 42 
 
 THE ORGANIZATION OF THE HOUSEHOLD INDUSTRIES. 
 
 The production in the household of woolen and linen, and to some extent 
 also cotton fabrics, not only clothing but also the necessary house furnish¬ 
 ings, such as sheeting, toweling, blankets, and table linen, and even such 
 coarse fabrics as rag carpets and grain bags, was a well-organized industry. 
 The various successive stages in the conversion of the raw materials into 
 the finished product were regularly assigned to members of the family 
 according to their strength and skill. Thus the men sheared and washed the 
 wool, and performed most of the laborious processes of breaking, swingling, 
 and hackling the flax to prepare the fiber for spinning. The carding of the 
 wool, corresponding in a way to these processes, was for years the task 
 assigned to the older members of the family whose strength and eyesight 
 would have been unequal to more onerous or more careful work. About the 
 year 1800, however, the household was relieved of this task by the intro¬ 
 duction of the water-power carding machines, which, spread so rapidly that 
 they were to be found in almost every village in 1810. The younger women 
 of the family spun the fibers thus prepared into yarn and thread on the large 
 and small wheels then found in every farmhouse. Bleaching and dyeing 
 were also a part of the multifarious activities of these women. In the latter 
 process almost all the materials used, such as pokeberries, madder, goldenrod, 
 the bark of the hickory, butternut, and sassafras trees, and various flowers, 
 could be found in the woods and fields. For producing the deep blue which 
 was so popular, indigo must be imported, and this was one of the few stand¬ 
 ard commodities sold at the stores and by itinerant peddlers. Weaving on 
 the ponderous and noisy handlooms was to some extent a specialized occupa¬ 
 tion performed by itinerant weavers. 
 
 On small looms the farm women made garters, points, glove-ties, hair- 
 laces, stay-laces, shoe-strings, hat-bands, belts, and breeches-suspenders, often 
 called “ galluses.” The production of these odds and ends of apparel shows 
 
 41 Report on Manufactures, in American State Papers, Finance, I, 132. 
 
 42 For a detailed account by a contemporary observer of the dress of the farm people 
 
 in New England, see the letter of Governor Treadwell of Connecticut, in Noah 
 Porter’s Historical Discourse, 82. 
 
FARM MANAGEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY 129 
 
 in a striking manner the extent to which the household was self-sufficient 
 in its supply ot clothing. Knitting was an important branch of the domestic 
 textile industry producing the hosiery, mittens, shawls, comforters, etc., for 
 all the family. It must be remembered that the foregoing discussion applies 
 onl) to the conditions prevailing in inland towns. In the seaports and larger 
 
 river towns the inhabitants had long used clothing and household furniture & of 
 foreign manufacture. 
 
 CONSTRUCTION AND FURNISHING OF FARMHOUSES 
 
 In the construction and furnishing of their homes the inland farmers 
 relied to a very limited extent on exchange with the world outside their 
 immediate vicinity and in fact supplied their wants, as in the matter of 
 food and clothing, largely by the exertions of their own families. They util¬ 
 ized the timber growing in the vicinity, often on their own land, and employed 
 as workmen those of their neighbors who carried on the carpenter’s trade as 
 
 f A'U'U ° f The task of raising the heavy beams which consti¬ 
 
 tuted the frame of the structure into position was accomplished by the united 
 
 efforts of a large number of neighbors. Only a small amount of hardware 
 
 was used and most of this, such as bolts and hinges, was made by the local 
 
 blacksmith. The nails, which were used much more sparingly than now, were 
 
 often made by farmers themselves from nail rods purchased either from the 
 
 local store or from a near-by slitting-mill. Glass, which had probably in all 
 
 except the newest settlements replaced the wooden shutters and oiled paper 
 
 of earlier times, was practically the only material brought from any distance. 
 
 The furniture such as bedsteads, chairs, settles, and tables, could easily be 
 
 produced by the local cabinet-maker, or even by a skilful carpenter. Besides 
 
 making the homespun sheets and blankets, quilts, and comforters, the women 
 
 of the family made mattresses and pillows stuffed with the feathers of home- 
 
 raised geese. In addition to their many other tasks they made candles and 
 soap. 
 
 „ , Inve " tori ,f of . |able-ware and kitchen utensils bring to light only a few 
 boughten articles, and these were carefully treasured and handed down 
 from parents to children. Wood was the commonest material. It was used 
 wherever possible; of it were made trenchers, drinking-cups, and tankards 
 and even spoons. Pewter also was used for these articles to some extent; but 
 china, porcelain, glass, or silverware were rarely seen. In the kitchen, wooden 
 
 and earthenware vessels predominated, pots of iron, brass, or copper beine 
 comparatively rare. 43 s 
 
 PURCHASES AND SALES. 
 
 To what extent the farmers in inland towns actually did purchase and 
 sel commodities we can not at this distance accurately determine. Reasoning 
 deductively from the facts presented above, we should conclude that trade 
 ot any kind was of small importance in rural communities. Fragmentary 
 
 °" d Tr n A“stnes ln colonial days, see Judd, Hadley, Massachusetts, 358, 359, 
 
 372, 3/8-380, 387 , Diary of Rev. Samuel Deane, in Smith and Deane's Journals 362- 
 ChZ Se buTh ar ^ 78 ; Bouton, Concord, New Hampshire,' 524 
 
 Ss lii°and C IV ' eW Hampsh,re ’ 416-424; Earle, Home Life in Colonial Days, 
 
 10 
 
130 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 data confirm this conclusion. Occasionally an old account-book comes to light, 
 furnishing a concrete illustration of the small amount of buying and selling 
 which took place. Such an account book was kept by the Rev. Medad 
 Rogers, 44 the minister of New Fairfield, Connecticut, a small town on the 
 western boundary of the State. He had the use of a farm of ioo acres and 
 •in addition a salary of $100, part of which was, as the accounts show, paid in 
 kind. The accounts extend from 1784 to 1822, but the years in which they 
 were most carefully kept are 1792 and 1793. In the 1 year and 9 months 
 from February 14, 1792, to November 13, 1793, his total purchases amounted 
 to i2 3, 10 shillings, and 11 pence. The items are as follows: 
 
 1 pair wool cards. 
 
 1 barlow penknife. 
 
 1 bbl. linseed oil and paints. 
 
 1 set pencilled tea dishes and saucers. 
 
 1 skein Holland thread. 
 
 2 bus. salt. 
 
 2 lbs. ginger. 
 
 1 lb. alum. 
 
 1 gal. rum. 
 
 1 gal. molasses. 
 
 7 smoaking pipes. 
 
 1 yard tobacco. 
 
 3 lbs. brown sugar. 
 
 10 lbs. iron. 
 
 1 iron pot. 
 
 1 iron skillet. 
 
 2 earthern basons. 
 
 2 chamber pots. 
 
 1 earthern jug. 
 
 1 small cream pot. 
 
 3 milk pans. 
 
 11 yards satinet. 
 
 1 yard everlasting. 
 5 yards coating. 
 
 The entries of goods purchased in other years show the same predomi¬ 
 nance of necessary commodities which could not be produced on the farm. 
 Chief among these were iron, of which in one year he bought 81 pounds, 
 besides a bundle of nail rods, and salt, with occasional purchases of molasses 
 and rum. Other entries show purchases of 50 bricks, a pork barrel, 6 cider 
 barrels, a broadcloth coat, and a pair of shoes. The coat and the penciled 
 tea-dishes were refinements of life which probably were considered necessary 
 to the minister’s social position and set him apart from the bulk of his 
 
 parishioners. . , 
 
 The entries of sales are far less numerous. The chief items are dairy prod¬ 
 ucts, among them one sale of 451 pounds of cheese. It went to the local 
 storekeeper and was to be paid for half in cash and half in merchandise. 
 All the other sales were small, such as 2 \ yards of tow cloth, 7 pounds of flax, 
 3 pounds of butter, a hind quarter of beef, and a barrel of cider. 
 
 THE FARMER A JACK OF ALL TRADES. 
 
 Besides taking his part in many of the harder tasks of the household 
 industries, such as breaking, swingling, and hatchehng flax, the farmer ap¬ 
 plied himself more or less regularly to a diversity of other tasks according 
 to his especial “ bent ” and opportunities. On the sea-coast, he was frequently 
 a sailor or a fisherman for part of the year. In inland towns he often plied 
 some trade or other and was classed as an artisan as well as a farmer. Every 
 farmer did a multitude of odd jobs for himself, such as repairing old build¬ 
 ings, and building new, laying walls and stoning up wells, butchering pigs and 
 cattle, making axe-handles and brooms, splitting staves and shingles, tanning 
 leather, and cobbling shoes. Occasionally he performed some of these tasks 
 
 44 Now preserved in the library of New Haven Historical Society, New Haven, Conn. 
 
FARM MANAGEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY 
 
 131 
 
 for a neighbor, who either had not the requisite skill or was too busy with 
 
 strictly agricultural operations. Such service was more often repaid in kind 
 than in currency. 
 
 Thus the Yankee farmer acquired his proverbial reputation for ingenuity 
 
 and for a moderate ability in a variety of occupations. Chancellor Living- 
 ston 40 wrote: & 
 
 . H e can mend his plough, erect his walls, thrash his corn, handle his axe, his hoe, 
 his sithe, his saw, break a colt, or drive a team, with equal address; being habituated 
 f rom early life to rely on himself he acquires a skill in every branch of his profession, 
 which is unknown in countries where labor is more divided.” 
 
 CAUSES OF HIS VERSATILITY. 
 
 1 he versatility of the northern farmers ought not to be credited to an 
 exceptional endowment of inventive ingenuity. There seems no reason to 
 believe that they were gifted with the “impulse to contrivance” in any 
 higher degree than their kinsmen in the southern colonies. Versatility was the 
 result of their persistent endeavors to adjust themselves to a particular aspect 
 of their economic environment, namely, the lack of a market for farm produce. 
 The problem that confronted the farmer was to get a living for himself 
 and his family, and to get as good a living as he could with the least expendi¬ 
 ture of labor. If he had been able to devote all his attention to raising some 
 particular product, with the proceeds of whose sale he could have purchased 
 the services of specialized artisans and goods from abroad, he undoubtedly 
 would have preferred to do so. It would have tremendously increased his 
 efficiency in production, and would have lightened the labors of all the mem¬ 
 bers of his family. But the lack of a market was an insuperable obstacle 
 to specialization, and consequently the family group was forced to rely upon 
 itself and upon irregular exchange with other neighboring groups for the 
 
 necessaries of existence, and to do without, in large measure, the comforts 
 and luxuries. 
 
 45 4 mcric , an Agriculture, in Edinburgh Encyclopedia (ist Am. ed., 1832) I 338 
 Written about 1813. ’ 0 
 
Chapter X.—Agricultural Trade. 
 
 THE LACK OF A HOME MARKET. 
 
 The lack of an industrial population in Colonial America meant that there 
 was practically no home market for farm products. A small market was 
 afforded by the consumption of the fishing and trading communities on the 
 seacoast, concentrated chiefly in the cities of Boston, New York, Philadel¬ 
 phia, and Baltimore. Taken together, their population in 1800 was slightly 
 over 150,000. In addition, there were, in the States north of Maryland, 17 
 towns of over 5,000 on tidewater or on the coast whose population totalled 
 about 100,000. In the towns of the second group about one-half the inhabi¬ 
 tants seem to have been engaged in agriculture. 1 By this computation, there¬ 
 fore, the market for foodstuffs in the commercial towns amounted to 
 200,000 persons, between 7 and 8 per cent of the total. Away from tidewater 
 there were but few towns of more than 3*000 inhabitants. Lancaster, Penn¬ 
 sylvania, whose population was 4,292 in 1800, was usually spoken of at that 
 time as “ the largest inland town in the United States. ’ There were of course 
 a great number of small village communities, especially in New England, 
 the largest of which contained from 50 to 100 houses grouped about the 
 church, the tavern, and the country store. The village dwellers were for 
 the most part farmers—producers and not merely consumers of foodstuffs. 
 The tavern-keeper and the proprietor of the country store, the minister, the 
 lawyers and doctors, the blacksmith, the owners of the village sawmills, grist 
 mills and tanneries were regularly owners and operators of farms. They 
 were the prototypes of the modern business and professional class, but their 
 occupations were as yet not differentiated from the original and all-embracing 
 occupation of farming. Only the broad outlines of a future separation of 
 employments or “ division of labor ” had been marked out. 
 
 MANUFACTURERS NOT DIFFERENTIATED FROM 
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 The situation was well described by Tench Coxe 2 who wrote: 
 
 “ Those of the tradesmen and manufacturers, who live in the country, generally reside 
 on small lots and farms, from one acre to twenty; and not a few upon farms from twenty 
 to one hundred and fifty acres; which they cultivate at leisure times, with their own 
 hands, their wives, children, servants, and apprentices, and sometimes by hired labourers, 
 or by’letting out fields, for a part of the produce, to some neighbour, who has time 
 
 1 See the author’s Rural Economy in New England, in Connecticut Academy of Arts 
 
 and Sciences Transactions, XX, 283. • x T v u- * e n it ,• 
 
 2 View of the United States, 442. See also Gardiner, in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 
 
 Publication Fund Series, II, 255; Allen, Vermont, in Vt. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 
 
 476. The subject of village industries is discussed in the author’s Rural Economy in 
 
 New England, in Connecticut Acaademy of Arts and Sciences, Transactions, XX, 
 
 251-276. 
 
 132 
 
AGRICULTURAL TRADE 
 
 133 
 
 or farm hands not fully employed. This union of manufactures and farming is found 
 to be very convenient on the grain farms; but it is still more convenient on the grazing 
 and grass, farms, where parts of almost every day, and a great part of every year, can 
 be spared from the business of the farm, and employed in some mechanical, handycraft, 
 or manufacturing business. These persons often make domestic and farming carriages, 
 implements, and utensils, build houses and barns, tan leather, and manufacture hats, 
 shoes, hosiery, cabinet-work, and other articles of clothing and furniture, to the great 
 convenience and advantage of the neighbourhood.” 
 
 Obviously this union of agriculture and manufactures, the practice of agri¬ 
 culture by all the members of the community, meant that the villages were not 
 centers of consumption of farm products. They were, however, the points 
 at which produce for export was collected through the medium of the country 
 stores. 
 
 THE COUNTRY STORE. 
 
 In every village there were one or more country stores with a varied stock 
 generally described as European and West India goods. Under the first head 
 were included a few pieces of imported dress-goods, crockery, glassware, 
 powder and shot, and bars of iron and steel. The West India goods were 
 salt, molasses, rum and other liquors, indigo, spices, and sugar. 
 
 Practically all the transactions at the country stores were by barter, for 
 “ hard ” money was scarce, and paper currency depreciated so rapidly as to 
 be but a poor medium of exchange. The storekeeper took in exchange for his 
 goods a great variety of farm products—butter, cheese, flaxseed, tow cloth, 
 grain, provisions, potash, feathers, and beeswax. There was as yet little 
 specialization in marketing functions, and so the storekeeper usually under¬ 
 took on his own responsibility the resale of his miscellaneous purchases in 
 the seaports, or if he lived on the coast or on a river, he might be himself 
 a shipowner and exporter. 3 
 
 THE EXPORT MARKETS. 
 
 The lack of a wide market for farm products was a fundamental charac¬ 
 teristic of northern agriculture in the colonial period. For the tobacco of 
 Maryland and Virginia and the rice, cotton, and indigo of the Carolinas and 
 Georgia there was an insistent demand abroad. These were tropical or sub¬ 
 tropical products, which could not be successfully grown in Europe. On 
 the basis of the export trade, the large-scale agriculture of the South was 
 developed with its plantation system and aristocratic social organization. 
 But north of Maryland there were no great agricultural staples. The products 
 of northern farms were the same as those of northern Europe. The wheat of 
 Pennsylvania and New York and the beef and pork of New England could 
 not compete, except in times of exceptional scarcity, in the European markets. 
 In the West Indies the sugar plantations furnished a market of limited 
 dimensions for northern products. The result was the continuance of small- 
 scale, non-commercial farming and democratic social and political condi¬ 
 tions throughout the North. 
 
 3 Bidwell, in Conn. Academy of Arts and Sciences, Transactions, XX, 258; see also 
 Schoepf, Travels, I, 222; Miller and Wells, Ryegate, Vermont, 214; Kendall, 
 Travels, III, 80; La Rochefoucauld, Travels, I, 424. 
 
134 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 EXPORTS TO EUROPE. 
 
 The export of wheat from the Middle Colonies to the ports of southern 
 Europe had begun before 1700 and continued irregularly throughout the 
 eighteenth century. In the first half of the century the trade was regarded as 
 a losing venture. In an official report of 1734 from New York we read: 
 
 “ Wheat is the staple of this Province, and tho’ that commodity seem literally to inter¬ 
 fere with the product of Great Britain, It do’s not so in fact, for its generally manu¬ 
 factur’d into flower and bread, and sent to supply the sugar Collonys, And whenever a 
 Markett in Spain Portugal or other parts of Europe has encouraged the sending it 
 thither in Grain, the Adventurers have often suffered by the undertaking, for at this 
 remote distance, the intelligence of a demand reaches us so late, that the marketts are 
 supplyed before our Vessells come there, and even if it were otherwise our Merchants 
 lye under vast and certain disadvantages besides for freight of Wheat from hence in 
 time of warr was at least two shillings and six pence, and in time of peace is eighteen 
 pence Sterling per bushell and by the length of the passage it often grows musty at 
 least cannot come so fresh to Markett as from Great Britain; whence freights (as its 
 said) are not above one quarter part of what they are at here.” 4 5 * 
 
 In the latter half of the century, European conditions favored increased 
 exports of American grain. In Great Britain from 1765 to 1793 surpluses 
 for export alternated with deficits and the necessity of import. From 1793 
 to 1820 the grain imports of Great Britain uniformly exceeded the exports. 0 
 
 On the continent the wars of the French Revolution decreased the produc¬ 
 tion of grain. A British official inquiry of 1780° stated that “the quantity 
 of grain raised in Europe, in common years, is not more than equal to the 
 ordinary consumption of it’s inhabitants; and that, in the event of a failure 
 of their crops, a supply can only be expected from America!’ 
 
 In 1793 the exports of American wheat reached almost 1,500,000 bushels, 
 besides over 1,000,000 barrels of flour. The average annual exports for 
 the decade 1791-1800, however, were only 426,000 bushels of wheat and 
 703,000 barrels of flour. 7 
 
 Besides wheat and some corn, the most important agricultural export to 
 Europe was flaxseed. Flaxseed was shipped from New York, Philadelphia, 
 and New England ports, chiefly to Ireland. Kalm 8 wrote in 1748 from New 
 York: 
 
 “ They send ships to Ireland every year, laden with all kinds of West India goods; 
 but especially with linseed, which is reaped in this province. I have been assured, that 
 in some years no less than ten ships have been sent to Ireland, laden with nothing but 
 linseed; because it is said the flax in Ireland does not afford good seed. But probably 
 the true reason is this: the people of Ireland, in order to have the better flax, make use 
 of the plant before the seed is ripe, and therefore are obliged to send for foreign seed; 
 and hence it becomes one of the chief articles in trade. 
 
 “At this time a bushel of linseed is sold for eight shillings of New York currency, 
 or exactly a piece of eight.” 
 
 In the years 1790 to 1794 the average annual exports of flaxseed were 241,- 
 000 bushels. 
 
 4 N. Y. Documents Relative to Colonial History, VI, 19. 
 
 5 Tooke, High and Low Prices (1st ed., 1823), pt. Ill, 180 et seq. 
 
 0 Quoted in Coxe, View of the United States, 147. See also Sheffield, Commerce of the 
 American States (6th ed., 1784), 73; Letters of Phineas Bond, in Am. Hist. Asso. 
 Report (1897), p. 523. 
 
 7 Pitkin, Commerce of the United States (1835 ed.), 96. 
 
 8 Travels, I, 255. 
 
AGRICULTURAL TRADE 
 
 135 
 
 EXPORTS TO THE WEST INDIES. 
 
 Of greater importance than the European market was that afforded by 
 the English, French, Spanish and other possessions in the Caribbean Sea, 
 known as the West Indies. In these islands great profits to be obtained from 
 sugar had led to specialized, large-scale agriculture utilizing the labor of 
 negro slaves. The industry had prospered greatly during the eighteenth 
 century, and the population of both blacks and whites had increased. How¬ 
 ever, at the end of the eighteenth century there were in the principal sugar- 
 producing islands, those owned by England and France, not more than 
 1,000,000 negroes and less than 200,000 whites. 9 
 
 There was no back country in the West Indies, no upland where the staples 
 could not be raised and consequently no sharply defined region of general 
 agriculture. Although a considerable proportion of the acreage of the planta¬ 
 tions was utilized for grazing and the raising of provisions, food products 
 were not nearly sufficient for the support of the population. 
 
 The principal exports from the North American colonies to the West 
 Indies (both British and foreign) in 1770 are given in table 18. 10 Of these 
 
 Table 18. —Exports from British North American Colonies to the West hvdies, 1770. 
 
 Commodity. 
 
 Amount. 
 
 Commodity. 
 
 Amount. 
 
 Indian corn .bus. 
 
 558,900 
 
 Lard and tallow..lbs. 
 
 172,600 
 
 Flour and biscuit.bbls. 
 
 230,600 
 
 Horses . 
 
 6,000 
 
 Beef and pork..bbls. 
 
 28,200 
 
 Live oxen . 
 
 3 , 3 oo 
 
 Cheese .lbs. 
 
 55,400 
 
 Sheep and hogs. 
 
 18,500 
 
 exports a negligible fraction were from Canada and Nova Scotia. Most of 
 the Indian corn was furnished not by the northern colonies, but by Virginia 
 and North Carolina. The animals and animal products were mostly from 
 New England. 
 
 During the Revolution, trade to the West Indies was of course interrupted. 
 After independence had been won by the Colonies, Great Britain showed 
 herself willing to adopt a liberal commercial policy as regarded imports of 
 American goods into her own ports. But the commerce of the West Indies 
 she determined to monopolize for herself and for her remaining possessions 
 on the American continent. All United States vessels were excluded from the 
 ports of the British West Indies, although American products might be 
 imported in English vessels. The restrictions were in line with the ideals of 
 the Mercantile System. It was hoped that Canada and Newfoundland might 
 be able to feed the sugar colonies were the competition of the United States 
 removed. The plan, however, did not prove practicable. Food shortages 
 resulted which, according to Edwards, * 11 were responsible for the death of 
 thousands of slaves. No agreement could be reached relative to the Wes t 
 India trade in the treaties of 1794 or 1806. But the difficulty of supplyi ng 
 
 9 Edwards, British West Indies (3d ed., 1801), II, 2; Morse, American Gazetteer, 1810. 
 
 10 From Sheffield, Commerce of the American States (6th ed., 1784), 135-154. The 
 
 figures are averages for the years I77I-I773, or, in some cases, for 1768-1770. 
 
 11 British M / est Indies (2d ed., 1794), II, 415. 
 
136 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Table 19.— Markets for northern farm products.—Destination of exports of 
 commodities produced in the northern colonies / 1770. 
 
 [Source: Pitkin, Commerce of U. S., edition of 1816, pp. 21—23.] 
 
 
 Great 
 
 Britain 
 
 and 
 
 Ireland. 
 
 South of 
 Europe. 
 
 West 
 
 Indies. 
 
 Total 
 exports. b 
 
 Wheat, bus. 
 
 Bread and flour, tons. 
 
 Indian corn, bus. 
 
 Mpal. bus . 
 
 161,724 
 
 3,846 
 
 150 
 
 588,561 
 
 18,501 
 
 175,221 
 
 955 
 
 23,449 
 
 402,958 
 
 4,430 
 
 49,337 
 
 851,240 
 
 45,868 
 
 5 / 8,349 
 
 4,430 
 
 50,383 
 
 312,612 
 
 Peas and beans, bus. 
 
 Flaxseed, bus. 
 
 311,863 
 
 1,046 
 
 749 
 
 c 244 
 
 Beef and pork. 
 
 d 2,870 
 223,310 
 6,692 
 12,797 
 2,615 
 
 Butter and cheese, lbs. 
 
 
 223,610 
 
 6,692 
 
 12,797 
 
 2,615 
 
 Horses . 
 
 
 
 Sheep and hogs. 
 
 
 
 Poultry, doz. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 “ Includes exports from all the British continental colonies, including the islands of Newfoundland, 
 Bahama, and Bermuda. 
 
 0 Including exports to Africa. 
 c Barrels. 
 
 4 Tons. 
 
 Table 20. —Agricultural exports, selected commodities, i 79 2 - 
 
 [From Coxe, View of United States, 413 et seq.] 
 
 
 From 
 
 New 
 
 England. 
 
 From 
 
 Middle 
 
 States. 
 
 From 
 
 Southern 
 
 States. 
 
 Total a 
 United 
 States. 
 
 Average, 5 
 years. b 
 
 Cereal and cereal products: 
 
 
 
 536,699 
 
 
 
 Wheat, bus. 
 
 599 
 
 316,492 
 
 853790 
 
 1,028,792 
 
 Flour, bbls. 
 
 37,778 
 
 453,165 
 
 333,521 
 
 824,464 
 
 814,362 
 
 Bread, bbls. 
 
 8,283 
 
 47,407 
 
 25,296 
 
 80 986 
 
 80,413 
 
 Indian corn, bus. 
 
 Indian meal, bbls. 
 
 119,985 
 
 654,305 
 
 1,190,683 
 
 1 , 964,973 
 
 1,696,005 
 
 3,590 
 
 42,043 
 
 7,048 
 
 52,681 
 
 61,954 
 
 Oats, bus. 
 
 99,012 
 
 10,462 
 
 10,259 
 
 119,733 
 
 93,747 
 
 Peas and beans, bus. 
 
 10,546 
 
 43,623 
 
 137,902 
 
 192,071 
 
 126,919 
 
 Flaxseed, casks c . 
 
 11,582 
 
 34,837 
 
 5,962 
 
 52,381 
 
 48,244 
 
 Animals and animal products: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Horned cattle . 
 
 4,000 
 
 385 
 
 l66 
 
 4,551 
 
 4,361 
 
 Horses . 
 
 5,024 
 
 457 
 
 159 
 
 1 5,656 
 
 5,540 
 
 Mules . 
 
 1,091 
 
 10,941 
 
 10 
 
 
 I,IOI 
 
 901 
 
 10,846 
 
 Sheep . 
 
 732 
 
 480 
 
 I 2 T 53 
 
 Hogs . 
 
 5,566 
 
 1,084 
 
 14,641 
 
 21,291 
 
 11,749 
 
 Poultry, doz. 
 
 5,173 
 
 969 
 
 1,174 
 
 7 , 3 i 6 
 
 6,552 
 
 Beef and pork, bbls. 
 
 75,279 
 
 22,516 
 
 14,641 
 
 112,436 
 
 105,851 
 
 Hams and bacon, lbs. 
 
 69525 
 
 426,080 
 
 89,758 
 
 a 585,353 
 
 530,326 
 
 Butter, firkins d . 
 
 6,259 
 
 4,133 
 
 1,369 
 
 11,761 
 
 15,586 
 
 Cheese, lbs. 
 
 72,360 
 
 42,540 
 
 11,025 
 
 125,925 
 
 222,957 
 
 Lard, lbs. 
 
 216 964 
 
 186,620 
 
 III,66l 
 
 515,245 
 
 603,909 
 
 Potatoes, bus. 
 
 12,187 
 
 6,289 
 
 1,158 
 
 19,634 
 
 *22,839 
 
 Onions, bus. 
 
 94,388 
 
 15,345 
 
 2,474 
 
 112,207 
 
 '293,223 
 
 Hay, tons . 
 
 2,177 
 
 355 
 
 60 
 
 2,592 
 
 1,903 
 
 Potash, tons . 
 
 2,966 
 
 4,834 
 
 23 
 
 7,823 
 
 7,214 
 
 a The totals are given as found in Coxe, View of the United States. In some cases these totals do 
 not agree with the sum for the groups of States. 
 
 b In the last column are given for comparison the average annual exports for the 5 years 1790—1794. 
 Source: American State Papers, Commerce and Navigation, I, pp. 24, 103, 147, 267, 298, 301. 
 (Supplement for 1793 included.) 
 
 c Cask = 5 bus. d Firkins56 lbs. e Barrel of potatoes=:ii pecks. 
 
 f Four-year average, ropes and bushels. 
 
AGRICULTURAL TRADE 
 
 137 
 
 the islands made it necessary for the British Government to open their 
 ports to American vessels every year for certain limited periods. 12 France 
 permitted her West India possessions to receive vegetables, rice, and maize 
 from the United State's, but prohibited other breadstuffs except in times of 
 scarcity. So frequent did such occasions become toward the end of the cen¬ 
 tury that the prohibition was suspended without interruption. 13 
 
 Table 19 indicates the relative importance of the European and West 
 Indian markets for northern agricultural products in 1770. 
 
 In Table 20 are presented the principal agricultural exports of the United 
 States for the year 1791-1792, omitting such items as cotton, indigo, rice, 
 and tobacco, which were grown for export exclusively in the South.' The 
 
 Table 21. Growth of exports of northern farm products, 
 
 1770-1790. 
 
 [Sources: For 1770; 
 also 2d ed., 1817), pp. 
 Commerce and Navigatio 
 
 Pitkin, Commerce of United States (ed. 1816: 
 21—23; for i 79 ° - 94 > American State Papers: 
 n, I, 24 et seq.] 
 
 
 1770. 
 
 Ave. of 5 
 years, 
 
 1790-94. 
 
 Wheat, bus. 
 
 851,240 
 45 868 
 
 
 Bread and flour, tons. 
 
 
 Flour, tons a . 
 
 71,257 
 
 80,413 
 
 Bread, bbls. 
 
 
 Indian corn, bus. 
 
 578,349 
 312,612 
 32 588 
 223,610 
 
 O T Qj 
 
 Flaxseed, bus. 
 
 241,240 
 
 105,851 
 
 1,151,796 
 
 Beef and pork, bbls. a . 
 
 Butter and cheese, lbs. 
 
 Cattle . 
 
 Horses . 
 
 ao 4 
 
 f\ 
 
 4,301 
 
 5,540 
 
 22,595 
 
 Sheep and hogs. 
 
 
 Poultry, doz. 
 
 2,615 
 
 
 ° 552 
 
 a The long ton was used in making these reductions. 
 
 extent to which the latter section competed with New England and the Mid¬ 
 dle States in the export of foodstuffs is noteworthy and is probably even 
 more important than the table indicates, since much southern wheat was 
 milled in Philadelphia, and Indian corn raised in Maryland and Virginia 
 was exported from New England ports. 
 
 A comparison of the exports of the most important foodstuffs in 1770 
 with the figures for 1790 to 1794 shows significant increases in the twenty- 
 year period. (See Table 21.) 
 
 INTERNAL TRADE. 
 
 The principal currents of internal trade in northern farm products were: 
 (0 from the back country to the seaports, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New 
 York, and the ports of New England, chiefly Boston; and (2) the coasting 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 Pitkin, Commerce of the United States (1835 ed.), 178. 
 Jefferson’s Works (ed. 1853), III, 510. 
 
138 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 trade by which the maritime region of New England was supplied with bread- 
 stuffs from the Middle and Southern Colonies, sending in return livestock 
 
 salted meat, and dairy products. 
 
 TRADE OF PHILADELPHIA WITH THE BACK COUN 1 RY. 
 
 For the farms west of the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania transporta¬ 
 tion was easier to the Baltimore market; nevertheless, Philadelphia drew 
 trade Tom an extensive area. It had excellent facilities for communication 
 with the interior by water and better land transportation than elsewhere m 
 the colonies. It was the market for all of eastern Pennsylvania, the wester 
 counties of New Jersey, the northern counties of Delaware, and even for 
 the newer settlements along the southern boundary of central New \oik 
 
 State. 
 
 From the immediate neighborhood came firewood, vegetables, fat cattle, 
 and dairy products for the consumption of city population (41,000 in iboo). 
 The marketing was largely done by the farm women, who carried then pro¬ 
 duce, butter, poultry, fresh meat, etc., in large wallets or panniers slung across 
 horses. Two-horse carts came into general use about the middle of t 
 
 century. 14 
 
 Overland transportation of farm products was confined to very short 
 distances in most regions of colonial America on account of the poorness ot 
 the roads. In southeastern Pennsylvania, however, the roads had been 
 sufficiently improved so that wheat could be carted in wagons for distances 
 of so or 60 miles. The German farmers in Lancaster, Lebanon, and York 
 counties were noted for their heavy wagons and teams of Conestoga horses. 
 
 Rush 15 wrote: 
 
 “A large and strong waggon covered with linen cloth, is an essential part of the 
 furniture of a German farm. In this waggon, drawn by four or five large horses of a 
 peculiar breed; they convey to market over the roughest roads, between 2 or 3 thousand 
 pounds weight of the produce of their farms. In the months of September and October, 
 it is no uncommon thing, on the Lancaster and Reading roads, to meet in one day from 
 fifty to an hundred of these waggons, on their way to Philadelphia, most of which 
 
 belong to German farmers.” 
 
 Herds of cattle were driven overland for hundreds of miles to be fattened 
 near Philadelphia, from the back country of Pennsylvania, from the uplands 
 of the Southern States, and even from New England. 
 
 In the matter of water communication Philadelphia was exceptionally 
 favored At the time of the spring and fall freshets wheat and timber were 
 floated down the Delaware River on flat boats to the city from points ioo to 
 150 miles distant in the back country. At Reading, on the Schuylkill River, 
 wheat was collected in the winter in great quantities to be sent down to 
 Philadelphia in the spring. The wheat and timber from the valleys of the 
 Susquehanna and its tributaries went principally to Baltimore, but to some 
 
 1 4 Smith, Wrightst own, Pennsylvania, in Buck, Bucks County, 19; (Appendix) Davis, 
 
 Bucks County, Pennsylvania, 713. , T x c. n i s0 
 
 1 5 Penn German Society, Proceedings and Addresses, XIX (1910), 67. bee a 
 
 Schoepf, Travels, I, 204, II, 22; Ellis and Evans, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, 
 
 35o; Weld, Travels, I, 93. 
 
AGRICULTURAL TRADE 
 
 139 
 
 extent Philadelphia was the market for this region also, being reached by 
 transhipment and land transportation across the peninsula between the rivers 
 a distance of about 20 miles. 16 
 
 On account of its strategic geographical position in the center of the chief 
 wheat-producing area, Philadelphia became early in the eighteenth century 
 the most important center of the grain trade. By 1765 its superiority to 
 i\ew York was clearly shown in the quantity of flour, bread, and grain 
 exported. In that year Philadelphia exported 367,522 bushels of wheat 
 and 18,714 tons of flour and bread. New York’s exports were only 109,666 
 bushels of wheat and 5,519 tons of flour and bread. 17 The quality of the flour 
 produced at the famous Brandywine mills was generally acknowledged to 
 be better than that of New York, even in the latter city, and was regularly 
 preferred in the West India market. 18 The exports of flour from Philadel¬ 
 phia just before the Revolution averaged 268,000 barrels a year. By 1787 
 they had fallen to 202,000 barrels, but recovery was rapid, in 1789 the figure 
 was 369,000 barrels and in 1792, 420,000 barrels. 19 
 
 TRADE OF NEW YORK WITH THE BACK COUNTRY. 
 
 The back country tributary to the port of New York was less extensive 
 than that which supplied the exports of Philadelphia and less productive 
 as well. It was this circumstance which was largely responsible for the slower 
 growth of the population on Manhattan. In 1786 the city had less than 
 25,000 inhabitants, but after that date there was rapid expansion, the census 
 of 1800 reporting 6o,ooo. 20 Land transportation to New York was less 
 important than to Philadelphia, but by water its market was easy of access. 
 The farmers of northeastern New Jersey drove cattle and shipped wheat 
 and flour, corn, beef, and pork, flaxseed, potatoes, and firewood to New 
 York, but those in the western counties traded with Philadelphia. 21 From 
 western Long Island came wheat, cattle, and, provisions, Almost every town 
 on the northern shore of Long Island Sound, as far east as Providence, 
 had small sloops carrying grain, flour, beef, pork, potatoes, and firewood 
 to New York. The following is a partial list of the commodities shipped 
 trom New Haven in 1801, which went almost wholly to New York: Cheese, 
 220,000 pounds; pork and beef hams, 24,000 pounds; pork, 1,900 barrels; 
 beef,1,700 barrels; butter, 800 firkins; lard, 600 firkins; corn meal, 1,000 
 hogsheads and 1,200 barrels; rye flour, 230 barrels; barley, 1,500 bushels; 
 Indian corn, 300 bushels; rye, 200 bushels; oats, 530 bushels; beans, 280 
 bushels; potatoes, 160 bushels. 22 New York did not control all the trade of 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 Cooper, Information Respecting America, no; Schoepf, Travels, I, 47; Smith New 
 Jersey, I, 486; Scot, Geographical Description of Pennsylvania 74. 
 
 v irginia Gazette, Apr. 9, 1767. 
 
 N h Y '^° C i L T e % S Relati . ve t0 T Colonial History, V, 57; N. Y. Soc. for Promotion of 
 i!f U A? rtS ’ Tr . ansacHon s> I (2d ed., 1801), 25. For a conflicting opinion see Strick¬ 
 land, Observations, 41. A contemporary description of the Brandywine mills is 
 given by I uton, in American Museum, Y, 380. 
 
 Coxe, View of United States, 64; Proud, Pennsylvania, II, 271. 
 
 Hardie, Description of Nezu York, 151. 
 
 On the agricultural exports of New Jersey, see Kalm, Travels, I, 230; Smith, New 
 Jersey, I, 488, 490, 492, 496, 497, 499. 
 
 Dwight, Statistical Account of New Haven, 67. 
 
140 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Connecticut. Many ports of that State shipped farm products directly to the 
 
 West Indies. . . . , . 
 
 The principal artery of communication between New York and the interior 
 
 was of course the Hudson River. Down this stream came the grain and dairy 
 products, potash, and timber from western New England and from a narrow 
 strip of country west of the river in New York State, extending as far north 
 
 as Albany. . a 
 
 Wheat was the most important commodity shipped down the Hudson. 
 
 Even in the days of the Dutch occupation the wheat of Esopus was renowned. 
 Farmers had begun to raise wheat in the Mohawk Valley soon after the 
 Peace of Utrecht (1713) and their success had encouraged rapid settlement. 
 By 1750 flour was being shipped from Sir William Johnson’s colony at 
 Amsterdam to the West Indies, and a few years later the country for 60 
 miles west of Schenectady was shipping wheat by sleighs in winter to that 
 point for eventual transhipment to Albany and to New York. 23 By the end of 
 the century Mohawk wheat had acquired a high reputation and was grown for 
 export as far as 100 miles west of Albany. 
 
 Richard Smith 24 wrote in 1769 that there were at Albany “31 sloops 
 . which carry from 400 to 500 Barrels of Flour each, trading con¬ 
 
 stantly from thence to York & that they make Eleven or 12 Trips a year 
 each.” The town of Catskill on the Hudson had prospered greatly after 
 the Revolution through the rapid development of its trade by wagonroad 
 with the back country of the Hudson Valley and of western Connecticut. 
 
 “ Six hundred and twenty-four bushels of wheat were brought to the Catskill market 
 in 1792. Forty-six thousand one hundred and sixty-four bushels came in 1800. On a 
 single day in 1801 the merchants bought four thousand one hundred and eight bushels 
 of wheat, and the same day eight hundred loaded sleighs came into the village by the 
 western road.” 25 
 
 A historian of the town wrote in 1803: “Between fifteen and sixteen 
 hundred sleighs, containing chiefly wheat and potash, have been unloaded in 
 the village in one day.” 26 At this time there were 15 sloops owned in the 
 town, 12 of which were engaged in carrying produce to New York, 2 to 
 Boston, and 1 to the Southern States. 27 
 
 TRADE OF NEW ENGLAND PORTS. 
 
 The trade of Boston, the largest seaport of New England, with the back 
 country was less than that of New York or Philadelphia. On this account 
 the growth of Boston was relatively slow and in 1800 it had but 25,000 inhabi¬ 
 tants. The shipment of New England farm products was not concentrated 
 in a single port, but was carried on from a large number of points. The New 
 Englanders were already famous for their maritime interests, good harbors 
 
 23 A/". Y. Documents Relative to Colonial History, VI, 207; Richard Smith, Journal, 
 
 p. xlix; Strickland, Observations, 8. 
 
 25 From Hampshire Gazette, Apr. 1, 1801, quoted by McMaster, United States, II, 5 7 ^ 
 
 26 Rev. Clark Brown in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, IX, 119. 
 
 27 Ibid., 118. On this subject see also Kalm, Travels, II, 246; Campbell, Travels, 2 3, 
 
 288; Richard Smith’s Journal, 12, 76. 
 
AGRICULTURAL TRADE 
 
 141 
 
 were abundant, and at all of them—Portsmouth, Newburyport, Salem, Boston, 
 Barnstable, New Bedford, Providence, New London, New Haven, Fairfield— 
 there were small crafts engaged in carrying beef and pork, butter and cheese, 
 cider, hay, vegetables, and livestock to the West Indies and to the Southern 
 States. 
 
 There were, therefore, a great many streams of trade trickling from the 
 back country to the seaports in New England. Among them a few main cur¬ 
 rents may be distinguished. We have already mentioned the shipment of 
 grain and dairy products from western New England down the Hudson River. 
 Not all the trade of this region went south. From the neighborhood of Lake 
 Champlain, pot and pearl ashes and beef were sent to Quebec in Canada and 
 salt and rum were imported in exchange. 28 The Connecticut River furnished a 
 cheap means of transportation throughout the middle of New England. Al¬ 
 though originally navigable only as far as Enfield in Connecticut, 65 miles from 
 the Sound, a series of canals constructed after 1790 had made possible the pas¬ 
 sage of small boats for 100 miles further north. Above Hartford only flat-bot¬ 
 tomed crafts of 10 to 20 tons burden could be used. According to Dwight 29 
 a fleet of 14 boats made regular trips about the year 1800 between Hartford 
 and the head of navigation in Vermont. They carried down potash and pearl 
 ash, staves, shingles, grain, beef, flaxseed, and linseed oil, and took back 
 rum, salt, molasses, dry goods, iron, and tea. Each round trip required 25 
 days and only 9 trips could be made in a season. At Hartford goods from 
 up river had to be transhipped into small schooners and sloops, which, after 
 collecting additional quantities of provisions and some vegetables from the 
 towns on the lower river, sailed for New York or the West Indies. 30 
 
 THE BOSTON MARKET. 
 
 In eastern New England the Merrimac Valley was an artery of trade roughly 
 parallel to the Connecticut River. The Merrimac was navigable only for 20 
 miles to Haverhill. But its valley provided a natural route for overland trans¬ 
 portation. A great thoroughfare ran through it, affording an outlet for 
 the products of northern and northwestern New Hampshire to the ports of 
 Salem, Newburyport, and Boston. Over this route herds of fat cattle were 
 driven to the Boston market. In winter sleds or pungs were used, square oblong 
 wooden boxes on runners shod with iron. In these conveyances a great vari¬ 
 ety of produce was conveyed to the Boston market—boxes of cheese, barrels 
 of apples, tubs of butter, winter squash, turkeys, chickens, eggs, and on top 
 of all carcasses of slaughtered hogs. 
 
 The teaming was of two kinds. There was a class of professional teamsters, who 
 drove large wagons, drawn by four, six, or eight horses, serving the merchants of the 
 up-country. ..... Wool, butter, cheese, and whatever sought the market would furnish 
 the loads, while salt, molasses, dry goods, rum, and all the varieties kept by the mis¬ 
 cellaneous ‘ country store ’ were taken on the return. Another class of teams probably 
 more numerous, though smaller, was driven by farmers, who took a trip or two yearly 
 
 28 Belknap Papers, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 5th series, II, 143; Graham, Descrip¬ 
 tive Sketch of Vermont, 40. 
 
 Z T ravels (1821 ed.), IV, 155; see also Kendall, Travels, III, 218. 
 
 0 Porter, Historical Discourse, 46. 
 
142 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 to market, carrying their own produce, beef, pork, or whatever they had to sell, and 
 returning with articles for home consumption or for the merchants. 
 
 Another important overland route in the latter half of the eighteenth cen¬ 
 tury ran between the Connecticut Valley towns, in central Massachusetts, and 
 Boston. Cattle and hogs were driven over this route before i 75 °- Small quan¬ 
 tities of goods were transported on horseback until about 1770, when sleighs 
 first came into use. Later, wagons drawn by horses were used in more or less 
 regular freighting to and from Boston. Grain, pork and potash were carried 
 eastward in quantities of a ton at a load. The return cargo was largely rum. 32 
 
 THE COASTING TRADE. 
 
 The thirteen colonies along the Atlantic seaboard had become sufficiently 
 differentiated economically in the eighteenth century to be separated into three 
 groups: (1) New England, (2) the Middle Colonies, and (3) the Southern 
 Colonies. The first group was distinguished by the prominence of maritime 
 pursuits and, in agriculture, by the importance of the grazing industry. In 
 Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey agriculture was relatively more 
 important than in New England and commerce and fishing less so. Gram 
 production for export was a distinguishing feature of farming in the.Middle 
 Colonies. The southern colonies were predominantly agricultural in their inter¬ 
 ests. Virginia and Maryland produced both grain and tobacco for export, 
 the upland country raised cattle, and finally on the coastal plains of Georgia 
 and the Carolinas were found rice, indigo, and cotton plantations. It was the 
 specialization thus broadly outlined which was the basis of the exchange of 
 commodities between the colonies. 
 
 DEPENDENCE OF NEW ENGLAND ON FOODSTUFFS FROM THE 
 
 SOUTHERN AND MIDDLE COLONIES. 
 
 During the first half of the eighteenth century the commercial population 
 of New England became regularly dependent on the Southern and Middle 
 Colonies for breadstuffs. Grain was still shipped from Connecticut and west¬ 
 ern Massachusetts to Boston in the first half of the century, but such supplies 
 were unreliable and Boston by 1750 was regularly importing breadstuffs from 
 New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore. By the end of the century flour was 
 being imported even into the former grain-exporting region of the Connecti¬ 
 cut Valley. 33 
 
 The provision of an adequate supply of grain for the city of Boston was 
 considered so important that a public granary was established in 1728, and 
 for more than 50 years a committee of selectmen was appointed each year 
 to purchase grain, superintend the granary, and regulate the sale of grain from 
 the public stock. By 1784 private importation had become sufficiently reliable 
 and the municipal undertaking was abandoned. 34 _ 
 
 31 Hazen, Billerica (Mass.), 274. See also Greene, Groton Historical Senes, 1st series, 
 
 I, 5; Bouton, Concord, N. H., 536- „ _ , ,, , a u 
 
 32 Judd, Hadley, Massachusetts, 37 L 382, 384; Carpenter and Morehouse, Amherst, 
 
 Massachusetts, 75- 
 
 33 Judd, Hadley, 354. 
 
 34 Boston Tozvn Records, VIII, 99 > I0 L 110 > 
 
 author is indebted to Dr. O. C. Stine. 
 
 XI, 233; XII, 
 
 270. 
 
 For this reference the 
 
AGRICULTURAL TRADE 
 
 143 
 
 There were of course differences of opinion in New England regarding 
 the advantages of the importations of foodstuffs, and voices of protest were 
 not wanting. We read in an anonymous pamphlet of 1750: 
 
 “ We supply ourselves from other Governments, in a great Measure with provisions 
 of various sorts, which Strangers tell us, is a Shame for us to do; and we ourselves ought 
 to think it a Shame; for we have many different Soils, as well adapted to those Neces¬ 
 saries of Life as our Neighbors. Corn, Rye, Barley and Oats we are sure, from our 
 own Experience, are quite easy to be raised among us; and I believe, were we as 
 industrious as some other Nations, we should raise enough not only for our own Con¬ 
 sumption, but also for Exportation, if required; but instead of so doing, we pay large 
 Sums for those Commodities to some of our neighboring Provinces.” 35 
 
 Governor Hutchinson, on the other hand, had already perceived the sound 
 economic basis of food imports. He wrote: 36 
 
 It seems agreed that the southern colonies as far as Virginia are designed by nature 
 for grain countries. It behoves us therefore, either like the Dutch for the other nations 
 in Europe, to become carriers for them with our shipping, or to contrive some articles 
 of produce or manufacture for barter or exchange with them, rather than in vain to 
 attempt raising to more advantage than they do, what nature has peculiarly formed 
 them for.” 
 
 The fishing and lumbering population of the coast of Maine were to a 
 large extent dependent on the import of breadstuffs from the Middle Colonies 
 throughout the eighteenth century. Owing to the imperfections of the market- 
 ing organization of those days, supplies were not always regularly forthcoming 
 and periods of scarcity and famine were not infrequent. The condition of a 
 coast town at such a time is described in the memorial presented by the 
 inhabitants of Kittery, 1751, to the Massachusetts legislature: 37 
 
 In the whole town there are about Two Hundred and Eighty Four families or 
 house-holders, and one quarter part of them Cannot raise one bushel of Corn, or any 
 Sort of Grain in a \ear, nor are they able to raise a Supply of any Sort of Provisions, 
 but Depend upon others for their Supply. Not one in ten through the whole Town does 
 raise a full Sufficiency for their own familys to live on the year about. Not one in thirty 
 that Can raise any Provisions to spare So that the Town in General Depend upon 
 buying, but have nothing to Purchase withall, as the times now are, but what they go 
 and work for in other Towns and places.” 
 
 The interruption of food supplies during the Revolution caused great distress 
 on the Maine coast. 38 
 
 New England paid for her imports of breadstuffs partly by the services 
 of her coasting vessels, in carrying the commerce of other colonies, and partly 
 with her own farm products. Fatted cattle were driven to the New York 
 market and occasionally to Philadelphia. Wool, hops, and barley were sent 
 to that city or to New York. To Georgia and the Carolinas were shipped beef, 
 pork, livestock, dairy products, apples, hay, and in fact much the same products 
 that went to the West Indies. The rice, indigo, and cotton plantations of 
 the southern coastal plains were comparable in many respects to the sugar 
 
 35 Some Observations Relating to Massachusetts Bay, 15. 
 
 30 Massachusetts Bay, II, 442. 
 
 37 In Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, IV, 200. 
 
 38 North, Augusta, Maine, 153. On conditions in Maine in the eighteenth century see 
 
 Rev. Thomas Smith’s Journal, in Smith and Deane’s Journals; Sullivan, Maine, 6, 
 
 43 ; Lincoln’s Observations on the Climate, Soil, etc., of the District of Maine, in 
 
 Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st series, IV, 146. 
 
144 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 plantations. They found specialization in their “ cash ” crops so profitable 
 that it seemed as if they could not afford to raise their own food supplies. 
 Although the plantations occupied but a small area of the farming land in these 
 colonies, an intervening strip of pine barrens cut them off from the region 
 of general farming in the back country. The products of the Middle Colo¬ 
 nies and of New England which were marketed in the Georgia and Carolina 
 lowlands included grain from New York and Pennsylvania, cheese and butter, 
 dried fish, salted beef, apples, potatoes, hay and cider from New England, and 
 in addition various products of the household industries, such as tow cloth 
 for negro garments, and woodenware. 39 
 
 a 9 Belknap, New Hampshire, III, 218; Bond, Letters in Am. Hist. Asso. Report (1897), 
 p. 560. 
 
Part III 
 
 EXPANSION AND PROGRESS 1800-1840 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 ? m 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter XI. —Pioneering West of the Alleghenies. 
 
 WESTWARD MOVEMENT OF POPULATION AND 
 
 OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 The settlement of the Ohio and Mississippi Valleys in the early decades of 
 the nineteenth century was one of the great colonizing movements of modern 
 times, great both in the numbers of men who participated and in its signifi¬ 
 cance in our political and economic history. Viewed broadly, the move¬ 
 ment of our population across the Alleghenies was but a phase in that con¬ 
 tinuous process of pioneering in which we had been engaged for almost two 
 centuries. There was little new in the motives for this newest drift to the 
 frontier. The desire to exchange exhausted farms for cheap, fertile land and 
 the craving for the excitement and romance of a new life in a new country 
 were as power ful in the nineteenth century as they had been in the seventeenth 
 and eighteenth. This is not the place to repeat in detail the story of the occu¬ 
 pation of the western country which had been so well told elsewhere. 1 It may 
 be helpful, however, to point out here some of the more important stages 
 
 in the great migration and to indicate a few of the circumstances which affected 
 it. 
 
 Before the Revolution the territory west of the Alleghenies was practically 
 uninhabited, save for the wandering Indian tribes and a few scattered out¬ 
 posts of French colonists. Hunters and trappers had spied out the country, 
 and lured by their glowing accounts adventurous Virginia backwoodsmen had 
 founded settlements in Kentucky. Figure 5 shows the extent of settlement 
 in 1/90) the date of the first census. In general, the line of the frontier was 
 still fixed by the Allegheny mountains. In New York State a tongue of settle¬ 
 ment, following the Mohawk Valley in a broad gap between the Adirondacks 
 and the Catskills, had reached beyond the center of the State, occupying the 
 whole of the Mohawk Valley and the country surrounding the interior lakes. 
 In Pennsylvania the general line of settlement was the southeastern edge of 
 the Allegheny plateau, but it had extended considerably beyond this in the 
 southwestern portion of the State, reaching as far as the junction of the 
 Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers at Pittsburg. North of the Ohio River 
 the land was unoccupied save for the single settlement at Marietta (1788) 
 and the French outposts on the Illinois and Mississippi Rivers. 
 
 By 1800, settlement in New York had advanced up the Mohawk and, 
 widening its path, extended from the southern border of the state to Lake 
 Ontario. Northern Pennsylvania west of the Susquehanna was still unin¬ 
 habited. But in the south the settlements around Pittsburg, becoming increas- 
 
 1 Roosevelt, Winning of the West, tells of the passing of the southern half of the 
 frontier across the Alleghenies before the Revolution. Turner, The Frontier in 
 American History, ch. IV, and The Rise of the New West, gives the best account 
 of the westward movement, 1790 to 1840. 
 
 147 
 
148 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 ingly dense, had spilled over into Ohio, and along the western border a 
 tongue of settlement extended up to Lake Erie. 
 
 “ Bv the opening of the nineteenth century, when Napoleon’s cession brought to the 
 United States the vast spaces of the Louisiana Purchase beyond the Mississippi, the 
 pioneers had hardly more than entered the outskirts of the forest along the Ohio and 
 Lake Erie. But by 1810 the government had extinguished the Indian title to the unse¬ 
 cured portions of the Western Reserve, and to great tracts of Indiana, along the Ohio 
 and up the Wabash Valley; thus protecting the Ohio highway from the Indians, and 
 
 opening new lands to settlement. The embargo had destroyed the trade of New England, 
 and had weighted down her citizens with debt and taxation; caravans of Yankee emi¬ 
 grant wagons, precursors of the ‘prairie schooner,’ had already begun to cross Pennsy - 
 vania on their way to Ohio; and they now greatly increased in number. North Carolina 
 back countrymen flocked to the Indiana settlements, giving the peculiar Hoosier flavor 
 to the State, and other Southerners followed, outnumbering the Northern immigrants, 
 who sought the eastern edge of Indiana.” 2 
 
 2 Turner, The Frontier in American History, 134 - 
 
PIONEERING WEST OF THE ALLEGHENIES 
 
 149 
 
 The war with Tecumseh and the War of 1812 hindered settlement only 
 temporarily, and by the treaties made at their conclusion, and the treaties of 
 1818, the Indians were pressed still farther north. 
 
 In the meantime, Indian treaties had released additional land in southern Illinois, 
 and pioneers were widening the bounds of the old French settlements. Avoiding the 
 rich savannas of the prairie regions, as devoid of wood, remote from transportation 
 facilities, and suited only to grazing, they entered the hard woods—and in the early 
 
 Fig. 6.—Population per square mile, 1810. 
 
 twenties they were advancing in a wedge-shaped column up the Illinois Valley. 
 
 While the hard woods of Illinois were being entered, the pioneer movement passed also 
 into the Missouri Valley. The French lead miners had already opened the southeastern 
 section, and Southern mountaineers had pushed up the Missouri; but now the planters 
 from the Ohio Valley and the upper Tennessee followed, seeking the alluvial soils for 
 slave labor. Moving across the southern border of free Illinois, they had awakened 
 regrets in that State at the loss of so large a body of settlers. 
 
 “Looking at the Middle West, as a whole, in the decade from 1810 to 1820, we per¬ 
 ceive that settlement extended from the shores of Lake Erie in an arc, following the 
 banks of the Ohio till it joined the Mississippi, and thence along that river and up the 
 
ISO AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Missouri well into the center of the State. The next decade was marked by the increased 
 use of the steamboat; pioneers pressed farther up the streams, etching out the hard 
 wood forests well up to the prairie lands, and forming additional tracts of settlement 
 in the region tributary to Detroit and in the southeastern part of Michigan. In the area 
 of the Galena lead mines of northwestern Illinois, southwestern Wisconsin, and north¬ 
 eastern Iowa, Southeners had already begun operations; and if we except Ohio and 
 
 Fig. 7.—Population per square mile, 1830. 
 
 Michigan, the dominant element in all this overflow of settlement into the Middle West 
 was Southern, particularly from Kentucky, Virginia, and North Carolina. The settle¬ 
 ments were still dependent on the rivers for transportation, and the areas between the 
 rivers were but lightly occupied.” 3 
 
 In the decade 1830-1840 the influence of the Erie Canal became apparent. 
 It was at this time more important as a highway of immigration than as an 
 outlet for the products of the West, carrying thousands of New Englanders 
 to their homes in the new country. By 1840 settlements had been carried 
 over the whole extent of Indiana, Illinois, and across Michigan and Wisconsin 
 
 3 Turner, The Frontier in American History, I34 -I 36. 
 
PIONEERING WEST OF THE ALLEGHENIES 
 
 151 
 
 as far north as the forty-third parallel. Population had crossed the Mississ¬ 
 ippi River into Iowa Territory, occupying a broad belt up and down that 
 stream, and in Missouri settlements had spread northward from the Missouri 
 River nearly to the boundary of the State and southward till they covered 
 most of the southern portion. 
 
 Fig. 8.—Population per square mile, 1840. 
 
 The increase in population in the region west of the Alleghenies and north 
 of the Ohio is shown in table 22. The percentage increase by decades in the 
 new territory is shown in table 23. 
 
 HOW THE GOVERNMENT POLICY FAVORED SETTLEMENT— 
 THE FEDERAL LAND POLICY, 1785 - 1840 . 
 
 In the policy adopted by our new national government in respect to the 
 colonization of the west, four important features may be distinguished. In 
 the first place, by the establishment of the territorial form of government, 
 liberal political privileges were guaranteed the settlers in the new country. 
 
152 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Their commercial relations with the older communities to the eastward were 
 to be forever free from tariff restrictions or duties. Toward the native 
 tribes who were occupying the land the government adopted a firm policy 
 which, whatever might have been its ethical aspects, did, nevertheless, effec- 
 
 Table 22. —Increase of population west of the Alleghenies, 1790-1840. 
 
 
 1790. 
 
 1800. 
 
 1810. 
 
 1820. 
 
 1830. 
 
 1840. 
 
 Western New York*.... 
 Western Pennsylvania b . 
 Ohio . 
 
 1,074 
 
 108,934 
 
 17,006 
 
 197,417 
 
 45,365 
 
 5,641 
 
 75,6i8 
 290,115 
 230,760 
 24,520 
 12 282 
 4762 
 20,845 
 
 • •••••• 
 
 265,325 
 
 390,593 
 
 581,295 
 
 147,178 
 
 55,162 
 
 8,765 
 
 66,557 
 
 406.858 
 
 528,831 
 
 937903 
 
 343,031 
 
 157,445 
 
 31,639 
 
 140,455 
 
 548,308 
 
 729,086 
 
 1,519,467 
 
 685,866 
 
 476,183 
 
 212,267 
 
 383,702 
 
 30,945 
 
 43 ,H 2 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 
 • •••••• 
 
 Towa - -. 
 
 
 
 
 Total . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 110,008 
 
 265,429 
 
 658 902 
 
 1 , 514,875 
 
 2,546,162 
 
 4,628,936 
 
 a The figures given for 1790 are for Ontario county and for later dates for approximately the same 
 
 b For 1790 the counties of Allegheny, Washington, Fayette, Westmoreland, Northumberland, Bedford, 
 Huntingdon, and Mifflin were included, and for later dates approximately the same area. A map 
 showing county lines as of 1790 is given in A Century of Population Growth. 
 
 tively remove a hostile menace from in front of the advancing waves of 
 settlement. 
 
 In the disposition of the public lands, although financial considerations were 
 at first dominant, the policy eventually adopted was one which aimed to put 
 those lands as speedily as possible into the hands of actual settlers. In the 
 
 Table 23. —Percentage increase of population west of the Alleghenies, 1790-1840. 
 
 
 1790-1800. 
 
 1800-1810. 
 
 1810-1820. 
 
 1820-1830. 
 
 1830-1840. 
 
 Western New York. 
 
 Western Pennsylvania . 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 149-8 
 
 81.9 
 
 344-0 
 
 47-0 
 
 408.6 
 
 334-6 
 
 250.9 
 
 34-6 
 
 I 5 I -9 
 
 500.2 
 
 349-1 
 
 84.0 
 
 219.2 
 
 53-4 
 
 35-4 
 
 61.3 
 
 133-0 
 
 185.4 
 
 260.9 
 
 III.O 
 
 34-7 
 
 37-9 
 
 62.0 
 
 99.9 
 
 202.4 
 
 570.9 
 173 -1 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 Town . 
 
 
 
 Summary . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 4 I -3 
 
 148.4 
 
 129.8 
 
 68.0 
 
 81.8 
 
 ordinance of 1785 was laid the foundation of the American public land policy. 
 The now familiar system of rectangular surveys was established by this ordi¬ 
 nance. Land was to be sold either by whole townships or by lots (“ sections ”) 
 of 1 mile square, at a minimum price of $1 per acre. The receipts from sales 
 under this ordinance proved disappointing, and Congress, being in urgent 
 need of funds, reverted to the policy of the colonial governments and agreed 
 to the sale of several large tracts to land companies, notably the Ohio and 
 
PIONEERING WEST OF THE ALLEGHENIES 
 
 153 
 
 Scioto Companies. The sales to these companies and to other large purchasers 
 in the years 1787 and 1788 amounted to about 1,500,000 acres, for which 
 Congress received $839,203 in its own depreciated currency and securities. 
 Such transactions, although out of line with our general land policy, did 
 nevertheless bring money into the treasury when it was badly needed and 
 \\ ere instrumental in getting settlers into the new country. 
 
 THE CREDIT SYSTEM. 
 
 The land policy as laid down in 1785 was further developed by the act of 
 1796, which reaffirmed the principle of rectangular surveys, and raised the 
 minimum price to $2 per acre. However, by extending the period of payment 
 from three months to one year it introduced an important new departure, the 
 credit system. In 1800 the details of previous acts were more carefully 
 worked out. The minimum price of $2 per acre was retained, but the minimum 
 tract which might be purchased was reduced to 320 acres (in the district west 
 of the Muskingum River). A significant extension was made in the credit 
 system. The purchaser was required to deposit only one-twentieth of the 
 purchase money, exclusive of fees and surveying expenses, and then was given 
 40 days to make an additional payment bringing the total up to one-fourth. 
 
 The balance of the price was divided into four annual payments due respectively 
 two, three and four years after the sale. On these payments interest at six per cent 
 from the date of sale ’ was charged, payable as they became due, but a discount of eight 
 per cent, from the amount demandable was extended for prompt payments If the final 
 payment was not made within one year after it fell due the tract would be advertised 
 
 for thirty days and sold at public sale for a price not less than the whole arrears due 
 plus the expenses of the sale.” 4 
 
 Says Professor Treat: 5 
 
 Under the Act of 1800 the land system became a real factor in the westward move¬ 
 ment, and it was the five-year credit period which rendered the act effective. Without 
 the credit little land could be sold for two dollars an acre, but with it a man could pay 
 fifty cents an acre and the balance within five years. The minimum lot was now reduced 
 to three hundred and twenty acres, so that a payment of one hundred and sixty dollars 
 entitled a settler to the use of a half section pending the payment of the balance- 
 
 even if he were forced to forfeit the land he had had five years’ occupation for that 
 amount. 
 
 Under the operation of this act about I 9 , 5 00 > 000 acres of public land were 
 sold, of which 8,850,000 acres were in Ohio, 2,500,000 acres in Indiana, 
 1,600,000 acres in Illinois, and 1,250,000 acres in Missouri. For the 20 years 
 during which the act of 1800 regulated the sales of public lands, the latter 
 were administered from the financial rather than from the social point of view. 
 That is, the idea of deriving revenue from the public domain was predomi¬ 
 nant over the idea of getting the land as speedily as possible into the hands 
 of actual settlers. The credit system, by stimulating speculative purchases 
 brought large revenues to the national treasury, but its easy terms proved 
 disastrous to many settlers. With pioneer optimism they purchased as much 
 as they could cover on the first payment, trusting to earn enough to cover 
 the second installment before it came due, or hoping that rising End values 
 would make the sale of a portion of the tract profitable. 
 
 4 Treat, The National Land System, 05. 
 
 5 Ibid., 378. 
 
154 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 LAND SPECULATION. 
 
 Land speculation became general. Birbeck c wrote in 1818 : 
 
 « Thp merchant invests his profits, and the professional man his savings, in the pur- 
 chase of un^Wvated lands. The farmer, instead of completing the improvement of 
 his nresent possessions, lays out all he can save in entering more land. In a dis 
 which is settling, this speculation is said to pay on the average, when managed 
 
 with judgment, fifteen per cent. Who then will submit to the toils of agriculture, ur er 
 
 than bare Necessity requires, for fifteen per cent? Or who 
 
 at fifteen per cent, where he can obtain that interest by investing it in land. Ihus every 
 description of men, almost every man, is poor in convertible property. 
 
 While crops were good and prices were high the credit system, with all 
 its faults, was a helpful method of enabling capital-less pioneers to get con¬ 
 trol of land. But its dangers in a period of poor crops and falling prices were 
 soon obvious. As early as 1804, Secretary Gallatin advocated the abolition 
 of credit but his advice was not followed. Petitions began to pour into Con- 
 nress from small purchasers who were unable to meet their payments, praying 
 for an extension of time so that they might not lose their homesteads and 
 investments. Congress, always sympathetic with the settler, afforded the 
 desired aid in a succession of relief acts extending the period of forfeiture. 
 Finally in 1820, Congress took the bold step of abolishing the credit system 
 altogether. At the same time the minimum price of land was reduced to 
 $1.2=; per acre and purchasers were allowed to buy as little as 80 acres. Un er 
 these provisions a settler who had $100 in cash might purchase outng it an 
 80-acre farm, but under the credit system $100 would have been little more 
 than enough to meet the first payment on the smallest tract purchasable, a 
 quarter-section. The act of 1820 marks a turning-point in our land policy, 
 from that date an ever-increasing emphasis has been laid on adjusting the land 
 laws to the needs of the settlers and nation’s financial needs have been 
 
 secondary. 
 
 PREEMPTION ACTS. 
 
 A further development of what may be called the social ideal in land policy 
 is seen in the series of acts relating to preemption which were passed in the 
 years 1801 to 1841. These laws granted to squatters, 1. e., unauthorized set¬ 
 tlers on public lands, the right, when such lands were opened to entry to 
 purchase at the minimum price in advance of the public sale, thus affording 
 protection against the competition of speculators. The necessity for such legis¬ 
 lation arose from the unsystematic and unregulated method of settlement. 
 Settlement did not wait for the extension of the land system. 
 
 “ Where land was held under foreign titles the period of confirmation would delay 
 the surveys and regular sales but would permit of speculation and some increase of 
 population. And even the most rapid surveying could not keep up with the land-hung y 
 settlers who preferred to squat on unsurveyed land, in the hope of securing a preei p- 
 tion, rather than buy inferior land at the minimum price or pay a premium for the 
 better land at the auction sale. The surveyors had to run their lines over good, bad and 
 indifferent land. The squatters would locate only on the best. For that reason th 
 surveys could not, even if money were available, keep pace with the settlers. While the 
 linesmen were struggling through some morass or thicket the squatters were rin S 1 ”® 
 trees along a likely river bottom. Therefore a map of the extension of the surveys wou d 
 not agree with a map of the population of the public land states For people woold 
 be settled on unsurveyed land and considerable surveyed land would still be unsold. 
 
 6 Letters from Illinois, 85. 
 
 7 Treat, National Land System, 162. 
 
PIONEERING WEST OF THE ALLEGHENIES 
 
 155 
 
 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RECOGNITION OF 
 PREEMPTION RIGHTS. 
 
 The recognition of preemption rights of squatters antedates the national 
 land system. As early as the middle of the eighteenth century it was a well- 
 recognized feature of the land system of colonial Pennsylvania, and was in¬ 
 corporated in the earliest legislation for the disposal of unoccupied lands after 
 the colony had become a state. s In Congress the principle of preemption 
 was recognized as early as I79°> although no acts of a general nature were 
 passed until 1803. The delay of surveys in Michigan and in Illinois led to 
 
 preemption being granted by general acts to settlers in those territories in 1808 
 and 1813. 
 
 “ By 1820, .... Congress had recognized squatting to the extent of granting some 
 measure of preemption to everyone of the public land States and territories save In- 
 chana . . From 1820 to 1841 the representatives of the public land States urged the 
 desirability of a general preemption act. Beginning in 1830, temporary preemption laws, 
 covering a limited period but of a general nature, were passed. Finally, in 1841 a 
 general preemption law was enacted and the long struggle of the pioneer for recognition 
 and tor the right to reap the reward of his enterprise was won.” 8 9 
 
 The recognition of the right of preemption was not equivalent to a free 
 grant. Phe squatteis must still buy their lands. The enactment of preemption 
 laws, however, established the principle that actual settlers should have prior 
 rights over all other purchasers. 
 
 Technically, the squatter throughout this period had been a lawbreaker. 
 Congress in 1787 had twice ordered its troops to move against unauthorized 
 settlers who were locating on the public lands. Western lands then being re¬ 
 garded as a source of revenue, they might not be taken up by land-hungry 
 settlers, and in 1807 strict laws were passed prohibiting unauthorized settle¬ 
 ment. But the preemption idea gained strength with the increasing impor¬ 
 tance of western settlement. In this case, as in dealing with the credit system, 
 Congress showed a lack of consistent policy. It proved more and more sym¬ 
 pathetic with the point of view of the pioneers. The squatter came to be 
 regarded not as a lawbreaker but as a model of public virtue. His bravery and 
 self-sacrifice in clearing land and making a home in a new country were ac¬ 
 counted of greater importance than his trespass in crossing the legal frontier. 
 The strict theory of the land system demanded that he be evicted, without 
 compensation for improvements, and that his land be sold to the highest 
 bidder. But in practice, even in the absence of preemption laws, the squatter 
 w r as protected by the public sentiment of the frontier community. It demanded 
 that the purchaser of his land should compensate him for his improvements 
 and at times was strong enough to protect him from competition at the 
 public sale and secure him a virtual preemption right at the minimum price. 10 
 
 8 See p. 72. 
 
 9 Treat, op. cit., 385, 386. 
 
 10 The facts in the above discussion of the federal land policy have been taken prin¬ 
 
 cipally from Professor Treat’s monograph quoted above. The author has also 
 consulted Sato, The Land Question in the United States in J. H. U. Studies 
 in Historical and Political Science, IV, Nos. 7-9 (1886); Donaldson, The 
 Public Domain, and Callender, Economic History of the United States, chs XII 
 and XIII. 
 
156 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 THE FACTORS DETERMINING AGRICULTURAL DEVELOP¬ 
 MENT OF THE OHIO VALLEY.—THE CHARACTER 
 OF THE PIONEER POPULATION. 
 
 Besides the legal and political institutions discussed above there were three 
 sets of conditions which determined the development of agriculture in the 
 great district drained by the Ohio and its tributaries: (i) the characteristics 
 of the emigrants themselves; (2) the physical environment, and (3) economic 
 conditions. As regards the characteristics of the settlers little need be said. 
 They had the typical pioneer virtues and defects, dhey were self-reliant and 
 impatient of control to the point of lawlessness, and were more disposed to 
 fitful violent exertions than to steady, unremitting application to farming. 
 In their racial origins they combined all the elements represented in the 
 original settlements on the Atlantic coast, but in the pioneer stage local preju¬ 
 dices were still strong enough to prevent much amalgamation by intermar¬ 
 riage. The antagonism between New Englanders and the emigrants from Vir¬ 
 ginia and North Carolina was particularly marked. 11 
 
 PHYSICAL FEATURES OF THE DISTRICT OF 
 
 THE OHIO VALLEY. 
 
 On crossing the mountains, the pioneers entered a region admirably adapted 
 bv nature for the development of a thriving agricultural industry. Its 
 abundant rainfall and the long, warm summers fitted it for the principal cereal 
 crops, particularly maize. In soil and configuration there were great differ¬ 
 ences in various parts of the great region drained by the Ohio and its tribu¬ 
 taries. In the mountainous districts of southwest Virginia, western Virginia, 
 western North Carolina, eastern Tennessee, and eastern Kentucky tillage was 
 practicable only in the broad valleys between the greater ridges. In the un¬ 
 glaciated region south of the Ohio river in Kentucky and Tennessee there 
 are sharp contrasts in soils. Where the earth is underlaid with coal measures, 
 as in eastern Kentucky and in central Tennessee, the soils are usually thin 
 and unfertile, but where the limestones appear at the sui face the soil immedi¬ 
 ately takes on an exceedingly fertile character. Such a region is the famous 
 bluegrass region of Kentucky, so named from the luxuriance with which the 
 species of grasses belonging to the genus Poa flourish there. In the region 
 north of the Ohio, the district with which this essay is chiefly concerned, 
 glacial action had produced soils of remarkable fertility and endurance. Over 
 a level surface of sedimentary rocks the ice-sheets had deposited a smooth, 
 thick mantle of finely divided silt and boulder clay. On this as a subsoil 
 decaying vegetable matter had accumulated for centuries with little loss from 
 erosion. The pioneers in this region had, then, two advantages over their kins¬ 
 men east of the mountains; their soils were better and their fields, owing to 
 their smoothness and lack of stones, were more easily tilled. 12 
 
 11 See Hubbard, Family Memories, 68; Harris, Journal, 58. . , 
 
 12 The discussion of physiography in this and following paragraphs is from bnaler, 
 
 United States, I, ch. iii; Brigham, Geographical Influences in American History, 
 chs. iii-v, and Bowman, Forest Physiography, 486-491. 
 
157 
 
 PIONEERING WEST OF THE ALLEGHENIES 
 
 NATURAL CLEARINGS OR TREELESS PLAINS. 
 
 A natural feature of great importance to the pioneer was the presence or 
 absence of forestation. Ihe pioneer agriculture of the seventeenth and 
 eighteenth centuries had been woodland agriculture, and a large part of the 
 activities of the first generation of settlers had been devoted to chopping trees 
 and burning logs. It is important to remember that the early pioneers west of 
 the Alleghenies were engaged in just this type of farming. On crossing the 
 mountains they emerged not on the prairies, but on broad, heavily-wooded 
 plateaus sloping gently to the broad plain of the Mississippi Valley on the 
 west, and northwest to the basin of the Great Lakes. Extending on a broad 
 belt across western New York and Pennsylvania and covering all of Ohio 
 and perhaps seven-eighths of Indiana, these plateaus and the equally well 
 wooded river valleys that dissected them were the scene of the typical western 
 agriculture of the years 1790 to 1840. Illinois is the first prairie State east of 
 the Mississippi, but, for reasons discussed below, there was until about 1830 
 little prairie farming in that State. 
 
 The plateaus were not entirely forest-covered. The natural openings or 
 treeless meadows which were so welcome a sight to the earliest arrivals on 
 the Atlantic Coastal Plain seem to have been even more numerous and cer¬ 
 tainly more extensive on the western slopes of the Appalachian Range. Chris¬ 
 topher Gist, 13 who was one of the first to explore and describe the new 
 region, wrote when near the present site of Circleville: “ All the way from 
 Licking Creek to this Place is fine rich level Land, with large Meadows, 
 Clover Bottoms & spacious Plains covered with Wild Rye.” Hutch¬ 
 
 ins, 14 who traversed the region a quarter of a century later, wrote: 
 
 On the north-west and south-east sides of the Ohio, below the great Kanhaway 
 river, at a little distance from it, are extensive natural meadows, or savannas. These 
 meadows are from 20 to 50 miles in circuit. They have many beautiful groves of trees 
 interspersed as if by art in them, and which serve as a shelter for the innumberable 
 herds of buffalo, deer, &c. with which they abound.” 
 
 Manasseh Cutler, in his Description of Ohio (1788), 15 describes the plains 
 or meadows in much the same language, but applies the typically western 
 word “ prairies ” to them. It is evident, however, that he did not mean true 
 prairies, for he adds: “ There is no undergrowth on them and the trees which 
 grow very high and become very large only need to be deprived of their bark 
 in order to become fit for use.” 
 
 In the Genessee country in western New York treeless plains were a feature 
 so striking as to demand explanation. 
 
 The openings, or large tracts of land, found frequently in this country free of 
 timber, and showing great signs of having been once in a state of cultivation, are singu¬ 
 larly curious. This sort of land, from the ignorance of the first settlers in regard to 
 its quality, was supposed to be barren, and was therefore little valued: necessity, 
 however, obliged some to attempt the cultivation of it, and they were agreeably disap¬ 
 pointed on finding they had got a good crop, and in numberless instances they have con¬ 
 tinued to reap plentiful crops every year for seven years past. This kind of land, which, 
 
 13 Journal (1751), in Filson Club Publications, No. 13 (1898), p. 122. See also pp. 133, 
 
 145, 146- . 
 
 14 Topographical Description, in Imlay, Western Territory (3d ed., 1707), p. 402. 
 
 0 In Ohio Arch, and Hist. Soc. Publications, III, 87. 
 
158 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 six years ago would not have sold for a quarter of a dollar an acre, is now reckoned 
 cheap at ten dollars an acre. It is difficult to account for these openings, or for the open 
 flats on the Genesee River, where ten thousand acres may be found in one body, not 
 even encumbered with a bush, but covered with grass of such height, that^the largest 
 bullocks, at thirty feet from the path, will be completely hid from the view.” 16 
 
 The pasturage afforded on the openings and prairies of the Allegheny plateau 
 was a natural resource of great importance which merits detailed discussion 
 later in this chapter. 17 
 
 WOODLAND VS. PRAIRIE FARMING. 
 
 The tendency to neglect the openings, except for pasturage, and to clear 
 woodland for tillage instead, was later strongly shown when the emigrants 
 came into contact with the actual prairie in Indiana and Illinois. It seems 
 illogical at first glance that they should have preferred to spend years of 
 arduous toil in clearing woodland when fertile, unforested plains lay ready 
 for the plow. But, taking everything into consideration, it would have been 
 remarkable had they acted otherwise. For almost two centuries Americans 
 had been pioneering in the forests, and clearing woodland had become a 
 national habit. The processes of girdling, grubbing, log-rolling, and burning, 
 and the construction of log houses represented a considerable body of tech¬ 
 nical knowledge, some of it committed to writing, 18 but mostly handed down 
 orally from one generation to another. In this technique of woodland farming 
 the principles of soil selection according to the character of the forest cover 
 held an important place. 19 In general, a heavy growth of hardwood was re¬ 
 garded as evidence of a “ strong ” soil. The prairies grew no timber, their 
 soils, therefore, were regarded with suspicion. 
 
 Moreover, forests were of great importance in pioneer economy. They 
 sheltered the game on which the backwoodsman and his family relied for 
 meat. They gave him the logs for his house, fuel for cooking and heating, and 
 material for fencing and for the construction of a great variety of household 
 furnishings and farm tools. 
 
 “ Not to speak of wooden houses, bridges, and roads —of wood for fuel and fencing— 
 we find it adopted in the west for purposes more anomalous, where wooden pins are 
 substituted for nails, and wells are curbed with hollow logs, where the cabin door 
 swinging on wooden hinges, is fastened with a wooden latch, and the smoke escapes 
 
 through a wooden chimney.Well may ours be called a wooden country; not 
 
 merely from the extent of its forests, but because in common use wood has been 
 substituted for a number of the most necessary and common articles—such as stone, 
 iron, and even leather.” 20 
 
 Water was another essential for family consumption and for the settler’s 
 livestock. The rivers furnished a cheap means of getting farm products to 
 market at a time when land carriage for any distance was prohibitorily ex- 
 
 16 Description of the Genesee Country ( 1799 ), in O’Callaghan, Documentary History 
 
 of New York, II, ii47* See also Ibid., II, 1107, 1132. 
 
 17 Below, pp. 159 et seq. 
 
 18 As in Dwight’s Travels, Belknap’s New Hampshire, and Lorain’s Nature and Reason 
 
 Harmonized, chap. 33. See references on pages 77 and 78. 
 
 19 Cooper, Guide in the Wilderness (1810), pp. 34-36* 
 
 20 Hall, Statistics of the West (1836), p. 101. 
 
PIONEERING WEST OF THE ALLEGHENIES 159 
 
 pensive. The desire to be near watercourses was, then, an additional reason for 
 avoiding the prairies and for the continuance of woodland farming. 
 
 Finally, prairie farming required more capital 21 than woodland farming 
 and with capital the early settlers in the Ohio Valley were not well supplied. 
 Breaking up the tough sod of the prairie required three or four yoke of 
 oxen and a heavy plough. When first broken up the soil yielded only a small 
 crop, in fact it was often allowed to lie fallow over one season until the grass 
 roots had thoroughly rotted. Consequently capital in the form of living sup¬ 
 plies was essential on the prairie. In the woods, on the other hand, equipped 
 only with an axe and a hoe, the pioneer might grub out the underbrush, girdle 
 the trees, plant corn, and have a good crop the first year. Breaking up the 
 prairies did, indeed, cost less per acre in terms of manual labor, but it cost 
 more in terms of the labor of draft animals, horses, and oxen. 22 
 
 NATIVE GRASSES. 
 
 The rich native pasturage of the region west of the Alleghenies was an 
 environmental advantage of first importance to the pioneers. The ease with 
 which their small herds found sustenance in the natural openings and river 
 bottoms and the rapidity with which they matured and multiplied were cir¬ 
 cumstances which lightened the unavoidable hardships of frontier farming. 
 In addition to the wild rye and andropogons which grew here much more luxu¬ 
 riantly than along the Atlantic coast, the first arrivals found white clover and 
 Kentucky bluegrass. Gist mentioned both of these grasses frequently as grow¬ 
 ing in Kentucky, and Ohio. 23 There seems no doubt of the accuracy of his 
 observations, which are supported by accounts of later observers. 24 The pres¬ 
 ence of these grasses in advance of settlement gave rise to the belief that they 
 were indigenous. “The white clover,” wrote Johnson 25 “appears to be a 
 natural grass of the country; for, although never sowed, it covers every field 
 and roadside, where the land has been neglected.” 
 
 Recent researches, however, have shown that both the white clover and 
 Kentucky bluegrass spread by natural dissemination from the Atlantic Coast, 
 or perhaps were carried into the Ohio Valley by the French missionaries and 
 traders from Canada. 26 As soon as clearings had been made and cattle turned 
 out to graze the bluegrass and clover appeared with surprising rapidity. 
 
 A new species of forage was the cane which was found along the borders 
 of the rivers in Southern Ohio, Kentucky, and Missouri. 
 
 21 See Faux, in Thwaite’s Early Western Travels, XI, 256, 289. Flagg, in Illinois State 
 
 Hist. Soc. Transactions (1910), p. 157. 
 
 22 This was pointed out.by Faux, in Thwaite’s Early Western Travels, XI, 256. See also 
 
 Ibid., 289; Flagg, in Illinois State Hist. Soc. Transactions, 1910, p. 157; Woods, 
 Illinois Country (1819), p. 230; Adams, in Mich. Pol. Sci. Assn. Publications, III 
 (1899), No. 7, p. 12. Lippincott, in Journal of Political Economy, XVIII 276, 
 note 23. 
 
 23 Journal, 123, 133, 146, in Filson Club Publications, No. 13. 
 
 24 See Imlay’s Western Territory, 29, 233, 318; Rev. James Smith, in Ohio Arch, and 
 
 Hist. Soc. Quarterly, XVI, 379; Welby, in Thwaite’s Early Western Travels, 
 XII, 218. 
 
 25 Letters from Pennsylvania, 75- See also Cooper, Guide in the Wilderness, 36. Maude, 
 
 Visit to Niagara, 24, 41. 
 
 26 See Carrier and Bort, in American Society of Agronomy, Journal, VIII (1916), p. 265. 
 
160 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 " The cane is a reed that grows to the height frequently of fifteen or sixteen feet, but 
 more generally about ten or twelve feet, and is in thickness from the size of a goose- 
 quill to that of two inches diameter; sometimes, yet seldom, it is larger. When it is 
 slender, it never grows higher than from four to seven feet; it shoots up in one summer, 
 but produces no leaves until the following year. It is an evergreen, and is, perhaps, the 
 most nourishing food for cattle upon earth. No other milk or butter has such flavour 
 and richness as that which is produced from cows which feed upon cane. 
 
 Hall, 28 writing in 1836, remarked: 
 
 “ The first settlers find them [the cane brakes] very valuable, as affording food for 
 their cattle during the winter; and even after the country has been many years settled, 
 the inhabitants drive their cattle to the cane in the autumn, and suffer them to remain 
 without any further attention until the ensuing spring. The cane, however, is genera y 
 destroyed in a few years, by the large number of cattle which are thus wintered upon it. 
 Cattle and horses eat it greedily, and will stray several miles in search of this favori e 
 food, which is said to be very nourishing.” 
 
 In the natural clearings, both the smaller openings and the more extensive 
 prairies, the natural vegetation furnished abundant and nutritious forage. Hall 
 described two kinds of prairie grass. The first was evidently a wild rye or one 
 of the andropogons, which, in the summer, he says, 
 
 “ soon assumes a golden hue, and waves in the wind like a ripe harvest. In the 
 
 low, wet prairies, where the substratum of clay lies near the surface, the centre of 
 main stem of this grass, which bears the seed, acquires great thickness, and shoots up 
 to the height of eight or nine feet, throwing out a few long coarse leaves or blades, 
 and the traveler often finds it higher than his head as he rides through it on horseback. 
 The plants, although numerous and standing close together, appear to grow singly and 
 unconnected, the whole force of the vegetative power expanding itself upward. But 
 in the rich undulating prairies, the grass is finer, with less of stalk, and a greater pro¬ 
 fusion of leaves. The roots spread and interweave so as to form a compact even sod, 
 and the blades expand into a close thick sward, which is seldom more than eighteen 
 inches high, and often less, until late in the season, when the seed-bearing stem 
 shoots up.” 29 
 
 The latter type of prairie grass included, among others, two indigenous 
 species not known east of the Alleghenies. They were known as buffalo grass 
 and buffalo clover. 
 
 BUFFALO GRASS AND BUFFALO CLOVER. 
 
 The latter, one of the native clovers, was described as resembling English 
 clover but larger. The buffalo grass was a coarse grass with a broad leaf. 
 It was a member of the same family as the famous buffalo grass which was 
 later so important in the development of the range and ranch cattle industries 
 on the Great Plains. Unlike the wild rye, it made nutritious hay as well as 
 good green forage. 30 
 
 The disappearance of the native grasses with the progress of clearing and 
 cultivation was a matter of frequent comment. The white clover and Kentucky 
 
 27 Imlay, Western Territory (3d ed., i 797 )» P- 2 9 - . . . _ . 
 
 28 Statistics of the West, 26. See also F. A. Michaux’s description in Thwaite s tarty 
 
 Western Travels, III, 94* 
 
 29 Statistics of the West, 74. . ... 
 
 30 American Museum, V (1788), p. 591 Woods, Illinois Country, 198; Atwater, Ohio, 92, 
 
 Imlay, Western Territory, 233. 
 
PIONEERING WEST OF THE ALLEGHENIES 
 
 161 
 
 blucgrass spread or volunteered ” in the new region with remarkable rapidity. 
 Birkbeck 31 commented on this fact with keen intelligence. He said: 
 
 “ The natural turf, in those spots where the shade is not too deep to allow a turf to 
 be formed, is composed chiefly of annual grasses, or of such as wither down to the root 
 in autumn: yet the perennial or evergreen species, which clothe the rich pastures of 
 more northern climates with perpetual verdure, thrive here to admiration when sown 
 even casually, and take entire possession of the soil, to the exclusion of the indigenous 
 grasses Where the little caravans have encamped as they crossed the prairies, and have 
 given their cattle hay made of these perennial grasses, there remains ever after a spot of 
 green turf for the instruction and encouragement of future improvers—a fact which, 
 I think, is conclusive against the prevailing notion that the natural grasses, as they are 
 called, are the best adapted to every soil and climate.” 
 
 ^ dhe cultivation of timothy and red clover had been begun in western New 
 York and Pennsylvania by some of the earliest settlers. In Indiana and Illi¬ 
 nois a few experiments had been made before 1840 with cultivated grasses in 
 order to insuie laige cattle raisers against failure of the native herbage. 32 
 
 ^Utters from Illinois, 38. See also Flint, Mississippi Valley, II, 128; Bradbury in 
 Thwaite s Early Western Travels, V, 294. 
 
 82 Description of the Genesee Country, in O’Callaghan, Documentary History of N. Y., 
 It, 1148, Maude, Visit to Niagara, 41, 72; Johnson, Letters from Pennsylvania, 74; 
 Peck, New Guide for Emigrants, 277; Wood, Illinois Country, 200: Ellsworth, 
 Valley of the Upper Wabash, 38. 
 
 12 
 
Chapter XII. —Pioneer Farming in the West. 
 
 Economic Conditions. 
 
 The outstanding characteristics of the farm economy of the early settle¬ 
 ments were ; (i) the extensive character of the enterprise, that is, the applica¬ 
 tion of small amounts of labor and capital on large amounts of land, and (2) 
 self-sufficiency, or production for consumption and not for sale. 
 
 An English traveler 1 acutely observed of the western settlements: 
 
 « Quantity of acres of produce is here thought to be of much greater importance than 
 quantity per acre. The great object is to have as many acres as possible cleared, ploughed, 
 set, sown, planted, and managed by as few hands as possible; there being little capital, 
 and therefore little or none to spare for hired labour. Instead of five acres well-managed, 
 they must have 20 acres badly managed. It is not how much corn can be raised on an 
 acre, but how much from one hand or man, the land being nothing in comparison with 
 
 labour.” 
 
 In these sentences Faux calls attention to one of the outstanding features of 
 pioneer farm economy, its extensiveness. Capital and labor, being scarce, were 
 spread thin over large tracts of land, which was cheap. We have already dis¬ 
 cussed the terms upon which land could be secured; 2 let us now examine the 
 pioneer’s capital equipment and his labor force. 
 
 SCARCITY OF CAPITAL GOODS. 
 
 Lack of capital and the lack of a market, cheap land and dear labor were 
 the determining economic conditions of pioneer farming in the Ohio Valley 
 as they had been in the back country of colonial times. The emigrant took 
 little equipment with him into the wilderness—an axe, a gun, a few household 
 goods, a cow, a yoke of oxen or a horse, a few sheep, and pigs. His farm 
 implements, the bull-plough, the wooden cart with solid wheels, the V-shaped, 
 wooden-toothed harrow, the sickle and later the cradle with which he har¬ 
 vested his wheat and small grain, his flail, fan and sieve used in threshing 
 and cleaning, his hoes and forks, all were constructed principally of wood 
 with iron parts secured from the local blacksmith. Farm buildings were not 
 numerous. Barns were few, more numerous were corn-cribs and shelters for 
 work horses. Hay and straw were stacked and foddered out of doors. Cattle, 
 pigs, and sheep had commonly no shelter but the woods. 3 
 
 1 Faux, in Thwaite’s Early Western Travels, XI, 177• 
 
 2 Above, pp. 151 et seq. . 
 
 3 Farm implements and their use are described in Howells, Recollections, 62, 154-150; 
 
 Cockrum, Pioneer History of Indiana, 320-321; Smith, Indiana, !, 351; Beers, Mont¬ 
 gomery County, Ohio, 293; Welker, in Western Reserve Hist. Soc. Tracts, IV, 
 No. 86, p. 31; Young, Chautauqua County , New York, 85. Flint, in Ihwaites 
 Early Western Travels, IX, 123, gives a detailed description of the cradle which he 
 found in use in Southern Ohio, 1818-1820. The peculiar carts and ploughs used by 
 the French colonists in Illinois are described by Reynolds, My Own Times, 22. On 
 farm buildings see Illinois State Hist. Soc. Transactions (1910), p. 162; Howells, 
 Recollections, 118; Wood, Illinois Country, 174; Maine Farmer, V (1837), p. 220. 
 
 162 
 
PIONEER FARMING IN THE WEST 
 
 163 
 
 After the middle of the century pioneering took on a more capitalistic form. 
 When the development of southern and eastern markets and of internal trans¬ 
 portation had made commercial agriculture possible on the prairies, the new 
 settlers were able to equip themselves by borrowing capital from older com¬ 
 munities. But while farming was still in the woodlands, markets were unde¬ 
 veloped and the pioneer farmer had to create, or accumulate, practically all of 
 his slender stock of capital by his own labor. 
 
 SCARCITY OF FARM LABOR. 
 
 The routine tasks of the farm were performed by members of the farm 
 family. In the newest settlements the families were mostly “ young,” that is, 
 the children were nearly all small. In such families the farmer did most of 
 the work himself with the help of one or two big boys. His wife, and perhaps 
 an older daughter, was called on for help in planting and hoeing corn and to 
 rake grain and hay at harvest time. “ The rule was, that whoever had the 
 strength to work, took hold and helped. If the family was mostly girls, they 
 regularly helped their father in all the lighter farm work.” 4 In addition to 
 occasional field work, the farm women regularly cared for the vegetable garden 
 and the poultry, and carried on besides a great variety of industrial pur¬ 
 suits indoors, spinning, knitting, weaving, and making clothing both for them¬ 
 selves and for the men-folks. As a rule, the women did the milking and made 
 the butter. 
 
 “ Except in a Yankee family no man or boy could be induced to milk the cows, it 
 being regarded as woman’s work. But wherever a New Englander was found, he and 
 the boys did the ‘pailing’ of the cows.” 5 * 7 
 
 Slavery had been prohibited in the Northwest Territory by the ordinance of 
 l 7 & 7 > nevertheless, efforts were made to evade its provisions and negroes were 
 actually held in servitude, under the guise of indentured servants, in southern 
 Illinois and Indiana until about 1820. This was not surprising, inasmuch as 
 the early settlements in these States were made by slaveholders from Virginia 
 and Kentucky. The number of such quasi-slaves was never very large; in 
 Indiana in 1810 they were less than 250, out of a total population of 24,500, 
 and in Illinois in 1818 they numbered about 800 in a total of 40,000.® 
 
 Free white labor for hire was almost entirely lacking in the early decades 
 of the century. The children of poor families were sometimes “ bound out ” 
 or apprenticed at farm work, and occasionally a farmer might employ one of 
 the poorer emigrants while the latter was earning money to buy land. These 
 were few, and with the prevailing high rate of wages and cheapness of land 
 they did not long remain hired hands. An English traveler in Illinois in 1818 
 wrote: 
 
 “A man used to work will earn in one day what will suffice for the simple wants of 
 a Backwoodsman a whole week. If he be sober and industrious, in two years he can 
 enter a quarter section of land, buy a horse, a plough, and tools. The lowest price for 
 labour now is 13$ per month with board and lodging.” 
 
 * Howells, Recollections, 156. 
 
 5 Welker, in Western Reserve Hist. Soc. Tracts, IV, No. 86, p. qo. 
 
 ® Esarev, Indiana, I, 197, 203; Buck, Illinois in 1818, pp. 138, 318^ 
 
 7 Ogg, Fordham’s Personal Narrative, 210. 
 
164 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The English farmers, Birkbeck, Flower, and others, who came to Illinois 
 with plenty of capital, expecting to carry on large-scale farming, found their 
 plans upset by the lack of a class of farm laborers. At first they attempted to 
 solve the difficulty by the importation of English laborers, but the relief was 
 only temporary, for the new arrivals soon were affected with the desire to be 
 landowners. Finally the English were “ forced to the conclusion that Illinois 
 was a good location only for the small farmer who was willing to work his land 
 without hired labor.” 8 
 
 GROUP COOPERATION. 
 
 Habits of group cooperation were brought by the pioneers from their east¬ 
 ern homes across the mountains. The clearing of land and building of log 
 houses, reaping, the handling of flax, corn-huskings, the picking of cotton, 
 sewing, and quilting were all accomplished by the united labor force of a 
 number of neighboring families and were made occasions for recreation and 
 social intercourse. Bradbury 9 wrote: 
 
 “ j t i s necessary to remark, that in the early part of the settlement of a country like 
 this, a great number of things occur necessary to be done, which require the united 
 strength of numbers to effect. In those parts, money cannot purchase for the new 
 settler the required aid; but that kind and generous feeling which men have for each 
 other, who are not rendered callous by the possession of wealth, or the dread of poverty, 
 comes to his relief: his neighbours, even unsolicited, appoint a day when as a frolic, 
 they shall, for instance, build him a house. On the morning of the appointed day they 
 assemble, and divide themselves into parties, to each of which is assigned its respective 
 duty; one party cuts down the trees, another lops and cuts them to proper lengths, a 
 third’is furnished with horses and oxen, and drags them to the spot designed for the 
 scite of the house: another party is employed in making shingles to cover the roof, 
 and at night all the materials are ready upon the spot; and on the night of the next 
 day, he and his family sleep in their new habitation. No remuneration is expected, nor 
 would it be received. It is considered the performance of a duty, and only lays him under 
 the obligation to discharge the debt by doing the same to subsequent settlers. But this 
 combination of labour in numbers, for the benefit of one individual, is not confined to 
 the new comer only, it occurs frequently in the course of a year amongst the old 
 settlers, with whom it is a continued bond of amity and social intercourse, and in no 
 part of the world is good neighbourship found in greater perfection than in the western 
 territory, or in America generally.” 
 
 SELF-SUFFICIENCY.—THE LACK OF MARKETS. 
 
 A second economic characteristic of western pioneer farming was its self- 
 sufficiency, that is, crops and livestock were produced chiefly for farm con¬ 
 sumption rather than for sale. Trade in farm products, as we shall see, 10 was 
 not entirely absent in the early western settlements. Wheat and cattle, potash 
 and lumber were exported from the communities in western New York 
 almost immediately after their settlement. The pioneers in the Ohio Valley 
 had begun to ship flour, pork, whisky and tobacco to the New Orleans market 
 before 1800, and soon after that date the first cattle were driven across the 
 
 8 See Buck, Illinois in 1818, p. 136, and sources quoted there. 
 
 0 In Thwaites, Early Western Travels, V, 282; see also Howells, Recollections, 145 ? 
 
 Woods, Illinois Country, 203, 213. 
 
 10 See p. 169. 
 
PIONEER FARMING IN THE WEST 
 
 165 
 
 mountains to eastern markets. But throughout the period of woodland farm¬ 
 ing the organization of the farm enterprise was determined by the needs of 
 the farm family and not by market conditions. Crops were selected and ani¬ 
 mals were raised for the production of food for the farm needs. Occasionally a 
 surplus was marketable and with the proceeds a small amount of store goods 
 could be bought. Otherwise, the farm produced all that the farm consumed. 
 Self-sufficiency was a uniform characteristic of all pioneer settlements west 
 of the Alleghenies from western New York to Missouri. 
 
 The following description of pioneer farm life in Illinois would apply 
 equally well to all the early western settlements: 11 
 
 The farmer raised his own provisions; tea and coffee were scarcely used, except 
 on some grand occasions. The farmer’s sheep furnished wool for his winter clothing: 
 he raised cotton and flax for his summer clothing. His wife and daughters spun, wove, 
 and made it into garments. A little copperas and indigo, with the bark of trees, fur¬ 
 nished dye stuffs for coloring. The fur of the raccoon, made him a hat or a cap. The 
 skins of deer or of his cattle, tanned at a neighboring tan-yard, or dressed by himself, 
 made him shoes or moccasins. Boots were rarely seen, even in the towns. And a log 
 cabin, made entirely of wood, without glass, nails, hinges, or locks, furnished the resi¬ 
 dence of many a contented and happy family. The people were quick and ingenious to 
 supply by invention, and with their own hands, the lack of mechanics and artificers. 
 Each farmer, as a general thing, built his own house, made his own ploughs and 
 harness, bedsteads, chairs, stools, cupboards, and tables. The carts and wagons for 
 hauling, were generally made without iron, without tires, or boxes, and were run with¬ 
 out tar, and might be heard creaking as they lumbered along the roads, for the distance 
 of a mile or more.” 
 
 PROGRESS FROM PIONEERING TO SETTLED FARMING. 
 
 To describe the farming operations of any region at a given date is a 
 formidable task. Differences in soil and in the intelligence, energy, and 
 equipment of neighboring farmers make generalization difficult. But at a 
 time when rapid changes are in progress, as from self-sufficient to commercial 
 agriculture, it becomes impossible to select features of farm practice which 
 can be considered typical or normal for the whole area. The Ohio Valley was 
 in the midst of such a transition in the first half of the nineteenth century. 
 At the front of the wave of settlement, as it advanced successively over west¬ 
 ern New York and Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, there were 
 typical frontier conditions, scattered population, rough life, lack of markets, 
 and primitive agriculture. As the wave rolled on conditions behind it changed 
 rapidly. Population became denser, trails changed to roads, log cabins gave 
 way to comfortable houses, clearings became farms, ragged villages grew into 
 towns. Distant markets became accessible by improved transportation facili¬ 
 ties, chiefly canals in this period, and home markets developed in the growing 
 river towns. With an outlet for their produce thus provided, farmers were 
 stimulated to increase production by more careful tillage and by the conserva¬ 
 tion of manures. They built better barns and bought improved breeds of 
 cattle, sheep, and swine. And so in a comparatively short time the region took 
 
 11 Ford, Illinois, 41. See also Young, Chautauqua County, New York, 89; Howells, 
 Recollections, 123-125; Gottfried Duden’s Report in Mo. Hist. Review, XII (1917— 
 1918), pp. 166, 175; Welker, in Western Reserve Hist. Soc. Tracts, IV, No. 86, pp. 
 43-48; Lippincott, Pioneer Industry, in Journal of Political Economy, XVIII (1910), 
 274, 280. 
 
166 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 on the prosperous appearance of the long-settled communities of the Eastern 
 States. Just when the backwoods life disappeared in any particular State can 
 be determined only by exhaustive research in local history. It seems safe to 
 say, however, that by 1830 frontier conditions were no longer typical of Ohio. 
 A corresponding date for Indiana, Illinois, and southern Michigan would be, 
 
 perhaps, 1850. 
 
 The changing character of the inhabitants of the Middle West illustrates 
 the progress from pioneering to settled farming. The Scotch traveler, James 
 
 Flint, 12 wrote: 
 
 “ All who have paid attention to the progress of new settlements, agree in stating, 
 that the first possession of the woods in America, was taken by a class of hunters, 
 commonly called backwoodsmen. These, in some instances, purchased the soil from 
 the government, and in others, placed themselves on the public lands without per¬ 
 mission. The improvements of a backwoodsman are usually confined to building 
 
 a rude log cabin, clearing and fencing a small piece of ground for raising Indian corn. 
 A horse, a cow, a few hogs, and some poultry, comprise his live-stock; and his farther 
 operations are performed with his rifle. The formation of a settlement in his neighbour¬ 
 hood is hurtful to the success of his favourite pursuit, and is the signal for his removing 
 into more remote parts of the wilderness. In the case of his owning the land on which he 
 has settled, he is contented to sell it at a low price, and his establishment, though trifling, 
 adds much to the comfort of his successor. The next class of settlers differ from th e 
 former in having considerably less dependence on the killing of game, in remaining in 
 the midst of a growing population, and in devoting themselves more to agriculture. A 
 man of this class proceeds on a small capital; he either enlarges the clearings begun in 
 the woods by his backwoodsmen [sic] predecessor, or establishes himself on a new 
 
 site. He does not clear away the forest by dint of labour, but girdles the trees. 
 
 By the second summer after this operation is performed, the foliage is completely de¬ 
 stroyed, and his crops are not injured by the shade. He plants an orchard, which thrives 
 
 and bears abundantly under every sort of neglect. This second rate class of 
 
 farmers are to be seen in the markets of towns, retailing vegetables, fruits, poultry, and 
 
 dairy produce.The settler of the grade under consideration, is only able to bring 
 
 a small portion of his land into cultivation, his success, therefore, does not so much 
 depend on the quantity of produce which he raises, as on the gradual increase in the 
 value of his property. When the neighbourhood becomes more populous, he in general 
 has it in his power to sell his property at a high price, and to remove to a new settlement, 
 where he can purchase a more extensive tract of land, or commence farming on a larger 
 scale than formerly. The next occupier is a capitalist, who immediately builds a larger 
 barn than the former, and then a brick or a frame house. He either pulls down the 
 dwelling of his predecessor, or converts it into a stable. He erects better fences, and 
 enlarges the quantity of cultivated land; sows down pasture fields, introduces an im¬ 
 proved stock of horses, cattle, sheep, and these probably of the Merino breed. He fattens 
 cattle for the market, and perhaps erects a flour-mill, or a saw-mill, or a distillery. 
 Farmers of this description are frequently partners in the banks; members of the 
 State assembly, or of Congress, or Justices of the Peace.” 
 
 It is Flint’s “ second-rate class of farmers ” which we have chiefly in mind 
 in the following description of farming operations. 
 
 LIVESTOCK AND ITS MANAGEMENT. 
 
 Every settler had a few cattle, enough to furnish milk and butter for his 
 family and a yoke or two of steers for the farm work. These with a few sheep 
 
 12 In Thwaites, Early Western Travels, IX, 232-235; cf. Ogg, Fordham’s Personal Nar¬ 
 rative, 125; Fearon, Sketches of America, 224; Flower, English Settlement, 67-72. 
 
PIONEER FARMING IN THE WEST 
 
 167 
 
 of mongrel breeds, a large herd of wild swine, and fowls, geese, and ducks 
 constituted his livestock. The methods of raising and caring for all kinds of 
 farm animals seem at this date inexcusably neglectful, but considering the 
 scarcity of labor and capital and the limited marketing opportunities, they were 
 probably at that time sound farm management. Unsheltered the year round, 
 the cattle and swine ran at large in the woods, each owner recognizing his 
 animals by their ear-marks. Winter fodder was scarce. But little hay was 
 cut either of the natural or imported grasses. Careful farmers had bundles of 
 the dried blades of Indian corn and pumpkins which they fed in the winter, 
 but in many cases the animals had to shift for themselves summer and winter. 
 All calves were preserved without regard to quality. Cows returned to their 
 calves mornings and evenings when they were partly milked, and the calves 
 had the remainder of the milk. Under such conditions the deterioration of 
 the stock was inevitable. Even westerners admitted that their neat cattle were 
 usually inferior in size to those of the older States and that cows did not 
 produce the same amount of milk nor of as rich a quality. 13 When slaughtered 
 they would weigh from 700 to 900 pounds and those which at 4 or 5 years 
 old would weigh 1,000 pounds were accounted exceptional. 14 
 
 F. A. Michaux 15 wrote from Kentucky in 1802: 
 
 “Of all domestic animals, hogs are the most numerous; they are kept by all the 
 inhabitants, several of them feed a hundred and fifty or two hundred. These animals 
 never leave the woods, where they always find a sufficiency of food, especially in autumn 
 and winter. They grow extremely wild, and generally go in herds. Whenever they are 
 surprised, or attacked by a dog or any other animal, they either make their escape, or 
 flock together in the form of a circle to defend themselves. They are of a bulky shape, 
 middling size and straight eared. Every inhabitant recognizes those that belong to him 
 by the particular manner in which their ears are cut. They -stray sometimes in the 
 forests, and do not make their appearance again for several months; they accustom 
 them, notwithstanding, to return every now and then to the plantation, by throwing them 
 Indian corn once or twice a week.” 
 
 In early Illinois it was not uncommon for farmers to have herds of from 
 60 to 100 swine running in the woods. 16 Such herds, however, were worth 
 but little for the production of pork. They were allowed to run wild until 2 
 or 3 years old and then penned up for a few weeks’ fattening before slaughter¬ 
 ing. In some cases so wild were the animals that when butchering time came 
 they were hunted in the forests and shot with the rifle. 17 Many of them when 
 mature did not weigh over 100 pounds. A good average would probably 
 have been 175 to 200 pounds. A hog of 200 pounds was considered “a fine 
 chunk of a fellow ” and few exceeded that weight. 18 As an eastern observer 
 remarked: “ It is true Pork in this country costs nothing and the way it is 
 raised it is good for nothing.” 19 He referred to the western hogs as “ the 
 meanest that I have ever seen. When I first came here I tho’t by the looks of 
 
 13 Peck, New Guide for Emigrants, 282. 
 
 14 Woods, Illinois Country, 178, 181; see also Flint in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, 
 
 IX, 163, 234, 310; Duden’s Report in Mo. Hist. Review, XII (1917-18), p. 170; 
 Flagg in Illinois State Hist. Soc. Transactions (1910), p. 158; Conner, Indiana 
 Agriculture, 15; Bradbury, in Thwaites Early Western Travels, V, 284. 
 
 15 In Thwaites, Early Western Travels, III, 246. 
 
 16 Woods, Illinois Country (1819), p. 184. 
 
 17 Beers, Montgomery County, Ohio, 294. 
 
 13 Woods, Illinois Country, 184; Howell’s Recollections, 64; Smith, Indiana, I, 356. 
 
 19 Flagg, in Illinois State Hist. Soc. Transactions (1910), p. 148. 
 
168 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 the hogs that I had got to the place where roasted pigs run about the lots for 
 they are crumped up and are Brown sandy colour. 
 
 CROPS AND TILLAGE. 
 
 A pioneer family required to begin with only 4 or 5 acres of cleared land. 
 Half an acre was usually devoted to garden vegetables, another half-acre to 
 wheat, and the remainder was the corn patch. Corn was usually the first crop 
 on newly cleared land in the New West and, as on the earlier frontiers, was 
 the chief support of the settlers. Cornmeal and hominy was practically the 
 only breadstuff which they consumed, although wheat was often raised as a 
 cash crop. The more progressive farmers carefully picked off the tops and 
 blades of the maize from the stalks in the field and preserved them for winter 
 fodder. This method was not only expensive of labor but caused considerable 
 loss in the weight of the ears. A new method introduced into Ohio by the 
 emigrants from the Potomac Valley in Virginia was to cut and stack the corn 
 and feed it to the stock in the field. In localities where stock were fattened 
 for “ droving ” to eastern markets the unhusked ears were fed with the stalks. 20 
 
 Corn was planted by hand, covered with the hoe, and cultivated with the 
 shovel plough. (See fig. 59, p. 303.) The description given by Woods 21 in 
 1819 shows but little, if any, change from colonial methods. 
 
 “The time of planting is from April to the middle of June; the middle of May is 
 considered the most proper season. It is planted in rows, of about four feet in each 
 direction; and after it is up they plough between the rows, first one way, and in a week 
 or two in the other direction; a third ploughing is sometimes given to it. An extremely 
 light plough, drawn by one horse, is used. Between the corn they hoe up the weeds ieft 
 near the corners that escape the plough; so that the land is made very clean. Generally 
 two or three plants are left at each angle. Pompions are often planted at the angles 
 with the corn, but only in every fifth or sixth row, and at some distance apart in the 
 rows. They also plant a small kind of French-bean with part of their corn, the stalks 
 serving instead of sticks for the beans to run on.” 
 
 It is doubtful whether many of the early settlers spent much time hoeing 
 their corn. Flagg 22 wrote from Edwardsville, Illinois, 1818: 
 
 “ The method of Raising Corn here is to plough the ground once then furrow it 
 both ways and plant the Corn 4 feet each way and plough between it 3 or 4 times in the 
 Summer but never hoe it at all.” 
 
 In another place 23 he remarked: 
 
 “ Corn grows from 10 to 15 feet high one Ear on a stalk. The ears grow very high. 
 I have seen ears so high that I could not hang my hat upon them when standing upon 
 
 the ground. After Corn is planted there is no more done to it except to plow 
 
 among it and cut up the Weeds. They hill it up not at all. 2 men plant 10 acres a day. 
 Corn is always sold in the ear in th[i]s state.” 
 
 On the prairies, after the sod had been turned and while the tough grasses 
 were decaying, the so-called sod-corn was planted in the furrows. In this 
 way a small crop was secured with no expense for cultivation. 24 
 
 20 Howells, Recollections, 148. Diary of a Naturalist, in American Journal of Science, 
 
 XXV (1834), p.235. 
 
 21 Illinois Country, 210. 
 
 22 In Illinois State Hist. Soc. Transactions (1910), p. 162. 
 
 23 Flagg, in Illinois State Hist. Soc. Transactions (1910), p. 147. 
 
 24 Birkbeck, Letters from Illinois, 43; Lippincott, in Journal of Political Economy, 
 
 XVIII, 276. 
 
PIONEER FARMING IN THE WEST 
 
 169 
 
 CORN MARKETED IN THE FORMS OF WHISKY AND PORK. 
 
 Corn in its original state was not marketable, being too low grade a commod¬ 
 ity to stand high transportation costs, but it could be used to fatten swine 
 which transported themselves to market. Another indirect way of marketing 
 corn and rye and barley as well, was by converting it into whisky. In west¬ 
 ern Pennsylvania the marketing of grain in the form of whisky was considered 
 so important by the pioneer farmers that when, in 1794, an excise tax was 
 imposed on distilled liquors they arose in insurrection. 25 In 1802 the obnox- 
 ious taxes were repealed and thereafter small distilleries could be found scat- 
 tered throughout the western country. Not all the product was sent down the 
 Mississippi; a great quantity was consumed by the pioneers themselves. 
 
 “No difference if grain was scarce or dear, or times hard, or the people poor, they 
 would make and drink whiskey. And the number of little distilleries was wonderfuf 
 Within two miles of where we lived there were three of them. They were small 
 concerns, but they produced enough. They were commonly fitted up with a twenty-five 
 or orty-gallon still and half a dozen tubs. They might, perhaps, have produced a 
 barrel a day, if pushed to their capacity. The distillers would exchange a gallon of 
 whiskey for a bushel of corn or rye, and when the whiskey-jug was empty, a boy would 
 be sent on a bag of grain, perched on an old horse, to the still-house to makefile ex¬ 
 change and renew the supply. People were not particular about the age of their liquor 
 and it was often drank on the day it was made. The custom was for every man to 
 iV . UI occasions.that offered; and the women would take it sweetened and 
 reduced to toddy. At raisings, huskings, log-rollings, and all manner of social gather- 
 
 t wUV'’ 33 T d as | an f ’ n "«V ator and a si 8 n of hospitality; and the manner of taking 
 t was from the neck of the jug, each man swallowing as much as he wanted.” 29 
 
 WHEAT, A CASH CROP. • 
 
 Wheat, in contrast to corn, was usually raised as a cash crop F A Mich- 
 aux 27 wrote: - 
 
 Les Americains de 1’ mterieur cultivent le bled, plutot par speculation pour en envoyer 
 a arme dans les ports de mer, que pour leur consommation particuliere: car les neuf 
 Qixiemes d entr eux ne font usuage que du pain de mais; . . . 
 
 In some parts of the Allegheny plateau, as for example in the Genesee 
 country wheat and other small grains were scratched in with a harrow on 
 newly-cleared land, 28 but on the bottom lands of Ohio and Kentucky wheat 
 was not sown until the land had been under other crops for a year or two. 
 A common practice farther west was to sow wheat among the standing corn in 
 September and cover it by running a few furrows with the plough between the 
 rows of corn. The dry cornstalks were then cut down in the spring and left 
 
 on the ground. 29 Better wheat crops were obtained when oats intervened 
 between the corn and wheat. 30 
 
 25 Pennsylvania Archives, 2d series, IV (1700-1706) 0. 6 
 
 26 Howells, Recollections, 125. 
 
 27 V Travel^III ^ THiS paSSage is * ncorrectl y translated in Thwaites, Early Western 
 
 28 ^Nia* 1 * the Genesee Tract > in Imlay, Western Territory, 477; Maude, Visit to 
 
 29 Peck, New Guide for Emigrants, p. 275; Flagg, in Illinois State Hist. Soc. Trans- 
 
 actions (1910), p. 162. 
 
 30 Faux, in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, XI, 187. 
 
170 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 CROP YIELDS. 
 
 Making due allowance for the enthusiastic exaggeration typical of settlers 
 in a new community, it was probably true that they secured larger crops of 
 corn and wheat from their new farms than they could have raised with similar 
 methods on land east of the mountains. The data upon which the earliest 
 writers based their estimates must have been fragmentary; nevertheless they 
 agree fairly well with those of the next generation. Filson (1788) thought 
 the usual crop of corn in Kentucky “ on the higher lands ” would be 50 to 60 
 bushels to the acre and noted exceptional crops of 100 bushels. Wheat “ upon 
 a moderate computation ” produced 30 bushels. 01 F. A. Michaux stated 
 in 1802 that 40 or 50 bushels of corn would be considered a common crop 
 and in abundant years from 60 to 75 bushels might be harvested. The usual 
 crops of wheat he estimated at from 25 to 30 bushels. In western New York, 
 near Oneida Lake, according to Maude 33 (1800), wheat yielded 25 bushels to 
 the acre when sown on partially cleared land and harrowed in without plowing. 
 On land free from stumps and unshaded, 30 or 35 bushels might be expected. 
 The corn crops on new land were then estimated at from 3° to 45 bushels, 
 with exceptional crops running as high as 60 bushels. In the years 1815 to 
 1840 we have a number of estimates covering the settlements northwest of 
 the Ohio River. 35 In general they agree that 50 bushels of corn and from 20 
 to 25 bushels of wheat were regarded as good average crops. These figures 
 should not of course be interpreted to mean that in any year the crops on all 
 farms would average 50 bushels of corn. They undoubtedly would have 
 averaged much less because of the necessary inclusion of many defective crops. 
 They indicate merely the yields which, with the usual cultivation on average 
 soil, a settler might expect to receive. 
 
 31 In Imlay Western Territory, 318. Practically the same estimates are given in Ameri¬ 
 
 can Museum, V (1788), p* 58, and by Cutler, in Ohio Arch, and Hist. Soc. Publica • 
 
 tions, III, 90. 
 
 32 In Thwaites, Early Western Travels, III, 238. 
 
 33 Visit to Niagara, 32, 34,40, 72. _ . TT ^ A >r n 1 n 
 
 34 J/cLfidevkcw'irp Papers, in Buffalo Hist. Soc. Publications, II, 56 > O Callaghan, Docu 
 
 mentary History of New York, II, 1148. _ ,, , „ . 
 
 35 Evans, in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, VIII, 194 5 Ogg, Fordhams Personal 
 
 Narrative, 118; Hall, Statistics of the West, 128, 130; Atwater, Ohio, 91; A. Y. 
 Farmer, IX (1836), 99; Peck, New Guide for Emigrants, 19 7 > 2 75 - 
 
Chapter XIII. —The Development of Internal 
 Trade and the Beginnings of Commercial 
 Agriculture in the West. 
 
 The development of the internal trade of the West in the early decades of 
 the nineteenth century was a fact of great significance in American economic 
 and political history. 1 The shipment of foodstuffs from the settlements in the 
 Ohio Valley to the sugar and cotton plantations of the South, by enabling the 
 latter to concentrate their attention on a single cash crop, favored the rapid 
 extension of slavery and of the plantation system in that region. The western¬ 
 ers, on the other hand, with the proceeds of the sales of pork, flour, whisky, 
 and tobacco were enabled to supply themselves with manufactured goods of 
 both foreign and domestic make from the commercial centers east of the Alle¬ 
 ghenies. The rise of manufactures in the East was in its turn promoted by 
 the growth of markets in the South and in the West. The commerce across 
 the mountains consisted at first almost wholly in the shipment of manufactured 
 goods from east to west. The high cost of overland transportation prohibited 
 the carriage of bulky farm products for long distances. The westerners, soon 
 after 1800, began to drive cattle and swine across the mountains. After the 
 completion of the Erie Canal had lowered transportation rates, western grain 
 and provisions entered the markets of the Atlantic seaboard, competing disas¬ 
 trously with the products of eastern farms. The effects of western competition 
 on eastern agriculture will be considered in a later chapter; for the present 
 we shall keep the point of view of the westerners, outlining the development 
 of their markets and considering the resulting changes in western farming. 
 
 PRODUCTS MARKETED FROM WESTERN NEW YORK. 
 
 # Even in the earliest settlements markets were not entirely lacking. The 
 pioneers of western New York, by the aid of considerable land transportation, 
 were able to utilize the water routes of Lake Ontario to carry beef, pork, salt, 
 flour, potash, and whisky to Quebec. They shipped wheat and flour by sleighs 
 in winter to Schenectady for later reshipment to New York and the West 
 Indies via the Mohawk and Hudson Rivers. Grain, whisky and lumber were 
 floated down the Susquehanna to Baltimore. Cattle were driven to Philadel¬ 
 phia and Baltimore. 2 In Chautauqua County ashes were for many years an 
 important article of trade and almost the only article which readily commanded 
 cash. 
 
 “ Many a settler who had a large surplus of grain which he was unwilling to sell at 
 the ruinously low prices offered, cut and burned timber for the ashes from which to get 
 
 1 See Callender, Economic History of United States, ch. VII. 
 
 2 Account of Genesee Tract, in Imlay, Western Territory, 460; Description of the Genesee 
 
 Country in O Callaghan, Documentary History of New York, II, 1149, 1161, 1162, 
 1163, Munro, Genesee Country, Ibid., II, 1174 ? 1184; Maude, Visit to Niagara, 29, 57. 
 
172 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 money to pay taxes and for other necessary uses. These ashes, and those from burned 
 log heaps, were sometimes drawn several miles over rough roads, and exchanged for 
 goods, or at a reduced price for cash, if cash must be had.” 3 
 
 THE SOUTHERN MARKET FOR WESTERN FARM PRODUCTS. 
 
 A natural outlet for the products of the region west of the Alleghenies was 
 provided by the Ohio River, and its tributaries, and the Mississippi, and as 
 early as 1746 flour and other commodities had been sent from the French settle¬ 
 ments on the Wabash and Illinois Rivers to New Orleans. 4 Exports of wheat 
 from western Pennsylvania via the Mississippi to New Orleans and the West 
 Indies had begun during the Revolution. By 1800 Pittsburg had become a 
 center of a thriving trade, exporting corn, flour, and salt provisions to the 
 south. Kentucky sent flour and smoked and salt pork down the river, but at 
 this time the settlements north of the Ohio contributed very little. 5 
 
 Table 24. —Cargoes passing the falls of the Ohio at Louisville, 1810-1811. 11 
 
 [Source: U. S. Bureau of Statistics (Treasury Dept.), Report on Internal Commerce of United 
 
 States (1887), p. 187.] 
 
 Articles. 
 
 
 Quantity. 
 
 Articles. 
 
 
 Quantity. 
 
 Flour . 
 
 
 206,855 
 
 Butter . 
 
 
 41,151 
 
 Bacon . 
 
 
 1,008,026 
 
 Lard . 
 
 
 775,692 
 
 Whisky . 
 
 
 15,797 
 
 Onions . 
 
 
 364 
 
 Cider . 
 
 
 4,193 
 
 Potatoes . 
 
 
 3,019 
 
 Pork .. 
 
 
 22,602 
 
 Hemp . 
 
 
 1 , 050,492 
 
 Apples . 
 
 
 4,200 
 
 Dried fruit . 
 
 
 442 
 
 Oats . 
 
 
 6,700 
 
 Yarn and cordage... 
 
 
 189,020 
 
 Corn . 
 
 
 79,795 
 
 Fowls . 
 
 
 2 012,224 
 
 Merchandise . 
 
 
 $592640 
 
 Shoe thread . 
 
 
 4,320 
 
 Cheese . 
 
 
 8,569 
 
 Country linen. 
 
 
 13,066 
 
 Beans . 
 
 
 1,010 
 
 Horses . 
 
 
 489 
 
 Lumber . 
 
 ....ft. 
 
 2,325,210 
 
 Beer . 
 
 459 
 
 Live hogs . 
 
 Cider, royal . 
 
 
 L 5 I 3 
 
 2,250 
 
 Tobacco . 
 
 
 3,891 
 
 a “ These statistics, which were taken by the pilots engaged in piloting the vessels over the Oh 10 
 Falls, for three-fifths of the vessels passing that point of danger, and estimated for the remainder, 
 which went over the falls during extreme high-water without a pilot, are in some respects more com¬ 
 plete than many made afterwards when statistics of the river trade were much more carefully collected, 
 for the later figures kept no record of the number of fowls, horses, etc., sent down the river. 
 
 “ The list of articles now sent to market gives some idea of the advance and development that has 
 taken place on the lower Mississippi with the advent of American rule.” 
 
 Until 1803 New Orleans was in the hands of foreign nations, first the Span¬ 
 ish and then the French, but the purchase of Louisiana in that year, by trans¬ 
 ferring the port to American possession, put an end to vexatious commercial 
 restrictions and encouraged the trade of the upper Mississippi and Ohio 
 Valleys. A rather careful estimate of the volume and character of the export 
 trade of the Ohio Valley in the year 1810-1811 is given in table 24. 
 
 The first steamboat appeared on the Mississippi in 1811 and by 1820 steam 
 navigation had achieved great results in reducing the time of the voyage up 
 and down the river. But steamboat rates were high, and consequently the 
 
 3 Young, Chautauqua County, New York, 94. 
 
 4 Benton, in J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and Pol. Science, XXI, Nos. 1-2, p. 24. 
 
 5 F. A. Michaux, in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, III, 145, 158, 191, 240, 245, 247; 
 
 Harris, Journal, 146. 
 
DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNAL TRADE 
 
 173 
 
 flatboats, barges, keelboats, 
 the western waters and to 
 exported . 6 
 
 and a multitude of other craft continued to ply 
 cariy a large proportion of the farm products 
 
 A f tc r ic is there was a noticeable increase in the demand of the southern 
 market for the foodstuffs of the upper Mississippi and Ohio Valleys Up to 
 this time the sugar plantations of Louisiana and the West Indies had furnished 
 the only outlet for western products. But after the end of the War of 1812 a 
 
 "nik nnWH' fr0n } the > C0tt0n planters ’ who > abandoning the exhausted 
 ; , 5 f 1 , e f tantic seaboard, were rapidly opening up new lands with slave 
 labor west of the mountains . 6 7 8 
 
 F ff, 2 t , ll 1 ' C€ nllll ! on dollars’ worth of goods was estimated to have passed the 
 Falls of the Ohio on the way to market, representing much of the surplus of the Ohio 
 
 Table 25 .—Receipts of produce at New Orleans, 1822-1839 * 
 
 [Source: U. S. Bureau of Internal Co™ «, 
 
 Average 
 
 1822-1824. 
 
 Average 
 
 1825-1829. 
 
 Average 
 
 1830-1834. 
 
 Average 
 
 1 83 S-i 839 . 
 
 Bacon and hams.. 
 Pork . 
 
 
 Lard . 
 
 
 Beef, dried . 
 
 
 Beef, pickled . 
 
 Hides . 
 
 
 Butter . 
 
 
 Flour . 
 
 
 Corn . 
 
 
 Whisky . 
 
 Tobacco . 
 
 Potatoes . 
 
 Hay . 
 
 
 853 453 
 3 , 062,000 
 1,217,000 
 2,580,000 
 (12,900) 
 495,467 
 12,300 
 
 308.900 
 
 111.900 
 94,638 
 10,200 
 24,700 
 
 2,000 
 
 400 
 
 9 , 871,054 
 7,828,000 
 3,895 OOO 
 
 7 , 763,914 
 (42,700) 
 1,026,420 
 14 900 
 
 428.400 
 
 142,700 
 
 168.400 
 27,900 
 26,200 
 
 3,600 
 
 650 
 
 II,690,66l 
 
 18,937,000 
 
 10,085,000 
 
 77,200 
 
 1,541,480 
 
 26,900 
 
 416,900 
 
 288,100 
 
 403,300 
 
 34,ioo 
 
 29,000 
 
 7,800 
 
 1,000 
 
 16,894,356 
 
 3 L 732 ,ooo 
 
 12,252,000 
 
 73,400 
 
 c 1,901,560 
 21,200 
 583,336 
 
 355 , 7 oo 
 
 888,200 
 
 43,ooo 
 
 37 . 6 00 
 16,900 
 
 13.600 
 
 ror T k, or e LOCO ftVh f bM? W tafon ,U no?k' n ir ’Si' 1 ™ Yf d: lbbd - (caslTor tierce) of bacon, 
 Gutter or lard = s6 lbs.; i bbl butter’or lard — 1 bacon — 50° lbs.; 1 keg or 
 
 1 bbl cornmeal = 4 bus. shelled corn;T5,1 cS? on ^ ° r lard =i.«o lbs.; 
 
 shelled = 100 lbs.; 1 bushel corn, shelled = 56 lbs ear-1.7 bus. shelled corn; 1 sack corn, 
 
 * Years beginning September 1. 
 
 reporfn/§wi“ g ^ that a mistake was made in 
 
 thesis are probably nearer the true quantities. ° P0Unds - The figures given in P a ™- 
 
 been T made P Squiva'lrat'toTbarref. *° ^ combines barrels and In this average the tierce has 
 
 'alley. Of this, pork amounted to $ 1 , 000,000 in value; flour, to $ 900000 - tobacco to 
 $ > 000 > and whisky, to $ 500 , 000 . The inventory of products reveals the Mississippi 
 
 agriculture. ™ St “ SOciety> producin S th * raw materials of a simple and primitive 
 
 From statistics of receipts of produce at New Orleans, table 25 has been 
 compiled, showing the increase in the shipments of the more important western 
 
 6 See Gephart, Transportation in the Middle West, 71, 96. 
 
 See Phillips, American Negro Slavery, ch. X. 
 
 8 Turner, in Am. Hist. Review, XI (1905-06), 324. 
 
174 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 products down the river. Although these figures include some shipments from 
 the lower Mississippi Valley, all the tobacco and most of the provisions came 
 
 through the Ohio. 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF MARKETING. 
 
 A few well-to-do farmers made up their cargoes and sent them directly to 
 New Orleans on their own responsibility, but most of the business was in the 
 hands of the merchants. Fearon wrote (1817) : 
 
 “There is a class of men throughout the western country called ‘ merchants/ who, 
 in the summer and autumn months, collect flour, butter, cheese, pork, beef, whiskey, 
 and every species of farming produce, which they send in flats and keel-boats to the 
 New Orleans market. The demand created by this trade, added to a large domestic 
 consumption, insures the most remote farmer a certain market. Some of these specu¬ 
 lators have made large fortunes.” 9 
 
 Farmers marketed their own products, according to Duden, 10 
 
 “ where merchants have not yet established themselves and are limited, almost entirely 
 to shipments of grain and meats. The products of the small farms, to which class 
 most of the farms here belong, hardly ever is so great but what the planter prefers to 
 
 dispose of his produce in his own community. In the central as well as in the 
 
 northern states, where cereals constitute the basis of agriculture, most of the farmers 
 dispose of their tobacco and cotton in their own neighborhood, even tho they ship their 
 grain to foreign markets. The trade in wax, tallow, hides, furs, and minerals is always 
 in the hands of merchants. The same is true of brandies, flour and many other things. 
 The American does not sell directly to the consumer, unless he happens to have a store 
 himself, the ordinary means of life, which are taken to the weekly market, excepted. If 
 a person has something to sell he usually takes it to the storekeeper, who disposes of 
 it for a commission, or buys it outright. Some farmers, for instance, make use of the 
 bad weather, to make shoes, barrels or other things. All these things they take to the 
 merchant to sell. This seems to be the most advantageous as also the most respectable 
 way. It is but natural that such a method should lead to barter, with which the merchant 
 usually makes a double profit.” 
 
 The business of the merchant comprehended a great variety of services 
 which have now become specialized occupations. As storekeeper he sold 
 drygoods and supplies to the farmer whom he financed, also, by long credits. 
 He packed the farmer’s pork and ground his flour, and packed it in barrels. 
 He was also engaged in transportation, owning and operating flat-bottom and 
 keel boats on the river. * 11 
 
 An attempt to promote river trade by the association of farmers with mer¬ 
 chants was made in 1803 by the organization of the Miami Expoiting Com¬ 
 pany. This was also a banking institution with the privilege of issuing notes. 
 The company did a prosperous business for a few years, but discontinued 
 exporting in 1807, because of disagreement between the farmers and the mer¬ 
 chants regarding the division of profits. Other companies were organized with 
 similar purposes, but none existed long enough to appreciably influence mar¬ 
 keting conditions. 12 
 
 9 Sketches of America, 201. 
 
 10 Report (1824-27), in Mo. Hist. Review, XIII (1918), p. 273. 
 
 11 Goodwin, in Ohio Arch, and Hist. Quarterly, XVI (1907), p. 333. 
 
 12 Gephart, Transportation in the Middle West, 99. 
 
DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNAL TRADE 175 
 
 DEFECTS OF THE NEW ORLEANS MARKET. 
 
 The New Orleans market was in many respects unsatisfactory. 
 
 “ Pr oduce would be brought into the local shipping points along the Ohio River and 
 a wait of weeks was often necessary before the river would rise. The rise of the river 
 frequently meant the saving of a year’s labor, and when the flood stage came joy 
 was unbounded. 4 The Ohio River had risen twenty feet ’ writes an editor 4 and once 
 more our boats are released.’ These were flat-boats, keel-boats and other crafts which 
 had been loaded with flour, pork, lard, whiskey and other Ohio products. New Orleans 
 was for fifteen years after the settlement of the state in the possession of a foreign 
 nation, which was almost continually hostile to the commercial interests of the Ohio 
 Valley ; and even after this obstacle to trade was removed in 1803, a quarter of a century 
 elapsed before a canal was constructed around the falls at Louisville. Even when New 
 Orleans was reached, it was often found to be an unsatisfactory market, for the hot and 
 humid climate of the lower Mississippi caused much of the flour, wheat, corn, pork and 
 other perishable products to spoil in transit. Many of these products were improperly 
 prepared for carriage through a warm area to a distant market, since they had to be 
 shipped when boats could be obtained and when the river permitted. There was a lack 
 of capital at New Orleans and consequently a dearth of elevators, storage rooms, com- 
 meraal houses, and other machinery for handling a large trade in domestic and foreign 
 goods. Shipping facilities were also wanting, for steamers sailed irregularly. In con¬ 
 sequence of these drawbacks the New Orleans market was alternately glutted and 
 emptied, and prices fluctuated violently.” 
 
 PRICES OF FARM PRODUCTS IN THE WEST. 
 
 The following data from the diary of a western traveler 14 indicate the 
 general level of the price of farm products in Pittsburg, 1807. He wrote: 
 
 There are two market days weekly, and the common prices of necessaries are — 
 good beef, from 2^ to 4 cents per lb; pork 3*, mutton 4, veal 3, venison 3 to 4, bacon 
 6 to 10, butter 10 to 18, cheese 8 to 12, hogs lard 8, fowls each 10 to 12, ducks 25, geese 
 33 to 37, turkies 40 to 75, flour $1 75 to 2 50 per cwt. or from 3 50 to 4 50 per barrel 
 corn 33, potatoes 40, turnips 18, Indian meal 40 cents per bushel, onions a dollar, white 
 eans a dollar, dried apples and peaches a dollar, and green 40 cents per bushel eggs 10 
 to 18 cents per dozen, fresh fish 3 to 6 cents per lb., maple sugar, very good, made in the 
 country, 10 to 12 cents a pound, whiskey 30 to 40 cents per gallon, peach brandy 75 to 80, 
 eer 5 to 7 dollars a barrel, and cider 3 to 4, 700 country linen 40 cents, and tow cloth 
 33 cents per yard; but salt comes high, being generally 2 \ dollars per bushel.” 
 
 From other similar accounts 15 we may conclude that the prices of the chief 
 farm products in western cities about the years 1815 to 1820 were roughly as 
 follows: Wheat 50 to 75 cents a bushel, occasionally as high as $1; corn 33 
 to 50 cents, occasionally as low as 25; pork, $2.50 to $4 per cwt., occasionally 
 $5; beef, $3.50 to $5 per cwt.; bacon, 8 to 10 cents per pound; butter and 
 cheese, 124 to 20 cents; potatoes, 25 to 50 cents a bushel. A list of prices, 
 
 Transportation in the Middle West, 95; see also Esarey, Indiana 306' Faux 
 in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, XI, 179; XII, 18. 
 
 14 Cuming in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, IV, 247. 
 
 ™ Niles’ Register, IX (1815-16), p. 420; X (1816), p. 269; XI (1817), p. 410; Flagg, 
 in Illinois State Hist. Soc. Transactions (1910), pp. 142, 153, 162, 166, 167; Ogg, 
 hordhams Personal Narrative, 118; Palmer, Travels, 83. 
 
176 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 more carefully compiled than many, is given by Hulme 16 for Zanesville, Ohio, 
 1818: 
 
 Table 26. —Prices at Zanesville, Ohio, July, 1818. 
 
 [Source: Hulme, in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, x, 7 4 -] 
 
 Dls. Cts. Dls. Cts. 
 
 Flour (superfine) per barrel of 196 lb. from 
 
 Beef, per 100 lb. 
 
 Pork (prime), per 100 lb. 
 
 Salt, per bushel of 5 ° lb. 
 
 Potatoes, per bushel. 
 
 Turnips, ditto . 
 
 Wheat, ditto of 60 lb. to 66 lb. 
 
 Indian corn, ditto shelled. 
 
 Oats, ditto . 
 
 Rye, ditto . 
 
 Barley, ditto .. 
 
 Turkeys, of from 12 lb. to 20 lb. each. 
 
 Fowls ... 
 
 Live Hogs, per 100 lbs. live weight. 
 
 Cows, (the best) ... 
 
 Yoke of Oxen, ditto. 
 
 Sheep ... 
 
 Hay, per ton, delivered.. 
 
 Straw, fetch it and have it. 
 
 Manure, ditto, ditto. 
 
 Coals, per bushel, delivered. 
 
 Butter, per lb. avoirdupois. 
 
 Cheese, ditto, ditto. 
 
 Loaf Sugar . 
 
 Raw ditto ._. 
 
 Domestic Raw ditto. 
 
 Merino Wool, per lb. avoirdupois, washed. 
 
 Three-quarter Merino ditto. 
 
 Common Wool . 
 
 5 o to 5 75 
 
 4 0 — 4 25 
 
 4 50 — 5 0 
 
 2 25 
 
 o 25 — 0 31^ 
 
 0 20 
 
 0 75 
 
 0 33i— o 50 
 
 0 25 — 0 33$ 
 
 o 50 
 
 0 75 
 
 0 37s— 0 50 
 
 o 123— o 18I 
 
 3 0 — 5 0 
 
 18 o —25 0 
 
 50 0—75 0 
 
 2 50 
 
 9 0 —10 0 
 
 0 8 
 
 O 12^— O l8 
 0 I2i— 0 25 
 
 o 50 
 
 o 31I 
 
 0 181 
 
 I 0 
 
 O 75 
 
 0 50 
 
 After 1820 prices tended to be lower. Wheat in Ohio about 1825 was con¬ 
 sidered high at 50 cents a bushel and 30 cents was the usual price secured by 
 farmers in trade at country stores. 17 Table 2 6a, based on data presented in a 
 congressional debate, presents the trend of wheat prices in the years 1820 to 
 1840. ; 
 
 Table 26a. —Wheat prices, eastern Ohio, 1820 to 1840. 
 
 [Source: Speech of Congressman Weller, of Ohio, August 4, 1841, in Congressional Globe and 
 
 Appendix X (1841), p. 501.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Price 
 
 per bushel. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Price 
 
 per bushel. 
 
 y 
 
 1820 . 
 
 $0.20 
 
 o.si 
 
 1827 . 
 
 $0.50 
 
 1834 
 
 1821 
 
 1828 . 
 
 0.50 
 
 1835 
 
 1822 
 
 0.383 
 
 0.385 
 
 0.423 
 
 0.383 
 
 0.38 
 
 1829 . 
 
 O.78 
 
 1836 
 
 
 1830 . 
 
 0.50 
 
 1837 
 
 . 
 
 I 8 OA 
 
 1831 . 
 
 0.50 
 
 1838 
 
 182^ 
 
 1832 . 
 
 0.653 
 
 1839 
 
 1826 . 
 
 1833 . 
 
 0.593 
 
 1840 
 
 Year. 
 
 Price 
 
 per bushel. 
 
 16 In Thwaites, Early Western Travels, X, 74. 
 
 17 Howells, Recollections, 138. 
 
DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNAL TRADE 
 
 177 
 
 In 1828 Flint 18 stated that a fair average price for corn in quantities in the 
 Cincinnati market had not exceeded, in the past three years, 12^ cents a 
 bushel. Pork in quantities brought only 1J cents a pound. In Indiana, wheat 
 sold in the \eais 1830 to 1840 for from 30 to 50 cents a bushel and corn at 
 from 10 to 12 cents. 19 Peck gives the following prices for Illinois, 1836: 
 
 Wheat, $1.00 bush.; Oats, 25c. bush.; Horses, for farm work, $50; Cows (in spring), 
 $7-15; Butter (summer), 10c. lb.; Cheese, 8 to 10c.; Pork: Bacon^7~8c.; Hams, 8-ioc.; 
 Stock hogs, 60-100 lbs. alive, $i-$2 per head/’ 20 
 
 EASTERN MARKETS FOR LIVESTOCK. 
 
 In the States of the Atlantic seaboard there was rapidly developing an 
 industrial population in the years 1810-1840, and with it was created a home 
 market for farm products. The access to this market was difficult, however, 
 for land carriage for most farm products was prohibitorily expensive. The 
 farmer had one commodity, however, which could be made to transport 
 itself to market, viz., livestock, cattle and swine. A beginning in eastward 
 droving was remarked in 1802, by Michaux, 21 who wrote: 
 
 “The number of horned cattle is very considerable in Kentucky; those who deal in 
 them purchase them lean, and drive them in droves of from two to three hundred to 
 Virginia, along the river Potomack, where they sell them to graziers, who fatten them 
 in order to supply the markets of Baltimore and Philadelphia.” 
 
 A few years later, in 1804 or 1805, the first herd of cattle from the Scioto 
 Valley, Ohio, was successfully driven across the mountains to Baltimore. 22 
 From that time until about 1850 cattle-droving eastward was a well-recognized 
 feature of Ohio Valley farming. Travelers crossing the mountains to the 
 west regularly commented on the droves of cattle and hogs, and occasionally 
 even horses and sheep, which they met on the way. 23 In 1810 it was estimated 
 that 40,000 head of hogs were annually driven from Ohio to the Philadelphia, 
 Baltimore, and other eastern markets. 24 The first herd of Western cattle 
 ever brought to New York arrived in that city in June 1817, “as fresh,” 
 according to a newspaper report, “ as if just taken off one of our Long Island 
 farms. When it is recollected that they have been driven nearly 1,000 miles, 
 this fact will be considered a very remarkable one.” 25 
 
 Two grades of cattle were driven eastward: (1) stock or store cattle, and 
 (2) cattle that had been fattened on corn. The former, 3-year old steers, 
 grass fattened, were taken in the fall to eastern Pennsylvania and also to the 
 Potomac Valley and sold to farmers to be fattened there for eastern markets. 
 The corn-fed animals, partly raised in Ohio and partly in Indiana and Illinois 
 
 18 Mississippi Valley, I (1828 ed.), p. 227. 
 
 19 Conner, Indiana Agriculture, 5. 
 
 20 New Guide for Emigrants, 275, 276, 281, 283, 284, 285. 
 
 21 F. A. Michaux, in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, III, 245. 
 
 22 U S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. cxxx; Ohio State Board of Agriculture, id 
 
 Annual Report (1848), p. 162. 
 
 23 Cuming, in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, IV, 136, 228; Melish, Travels, II, 51; 
 
 Flint, T. imothy, Recollections, 9J flint, James, in "Ihwaites, Early Western Travels 
 IX, 80; Welby, ibid., XII, 293. 
 
 24 Kilbourn, Ohio Gazetteer (7th ed., 1821), p. 16. 
 
 2 *New York Press, quoted in De Voe, Market Book, 411. See also Niles Register, XII 
 (1817), p. 287. 
 
 13 
 
178 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 but fattened in Ohio, were driven more slowly across the mountains, arriving 
 at eastern stockyards between April 15 and August 1. 
 
 There were three main droving routes: (1) the northern by way of Dun¬ 
 kirk, New York; (2) the middle by way of Pittsburg to Philadelphia; and 
 (3) the southern, passing through Bedford, Pennsylvania, and ending in 
 either Philadelphia or Baltimore. 
 
 “ During the summer and autumn, along these lines of travel, so many drovers passed 
 that an observer, a mile or more away, could know of the passing of stock, for far up 
 in the air he could see long moving lines of rising dust. In the winter and early spring 
 the clay pikes became almost impassable because of the depth of the mud. And worse 
 than that, cattle naturally walk abreast of each other, and soldier-like they put their 
 feet in the tracks of the one in front, and in this way great trenches were made across 
 the highway, which when the clay dried became almost impassable for carriages and 
 
 other vehicles. Seldom were there less than one hundred cattle in a drove, and 
 
 not often much over two hundred in the largest droves. When fat cattle were driven, it 
 was not unusual to have the drove accompanied with as many or even more stock hogs. 
 In such cases the hogs cost little in the way of grain, for they consumed the corn that the 
 cattle wasted. When hogs were taken with cattle the journey took about a week longer. 
 Droves of horses would average twenty-two miles per day, stock cattle nine miles, fat 
 cattle seven, and cattle with hogs, not quite so many miles per day.” 2(5 
 
 Marketing conditions were bad. It required 40 or 50 days to reach the mar¬ 
 ket, and within that time prices fluctuated widely. 
 
 “ It was not uncommon for the drover to be met by speculators some three or four 
 days’ journey from the market. These were men who were good judges of stock and 
 they knew well how the market was supplied and how prices ruled. To a great extent 
 they had the advantage of the drover, who did not have access to a daily market report, 
 only as he might interview returning drovers.” 27 
 
 With the development of Cincinnati as a pork-packing center in the years 
 1835-1840, eastward droving of hogs declined. Cattle droving came to an 
 end in the 5o's when the construction of trunk-line railroads deprived Ohio 
 of the advantage of nearness to the eastern markets. 
 
 CATTLE GRAZING IN EASTERN OHIO. 
 
 The development of cattle fattening as a specialized industry in Ohio was 
 a natural consequence of the opening of the eastern market for western live¬ 
 stock. Thousands of young cattle were purchased by Ohio graziers at the 
 close of winter from the farmers of Indiana and Illinois, and even from 
 Missouri, to be fattened for eastern droving. The rich bottom lands of the 
 Scioto and other tributaries of the Ohio yielded better crops of corn than of 
 wheat and thousands of acres of the former grain were raised for cattle 
 fodder. The method of feeding, introduced in the Scioto valley by early 
 settlers from the South Branch of the Potomac in Virginia, by its economy 
 of labor was to a large extent responsible for the success of the industry. 
 Elsewhere in the West, corn-fodder was scantily supplied to cattle, consisting 
 merely of tops and blades laboriously gathered by hand. The Scioto farmers, 
 however, fed the unhusked ears with the fodder from stacks in the field. The 
 cattle were fed twice a day in open lots of 8 or 10 acres each, and followed 
 
 26 King in Ohio Arch, and Hist. Soc. Quarterly, XVII (1908), p. 249. 
 
 27 Ibid., 252. 
 
DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNAL TRADE 
 
 179 
 
 by hogs to clean up the neglected grain and ears. 28 The scale on which the 
 industry was conducted is indicated by the size of the herds owned by individ¬ 
 ual farmers. According to the estimate of the Ohio Farmer 29 there were in 
 Ohio, about the year 1835, 58 graziers whose herds in the aggregate amounted 
 to 11,802 head. Herds of from 200 to 800 cattle were not uncommon and 
 some were over 1,000. 
 
 A traveling contributor to the New York Farmer 30 wrote the following 
 account of the operations of a farmer in the neighborhood of Chillicothe. 
 
 “ Mr. G. R. purchased 
 
 400 cattle, principally from Missouri, at $10 each 
 Labor to cultivate 150 acres of land, 1 
 the produce of which was fed to them./. 
 
 $4000 00 
 300 00 
 
 and sold them at his door seven months'! 
 after, at $15 00 each, / 
 
 leaving him a net profit on his cattle of 
 
 $4300 00 
 $6000 00 
 $1700 00 
 
 The profit on the store cattle and swine, fed on what was left by the others, he con¬ 
 siders would pay all troubleThat was the worst year he ever had, but mark the dif¬ 
 ference in the statement that follows. The same gentleman sold this spring, 480 cattle 
 at $30 each, amounted to $14,40000, from which deduct expense of driving to market 
 at $7 each,. $3,360 00 and the first cost $10 each, $4,800, leaves him $6,240 for one years 
 produce raised on his farm, whence he has profit on his store cattle and hogs, enough to 
 pay all expenses. Now you may, perhaps, enquire what land is worth here? I answer, 
 a good farm, with stonehouse and other improvements, in the vicinity of Chillicothe, 
 sold for $10 per acre, and good land, without buildings, sells from $1 to $5.” 
 
 Specialization in the fattening of swine on corn lands had begun by 1835 
 in the upper Wabash Valley. Stock purchased from the raisers were turned 
 into a field of ungathered corn in the middle of September and into another as 
 soon as that was eaten oft clean, until at the end of three months they were 
 considered ready for the southern markets. Some farmers fattened as many 
 as 1,000 swine in a year. 31 
 
 IMPORTATION OF IMPROVED ENGLISH CATTLE. 
 
 The improvement of the breed of Ohio cattle by the importation of English 
 stock had received considerable attention before 1840. The first English 
 cattle to cross the mountains were those taken by members of the Patton family 
 from Virginia to Kentucky about the year 1795 - A few years later represen¬ 
 tatives of this stock were taken into Ohio, where they soon gained a wide 
 reputation. They were large animals, coarse and rough, with long, widespread 
 horns, of no well-defined breed 32 and on account of their great growth were 
 slow in coming to maturity. By crossing these animals, and later importations 
 of the same type, on the native stock a considerable improvement was effected. 
 
 90 k' i860 ^Agriculture, p. exxx; Peck, New Guide for Emigrants, 109, 283. 
 
 ■ Quoted in. The Cultivator III (1836-37), P- 32. See also Diary of a Naturalist 
 ,«tt „ jamin Silliman) in American Journal of Science, XXV (1834), pp 23=3 237 
 
 30 HI (1830), p. 273. 
 
 31 Ellsworth, Valley of the Upper Wabash, 39, 42. 
 
 i Ins description is from U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. cxxxii, and Beatty, 
 Essays on Practical Agriculture, 33. Some later writers hold that the original 
 importations were Shorthorns. See Plumb, Types and Breeds of Farm Animals, 183. 
 
180 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 In 1817 the first importations of pure-blood English stock, began to arrive in 
 Kentucky, and among them came the first of the famous “ Shorthorns.” 33 
 
 “The short horns proved a valuable acquisition to the existing stock of the country 
 though the quality of their beef was perhaps no better than the Patton or Miller stock, 
 nor were the cows better milkers, but their early maturity, and aptitude to fatten were 
 qualities peculiarly desirable at the time, had they been properly appreciated and im¬ 
 proved upon by the breeders generally.” 34 
 
 Although the new breeds were known in Indiana and Ohio as well as 
 in! Kentucky there was little general interest among farmers in stock improve¬ 
 ment by importation. English cattle were regarded as too “ fancy ” for the 
 average farmer. 
 
 The organization in 1834 of the Ohio Company for Importing English 
 Cattle marked the beginning of a new stage in the betterment of western 
 livestock. Heretofore, importations had been sporadic, depending on the 
 whims and financial means of individual gentlemen farmers. The new com¬ 
 pany, with a capital of $9,200 subscribed in shares of $100 each, sent agents 
 abroad who selected and brought to Ohio 19 head of thoroughbred Shorthorn, 
 or Improved Durham, stock from the herds of the most celebrated breeders. 
 The cattle were kept together under the care of an agent and their number 
 was increased by later importation until 1836 when they were sold at auction 
 and scattered extensively over Ohio. In 1837 another large importation was 
 made and sold by the same methods. The results on the breed of Ohio cattle 
 were unmistakable. 35 
 
 DIFFICULTIES OF OVERLAND TRANSPORTATION. 
 
 The cheapening of transportation costs by the improvement of roads and 
 by the building of canals was responsible for the beginning of a new era in 
 western agriculture. Rivers were the natural means of communication, but 
 roads were necessary to bring products of inland farms to the waterside. The 
 first roads were merely trails, passable only on horseback. A considerable 
 amount of money was invested in the years 1800 to 1840 in the improvement 
 of these trails and in making new roads, but from the descriptions of the 
 highways thus produced we must conclude that they afforded little encourage¬ 
 ment to farmers. The so-called roads were merely narrow avenues through the 
 woods from which the trees had been felled and rolled away, leaving the 
 brushwood and stumps a foot or a foot and a half high. They retained their 
 natural clay foundation without artificial surfacing of any kind. Little atten¬ 
 tion was paid to grade, and many of them led over steep hills. A trip over 
 such thoroughfares in a light vehicle was no small adventure. For loaded 
 wagons during the greater part of the year they were impassable, and even at 
 their best hauling over them was expensive. 36 
 
 33 American Farmer, II (1820-21), p. 313; IV (1822), pp. 223, 280. 
 
 34 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. cxxxii. 
 
 35 Ohio State Bd. Agric., 12th Annual Report (1857), p. 301; Flint, in Maine Bd. Agric., 
 
 igth Annual Report (1874), p. 140. 
 
 36 The construction of turnpikes was not seriously undertaken until after 1830, and 
 
 then only in the more densely settled districts. Descriptions of western roads about 
 1820 are given by Welby in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, XII, 241; and by 
 Flint, Ibid., IX, 253. See also Welker, in Western Reserve Hist. Soc., Tracts, IV, 
 No. 86, p. 53; Smith, Indiana, I, 344; Gephart, Transportation in the Middle West, 
 51, 129-134, 141; Kilbourn, Ohio Gazetteer (nth ed., 1833), p. xxvi. 
 
DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNAL TRADE 
 
 181 
 
 “ With such roads it was exceedingly difficult to market grain and other produce. With 
 ox-teams it required three days to go twenty-five miles to market and return. Unless the 
 roads were unusually good, it required two yoke of oxen to draw what would now be 
 called a small load. Counting time, it was almost worth a load of grain to market it.” 37 
 
 Faux estimated that in Indiana, in 1818, the usual price for land carriage 
 was 50 cents for 100 pounds for every 20 miles, sometimes more, but never 
 less. Flower 39 wrote that land carriage to the Wabash River, a distance 
 of 9 miles, cost 16 cents per 100 pounds. At such rates corn could not stand 
 the expense of moving 20 miles, even though produced at no cost, and wheat 
 could not be profitably transported by land more than 50 or 75 miles. 
 
 OPENING OF THE ERIE CANAL CAUSES WESTWARD SHIFT IN 
 
 WHEAT PRODUCTION. 
 
 The opening of the Erie Canal in 1825 marked the beginning of a new era 
 in western trade. The reduction in transportation costs thus accomplished 
 was eventually to enable the farmers of the Ohio Valley to ship great quanti¬ 
 ties of grain and provisions to eastern markets. It did not immediately turn 
 the current of western farm products from the south to the east, for until 
 1850 the trade down the Mississippi increased more rapidly than the trade 
 via the canal. In the years before 1840 its influence was confined chiefly to the 
 wheat farmers of western New York and of the lake shore of northern Ohio. 
 In western New York wheat became the chief crop and the Genesee Country 
 became our chief wheat-growing section. 
 
 “ Previous to the construction of the canal the cost of transportation from Lake Erie 
 
 to tide-water was such as nearly to prevent all movement of merchandise.The 
 
 expense of transportation from Buffalo to New York was stated at $100 per ton, and 
 the ordinary length of passage twenty days; so that, upon the very route through which 
 the heaviest and cheapest products of the West are now sent to market, the cost of 
 transportation equalled nearly three times the market value of wheat in New York; 
 six times the value of corn; twelve times the value of oats; and far exceeded the value 
 of most kinds of cured provisions.” 40 . 
 
 Under the stimulus of the market, farmers in Onondaga County made no¬ 
 table progress in better methods of wheat cultivation. 
 
 “ They know, better than they did, how to prepare for this crop; which is done, in 
 many instances, by less expensive modes of culture. They are more careful than they 
 were to sow clean and good seed. Instead of such meslin crops of chess, cockle, rye, 
 smut and wheat, all intermixed, as grew here under the slovenly husbandry of former 
 years, the wheat-fields of this county, with but few exceptions, are now expected to 
 produce crops exhibiting a very cleanly and neat appearance. The smut of wheat is 
 almost banished from the county.” 41 
 
 The scale of farming operations in this region also showed considerable 
 enlargement, crops of 1,500 to 3,000 and even of 6,000 bushels being gathered 
 by some farmers. 42 
 
 In northern Ohio the price of wheat rose rapidly after 1825, but it was not 
 until the completion in 1832 of canals connecting the Great Lakes with the Ohio 
 
 37 Adams, in Mich. Pol. Sci. Assn. Publications, III (1899), No. 7, p. 16. 
 
 38 In Thwaites, Early Western Travels, XI, 291. 
 
 39 Ibid., X, 142. 
 
 40 Andrews, Report on Colonial and Lake Trade, 234. 
 
 41 N. Y. Bd. Agric. Memoirs, III (1826), p. 89. 
 
 42 N. Y. Farmer, VI (1833), p. 337. 
 
182 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 River that the advantages of cheap water transportation were made available 
 to farmers in the interior. As early as 1830, 200,000 bushels of Ohio wheat 
 were milled at Rochester. The flour was considered of a lower quality than 
 that of western New York. It brought a lower price at the mills and was 
 graded lower when inspected for export. 43 In 1835 Ohio was the only grain¬ 
 exporting territory on the lakes. In that year, 86,223 barrels of flour and 
 1,354,995 bushels of wheat, all Ohio products, passed through the Erie Canal. 
 Before 1840 shipments of wheat had been made from both the western and 
 eastern shores of Lake Michigan. 44 
 
 Table 27 45 showing the principal articles shipped from Buffalo by canal 
 in 1835 and in 1840 indicates the character and extent of the eastward ship- 
 
 Table 27. —Articles shipped eastward from Buffalo by canal. 
 [Source: Andrews, Report on Colonial and Lake Trade, 85.] 
 
 Articles. 
 
 1835- 
 
 1840. 
 
 Flour .barrels.. 
 
 Wheat .bushels.. 
 
 Corn .do- 
 
 Provisions .barrels.. 
 
 Ashes .do- 
 
 Staves .number.. 
 
 Wool .pounds.. 
 
 86,233 
 
 95,071 
 
 14,579 
 
 6,502 
 
 4,419 
 
 2565,272 
 
 140,911 
 
 1,030,632 
 
 633,700 
 
 881,192 
 
 47,885 
 
 25,070 
 
 7,008 
 
 22,410,660 
 
 107,794 
 
 3,422,687 
 
 Butter 
 
 Cheese r . do.... 
 
 : Lard 
 
 ments of western produce. It does not include the entire exports of Ohio on 
 the lakes, for in addition to the canal traffic considerable quantities of pork and 
 flour were shipped to Montreal and Quebec. 40 
 
 OTHER COMMODITIES PRODUCED FOR SALE—CHEESE, 
 
 TOBACCO AND WOOL. 
 
 The shipments of cheese shown in table 27 were the product of the New 
 England settlers on the Western Reserve in northern Ohio. Very soon after 
 settlements had been made in this region cheese was sold in Pittsburg. Some 
 farmers made from 1 to 2 tons in a season. 47 About 1820, Ohio cheese w*as 
 first shipped down the river to southern markets. 48 
 
 The cultivation of yellow-leaf tobacco as a cash crop began about 1825, 
 in the hilly region of Ohio centering around Licking, Fairfield, Perry, and 
 Muskingum counties. 
 
 “ For two or three years the people in and near this neighborhood had been raising 
 tobacco of a particular variety, which proved a profitable business, and helped materially 
 
 43 N. Y. Farmer, III (1830), p. 217; IV (1831), pp. 109, 203. 
 
 44 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. cxlvi. 
 
 45 From Andrews, Report on Colonial and Lake Trade, 85. It will be noted that the 
 
 figures for wheat shipments are considerably less than those given in the previous 
 paragraph. Andrews admits that his figures are not entirely accurate. 
 
 46 Atwater, Ohio, 310. 
 
 47 Cuming, in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, IV, 91 and note. 
 
 48 Burkett, Agriculture of Ohio, 179. 
 
DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNAL TRADE 
 
 183 
 
 to supply the farmers with articles they needed, and to pay for their lands, for the crop 
 would mostly bring cash. The kind of tobacco raised was a variety that had been 
 raised in Maryland, and was known as light or yellow tobacco. It differed from the 
 Virginia crop in being a lighter and finer plant, and being cured by the heat of fire, 
 instead of the air of a shed, as was the heavier kind. It was left for the leaf to ripen or 
 turn >ellow upon the stalk, when it was gathered and dried over great fires in a close 
 house, so constructed as to confine the heat around the leaves until they were 
 thoroughly cured.” 49 
 
 For a few years prices were high, ranging from $6 to $40 per hundred¬ 
 weight, and successful raisers cleared large profits. A tobacco mania prevailed j 
 tobacco was regarded as a sure road to wealth and other crops were neglected. 
 Such quantities of Ohio leaf were received in Baltimore as to make Maryland 
 growers apprehensive of the new western competition. Most of the demand 
 for the yellow leaf came from Europe, where it was consumed chiefly by 
 the more wealthy classes. Their demand proved inelastic, and within a few 
 years the market was so overstocked that prices fell to between $2 and $3 
 per hundredweight, resulting in temporary reduction of the crop but not in its 
 complete abandonment. 50 
 
 Commercial wool-growing had made but little progress in the West before 
 1840. Although sheep had increased rapidly, they were still largely kept for 
 the supply of domestic textiles. A few woolen factories had been established, 
 notably those at Steubenville, Ohio, creating a demand for fine wool, and in 
 response to this demand Merino sheep had been brought from the East to 
 Ohio. 51 A few flocks of Merinos were kept in Indiana and Illinois before 
 1820.' Small shipments of wool eastward across the Alleghenies began about 
 1825. From Washington County, Pennsylvania, out of a total clip of over 
 400,000 pounds, it was estimated that three-fourths would be consumed in 
 household manufactures, and of the remaining 100,000 pounds two-thirds 
 would be used in western factories and one-third sent eastward. 53 In this 
 county wool was beginning to compete with wheat as a cash product and in 
 western New York the substitution of sheep for cattle was being discussed. 54 
 
 The small, proportions which the shipments of western wool had attained 
 before 1840 is indicated by the statistics of the clearances at Buffalo over the 
 Erie Canal, which carried to eastern markets almost all the wool produced 
 in the Ohio Valley. In the years i834~i 840 these shipments were: 55 
 
 1834 
 
 1836 
 
 1837 
 
 lbs. 
 
 186,000 
 252 OOO 
 39 ,ooo 
 
 1838 
 
 1839 
 
 1840 
 
 lbs. 
 
 109,000 
 
 131,000 
 
 170,000 
 
 49 Howells, Recollections, 131. 
 
 *» American Farmer, VII (1825), pp. 348, 4H; VIII (1826), pp. 224, 336, 397; American 
 Journal of Science, XXV (1834), p. 232; Atwater, Ohio, 88. 
 
 Hv es Renter, VI (1813-14), pp. 209, 210; VII (1814-15), p. 350. 
 
 “ q aux ,.in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, XI, 250; Hall, Statistics of the West, 147. 
 American Farmer, VII (1825), p. 138; See also Ibid., X (1828), p. 286, and Hazard, 
 Register of Pennsylvania, I, 142. 
 
 54 N. Y. Bd. Agric. Memoirs, III (1826), p. 94, 95. 
 
 55 From Niles Register, LXIX (1835-36), p. 54. 
 
Chapter XIV. —The Organization and Education 
 
 of Farmers. 
 
 THE SPIRIT OF IMPROVEMENT. 
 
 The closing decades of the eighteenth century gave indications of the be¬ 
 ginning of a new epoch in northern agriculture. We have already noted sig¬ 
 nificant improvements, such as the introduction of the use of gypsum, the 
 rapid increase in the sowing of clover and other grasses, and Jefferson’s 
 experiments with an improved plough. Although none of these changes had 
 immediately a widespread influence on agricultural production, yet taken 
 together with the organization of agricultural societies and the beginning of 
 American agricultural literature, they indicated the rise of a new and enthusi¬ 
 astic interest in agricultural improvement. 
 
 The origin of the new spirit in agriculture seems allied to the revolutionary 
 political changes which were taking place in the years 1775 to I 79°- The suc¬ 
 cessful attainment of American independence in 1783 and the establishment 
 in 1789 of a new national government, after 6 critical years of anarchy and 
 economic depression, were accomplishments that stirred men’s minds with 
 patriotic pride. They were proud of their new country and looked about for 
 something further to do to make it happy and prosperous. Washington, Jef¬ 
 ferson, and many others were familiar, by correspondence or by personal 
 observation, with the revolutionary changes which were under way in the 
 agriculture of England. Contrasting European progress with the stagnant 
 condition of agriculture at home, they thought they saw a great opportunity 
 for constructive service before them. To popularize the knowledge of the 
 new farming in America seemed an eminently worthy task. 
 
 THE FIRST AGRICULTURAL SOCIETIES. 
 
 The agencies selected for this work were agricultural societies, in imitation 
 very probably of those recently organized in England. Beginning with the 
 formation in 1785 of the Philadelphia Society for Promoting Agriculture, 
 societies were organized before 1800 in Charlestown, South Carolina, Hallo- 
 well, Maine, New York City, Boston, New Haven, and in Middlesex County, 
 Massachusetts. 1 The nature of these societies, their purposes, and program 
 are revealed in their articles of association. They were not intended to be 
 clubs of practical working farmers who might aid each other by the exchange 
 of facts and ideas from experience, but rather groups of men of all profes¬ 
 sions who were to receive, adapt, and disseminate the knowledge of the prog- 
 
 1 A society “ mainly for improving agriculture,” but embracing other industries also in 
 its interests, had beep organized in New York as early as 1763, but I have found no 
 record of its activities. See Furman, Long Island Antiquities, 91. 
 
 184 
 
ORGANIZATION AND EDUCATION OF FARMERS 185 
 
 ress accomplished in other countries. So the preface to the Laws and Regula¬ 
 tions of the Massachusetts Society for Promoting Agriculture 2 reads; 
 
 One great object of this Society will be, to obtain and publish an account of the 
 improvements of other countries, and to procure models of the machines in which 
 they excel. It will attend to whatever relates to rural affairs, and especially to promote 
 an increase of the products of our lands, .... To encourage the utmost attention to 
 
 th u SC ? . Ct i, the Society Wlll > from time to time, offer such premiums as their funds 
 will admit. They consider agriculture in its various branches and connexions as highly 
 interesting to all mankind. The wealth and importance of the community, is so intimately 
 connected with, and dependent on the extent and success of agriculture, that every one 
 w 10 is desirous of advancing the happiness, prosperity, and dignity of his country, its 
 
 commerce, and convenient subsistence of individuals, will lend his aid to this most 
 useful institution. 
 
 The appeal of the society organized in Philadelphia in 1785 is equally 
 broad. Here we read : 3 
 
 “ Th V Philadelphia Society for Promoting Agriculture, was formed .... by 
 some citizens, only a few of whom were actually engaged in husbandry, but who were 
 convinced of its necessity; and of the assistance which such an association, properly 
 
 attended to, would afford to the interests of agriculture. Many citizens have a 
 
 mistaken idea, that their not being agriculturists, disqualifies them from becoming 
 useful members of. our Society. The interests of Commerce, Arts, and Manu¬ 
 
 facturers, form, with Agriculture, an indissoluble union; to which citizens of every 
 class and calling, have it amply in their power to contribute.” 
 
 CHARACTER OF THEIR MEMBERSHIP. 
 
 These appeals were answered in the spirit in which they were issued. An 
 examination of the early membership of the societies shows that they were 
 composed of men in whose lives agriculture was only one of many interests, 
 and often the least important of all. There were in the Massachusetts society 
 men of legal education, who had become prominent in political life, such as 
 Samuel Adams, James Sullivan, then attorney-general of the state and later 
 governor, General Joseph Lincoln, then collector of the port of Boston, Chris¬ 
 topher Gore, John Lowell, and Jonathan Mason, all lawyers and active in 
 politics and government. Besides these there were merchants, such as Stephen 
 Higginson, Charles Vaughan, and Azor Orne. We find also representatives of 
 the two other professions, ministers and doctors, who, blessed with an outlook 
 on the affairs of the community beyond their immediate duties, turned their 
 attention to improvements in agriculture. Such were the Rev. Manasseh Cut¬ 
 ler and Cotton Tufts, the physician. 
 
 The practical farmers may have formed a considerable element in the mem¬ 
 bership of the Kennebec and the Middlesex Societies, but in them, as well as 
 in the city groups, initiative and direction came from the professional and 
 business men. Their interest in agriculture, although no doubt genuine, was 
 nevertheless far different in nature and in intensity from that of the inland 
 farmer, who was toiling day in and day out on his 100 acres, endeavoring to 
 make a living for himself and his family. The point of view of the “ literary ” 
 
 2 pp. iii, iv. 
 
 3 Philadelphia Society for Promoting Agriculture, Memoirs, I (1815), pp. iii, v (note). 
 
186 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 agriculturalist was expressed by General (James?) Warren. In the American 
 Museum he wrote : 4 
 
 “ Agriculture has long been a favourite object with me. In a philosophic view, it 
 is great and extensive; in a political view, it is important, and perhaps the only firm 
 and stable foundation of greatness. As a profession, it strengthens the mind,, without 
 enervating the body. In morals, it tends to increase virtue, without introducing vice. 
 In religion, it naturally inspires piety, devotion, and a dependence on providence, with¬ 
 out a tincture of infidelity. It is a rational and agreeable amusement to a man of leisure, 
 and a boundless source of contemplation and activity, to the industrious.” 
 
 WHAT THEY ACCOMPLISHED. 
 
 The “ literary ” or “ learned ” agricultural societies were pioneers in the 
 great task of agricultural education. In their Memoirs and Transactions they 
 put before the public periodically an account of the best agricultural practice 
 abroad, as well as the results of experiments in scientific agriculture by their 
 members in this country. The work was carefully and well done. The 
 Memoirs of the Philadelphia Society comprise 5 octavo volumes, issued at 
 irregular intervals over a period of 18 years (1808 to 1826). The Massachu¬ 
 setts Agricultural Repository and Journal, published by the Massachusetts 
 Society for Promoting Agriculture, makes up 10 volumes with publication 
 dates ranging from 1798 to 1832. Taken together with the Transactions of 
 the New York Society for the Promotion of the Useful Arts (4 vols., 1801 
 to 1819), they form a body of scientific literature which, judged by the state 
 of knowledge of the time, was very creditable. But as far as reaching the “ dirt 
 farmer ” and influencing his practice these publications were failures. The 
 working farmer was not prepared to receive his education in the form of 
 treatises and pamphlets. 
 
 “The improvements proposed fell almost dead upon the people, who rejected ‘book 
 farming ’ as impertinent and useless, and knew as little of the chemistry of agriculture 
 as of the problems of astronomy.” 5 
 
 Besides publishing memoirs and transactions, the early societies offered sub¬ 
 stantial premiums for the discovery and description of methods of destroying 
 insect pests, for the raising of grasses and trees from seeds, and for new 
 methods of soil improvement. But here again competition was limited, by the 
 very nature of the case, to a small number of educated persons with leisure 
 for scientific investigation. Often the premium money remained unclaimed 
 in the societies’ treasuries. The Committee on Agricultural Experiments of 
 the Massachusetts society reported in 1818: 6 
 
 “With respect to some of the objects to which the public attention is called, under 
 the head of agricultural experiments, it must not be expected, that our practical farmers, 
 generally, will contend for them at present. What has been almost wholly untried or 
 requires uncommon care, should first be attempted and proved profitable and well 
 suited to the climate, or otherwise, by the few who can best afford, and ought not 
 to regard, the necessary time and expense.” 
 
 Some of the papers published by the agricultural societies were reprinted 
 in pamphlet form. Of these the most widely circulated were Richard Peters’s 
 Agricultural Inquiries on Plaster of Paris (1797) and Livingston’s Essay on 
 
 4 II (1787), P. 344- . , „ , n 
 
 5 Flint, in Kettell, Eighty Years Progress, I, 25. 
 
 6 Mass. Agric. Repository, V (1818-19), p. 254. 
 
ORGANIZATION AND EDUCATION OF FARMERS 187 
 
 Sheep (1809). The interest of educated people in agricultural improvement 
 was responsible for the publication of a number of treatises and handbooks 
 on farming in the years after the close of the Revolution, in which an 
 attempt was made to describe the best English practice, occasionally with 
 suggestions for its adaptation to American conditions. 7 
 
 ELKANAH WATSON AND THE BERKSHIRE AGRICULTURAL 
 
 SOCIETY. 
 
 In 1807 Elkanah Watson exhibited in the public square at Pittsfield, 
 Massachusetts, two Merino sheep, thus founding the cattle show or fair, an 
 institution which was destined to accomplish much for American agricul¬ 
 ture. Watson was a well-to-do New Englander, who after accumulating a 
 competency in commercial enterprises and having traveled extensively 0 in 
 Europe, bought an estate near Pittsfield and “retired from the city in 
 pursuit of rural occupations and felicity/’ Through his friendship with 
 Chancellor Livingston of New York and Colonel David Humphreys of Con¬ 
 necticut, he had become interested in their efforts to improve the quality of 
 American wool by the importation of Spanish Merinoes. His exhibition 
 seems to have been merely an attempt to interest his neighbors in the improve¬ 
 ment of their flocks. With the same purpose he brought to his farm a pair 
 of improved swine and a bull of English stock, whose merits he diligently 
 advertised in the local press. A few years later, in 1810, he persuaded 25 of 
 his neighbors to join him in an exhibition of livestock on the village green. 
 1 he show was a success and Watson proceeded to make it an annual event by 
 the organization of the exhibitors and other Pittsfield farmers into the Berk¬ 
 shire Agricultural Society. In its organization and methods the Berkshire 
 society furnished a striking contrast to the older, or literary, societies. It 
 proved so successful that it served as a model for numerous county societies 
 all over the northern States between 1815 and 1840. 
 
 Watson saw the failure of the older societies in their attempts to educate 
 the working farmer by their publications and premiums. With a keen insight 
 into human nature he determined to approach the farmer through his heart 
 rather than his head. If he could once “ sieze upon the farmer’s heart ” and 
 excite a spirit of competition and personal ambition, then the way might be 
 prepared for books and science as auxiliaries. The cattle show was therefore 
 selected as the chief feature of the new society. Cattle shows or fairs were 
 not an original idea of Watson s. They were utilized as agencies for agricul¬ 
 tural improvement in England and France in the late eighteenth century and 
 had been visited by many Americans, perhaps including Watson, on European 
 travels. Nor is it entirely clear that he was the first to introduce the cattle 
 show into this country, 8 but the fact is certain that he deserves the credit for 
 making it, in combination with the society of working farmers, a successful 
 agency for agricultural progress in this country. 
 
 7 See Bibliography, p. 466. 
 
 8 “Before the Revolution, regular Cattle Fairs were held in the town of Hardwick 
 
 under the patronage of Timothy Ruggles, one of the most distinguished men of our 
 county in former times.” National Aegis, Worcester, Massachusetts, quoted in 
 New England Farmer, VII (1829), p. 136. I have been unable to find any evidence 
 to confirm this statement. 
 
188 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 With great skill Watson enlisted the aid of the farmers’ wives and of the 
 local clergymen. The exhibition of farm products and of domestic manu¬ 
 factures became the central feature in an elaborate program, which included a 
 street parade, a public meeting in the village church with a prayer, an address, 
 singing and, to end the festivities, an agricultural ball in the evening. 
 The new organization, although established on a sound psychological basis, 
 had a hard struggle to survive in its early years. Its organizer was met with 
 indifference and even by ridicule by his neighbors. The financing of the 
 annual shows proved to be a difficult task. Annual memberships at $i per 
 year did not yield enough to cover the cost of the premiums, and deficits 
 were paid by Watson and some of his Boston friends. In 1814, Watson 
 resigned as president of the society, much discouraged at its apparent failure. 
 
 RAPID SPREAD OF SOCIETIES ON THE BERKSHIRE PLAIN. 
 
 Meanwhile a number of new agricultural societies had sprung up. In 
 Windham county, Connecticut, a society was organized in 1809. In Pennsyl¬ 
 vania, societies were in existence in Bucks and Luzerne Counties in 1810, and 
 both of them held cattle shows in 1811. In New Hampshire societies were 
 organized in Hillsborough (1812) and in Rockingham County (1814). In 
 Massachusetts, a society was organized (1811) comprising farmers in a num¬ 
 ber of towns in Worcester County, and by 1815 there were in that state at 
 least 15 “town” societies in existence. 10 After 1815 the movement spread 
 rapidly until, by 1820, according to Watson’s claim, agricultural societies on 
 the Berkshire plan were to be found in all the New England States except 
 Rhode Island, and in all the counties of those States, in Pennsylvania, Mary¬ 
 land, Virginia, and North Carolina, and even in the newer states of Ohio and 
 Illinois. * 11 In New York, where Watson had been especially active in the 
 work of propaganda and organization, societies had been formed in all but 6 
 of the 58 counties. 12 In October 1819, Watson estimated that before the end 
 of that month there would be in operation in the United States at least 100 
 societies. 13 A typical instance of the swiftness with which the new societies 
 were organized is found in the case of Bath, Steuben County, New York. The 
 farmers of the township were considering the organization of a society and 
 had arranged for Watson to come and address them. On his arrival he was 
 conducted by the local clergyman to the court-house. The court adjourned 
 and the building was soon filled with the townsfolk, including ladies in the 
 gallery. A prayer was offered which “ softened the hearts of the audience.” 
 Watson then made an address, and within an hour sufficient funds were sub¬ 
 scribed to get the State bounty and the society was launched. 14 
 
 9 The facts regarding Watson’s life and work are taken from his Memoirs, edited by 
 
 his son, W. C. Watson, and from his own History of the Rise of Modern Agricnl- 
 tural Societies. 
 
 10 Larned, Windham County, Conn., II, 449; Penn. Bd. Agric. Annual Report (1880), 
 
 p. 229; Penn. Sec’y of Internal Affairs, 3d Annual Report (1874— 75 )» Part III, 103; 
 N. H. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, 1850, 1851, 1852, pp. 14-29; Mass. Agric. 
 Repository, III (1815), p. 80. 
 
 11 Watson, History of the Rise of Modern Agricultural Societies, 180. 
 
 12 Ibid., 163. 
 
 13 Ploughboy, I (1819-20), p. 205. 
 
 14 Rise of Modern Agricultural Societies, 164. 
 
ORGANIZATION AND EDUCATION OF FARMERS 189 
 
 THE POLICY OF STATE AID. 
 
 The allotment of State funds to county societies was largely responsible 
 for their rapid extension in the years from 1817 to 1825. State aid to agricul¬ 
 ture was not a new thing in the nineteenth century. We have already noted 
 the offering of bounties on a number of products, such as hemp, silk, and 
 wool, by eighteenth century legislatures. 15 In Massachusetts, the Society for 
 Promoting Agriculture had been the recipient of State aid since its founding 
 in 1792, but New Hampshire was the first State to extend aid to the newly 
 formed county societies. In 1817 the legislature of that State granted $100 
 to each of two county societies. The appropriation was increased in 1818 and 
 divided among 5 societies. 16 Massachusetts and New York both embarked 
 on a liberal program of State aid in 1819. The former offered $200 annually 
 to every society which should raise and invest a fund of $1000 and a propor¬ 
 tional sum for greater investments up to $600 per year. Under this act and 
 its amendments, the agricultural societies of Massachusetts received, in the 
 years 1819 to 1845, $n 5-8oo from the State treasury. 17 
 
 The legislature of New York (act of 7 April, 1819) appropriated $10,000 
 a year for 2 years, later extended to 4 years, “ for the promotion of agricul¬ 
 ture and family domestic manufactures.” Quotas ranging from $75 to $500 
 were assigned to the various counties, according to their population. The law 
 provided that the amounts granted to the counties should be equal to the 
 funds raised by their members, but not in excess of their quotas. The funds 
 of the societies were to be expended for granting premiums at their annual 
 fairs. 
 
 In the years 1819 to 1825 the funds available for the aid of agricultural 
 societies in New York amounted to over $60,000, but of this less than $43,000 
 was actually paid out, the balance remaining unclaimed because of the failure 
 of the societies in some counties to raise funds of their own in compliance 
 with the terms of the law. 18 An interesting feature of the New York law, 
 which was found also in the New Hampshire law of 1820, was the establish¬ 
 ment of a State board of agriculture to be composed of the presidents of 
 the county agricultural societies or delegates chosen in their stead. The chief 
 duty of this board was the publication of an annual volume of essays and 
 reports. 19 Thus the ideal of the older “ literary ” societies was to be engrafted 
 on the newer county organization. In Pennsylvania a State agricultural society, 
 incorporated in 1823, with State aid, performed much the same duties as 
 the State boards. 
 
 THE CLIMAX OF RURAL ORGANIZATION. 
 
 The climax of rural organization was reached between the years 1820 and 
 1825. In 1822 the repeal of State aid in New Hampshire was followed in a 
 few years by the disappearance of all its societies. In New York the with- 
 
 15 See p. 100 and references there given. 
 
 16 N. H. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, 1850, 1851, 1852, pp. 14-29. 
 
 17 Mass. Sec’y of the Commonwealth, Returns of the Agricultural Societies (1845), 
 
 p. xi. 
 
 18 N. Y. (State) Senate Journal, 49th Session, Jan. 1826, pp. 176-183. 
 
 19 N. Y. Bd. Agric., Memoirs, 3 vols. (1821 to 1826), I (1821), p. vii; N. H. State Bd. 
 
 Agric., A. H. Agricultural Respository, No. 1 (1822), pp. 7-9; Penn. Agric. Soc., 
 
 Memoirs, I (1824), pp. xi-xv. 
 
190 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 drawal of State funds was followed by the wholesale collapse of the move¬ 
 ment, so that by 1830 only one county, Jefferson, still supported an agricul¬ 
 tural society. 20 In Connecticut and in Pennsylvania only a few societies sur¬ 
 vived after 1825. State aid in Massachusetts was probably largely responsible 
 for the continued existence of a number of county societies, but even in that 
 State no new societies were organized between 1823 and 1839. 21 West of the 
 Alleghenies, in Ohio, the movement gave signs of continued life in the organ¬ 
 ization of 6 counties in the years 1819 to 1833. By the act of February 25, 
 1833, State funds were made available with the result that societies were 
 founded in 15 counties between that date and 1840. 22 In Maine, a State which 
 like Ohio was in this period one of the newer agricultural regions, at least 
 two societies had maintained a continuous existence from 1818 to 1832. In the 
 latter year a policy of State aid was inaugurated, resulting in the organization 
 of 6 counties before 1840. 23 A revival of interest in agricultural societies 
 was evident in a few counties in New York State in the closing years of the 
 decade 1830-1840, but in general the movement remained at low ebb through¬ 
 out the older States. 
 
 THE CAUSES OF THE RISE AND DECLINE OF COUNTY 
 
 SOCIETIES. 
 
 The spectacular rise and decline of county agricultural societies in this 
 period should be related to the great variety of “ reform ” movements which 
 were in the air at the time. The facility with which the Americans organized 
 for all sorts of purposes was remarked by De Tocqueville. 24 In 1840 he wrote: 
 
 “Americans of all ages, all conditions, and all dispositions, constantly form asso¬ 
 ciations. They have not only commercial and manufacturing companies, in which all 
 take part, but associations of a thousand other kinds—religious, moral, serious, futile, 
 extensive or restricted, enormous or diminutive. The Americans make associations to 
 give entertainments, to found establishments for education, to build inns, to construct 
 churches, to diffuse books, to send missionaries to the antipodes; and in this manner 
 they found hospitals, prisons, and schools. If it be proposed to advance some truth, 
 or to foster some feeling by the encouragement of a great example, they form a society. 
 Wherever, at the head of some new undertaking, you see the Government in France, 
 or a man of rank in England, in the United States you will be sure to find an 
 association.” 
 
 In the case of the agricultural societies the natural tendency toward organ¬ 
 ization was stimulated by the policy of State aid, and consequently the move¬ 
 ment spread far ahead of the real need for it, i. e., ahead of the appreciation 
 and desire for organization on the part of practical farmers. As in the case 
 of later associations of farmers, such as the Patrons of Husbandry, those 
 who rushed to join entertained exaggerated hopes of the benefits they would 
 receive. When the first flush of enthusiasm had faded and none of their 
 vague anticipations had materialized, their support wavered. When eventu¬ 
 ally the support from the State treasuries was withdrawn the whole flimsy 
 fabric collapsed. 
 
 20 N. Y. Farmer, III (1830), p. 295. 
 
 21 Mass. Sec’y of the Commonwealth, Returns of the Agricultural Societies (1845), p. x. 
 
 22 Ohio State Bd. Agric. Brief History, 9-24. 
 
 23 Maine Bd. of Agric. 1st Annual qeport (1st ed., 1856), pp. 15-17. 
 
 24 Democracy in America, III, 220. See also Turner, Rise of the New West, 6. 
 
ORGANIZATION AND EDUCATION OF FARMERS 
 
 191 
 
 RELATION OF RURAL ORGANIZATION TO GENERAL 
 
 INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS. 
 
 The relation of the earliest movement for rural organization to general 
 industrial conditions is significant. Although begun in a period of rising prices, 
 the greatest activity of the county societies, as of later agrarian movements, 
 came in a period of rapidly falling prices. Farmers who were still in a self- 
 sufficient economy were not greatly afifected by price changes, but to those 
 who were at this time taking the first steps in the transition to commercial 
 agriculture, the decline in the prices of beef and pork, butter and cheese, wool, 
 wheat, and corn brought distress. With vague hopes they turned for relief 
 to the county societies. But in the latter’s campaign for better farming the 
 
 The index number of general prices for the years 1801 to 1824 is taken from Hansen’s 
 article in American Statistical Association, Quarterly Publications, XIV (1914-15), 
 p. 808. The figure for 1809 I have supplied independently, using identical data and 
 methods. For the years 1825—1863 the index number is based on the yearly average of 
 Few York wholesale prices of 74 commodities quoted in the Report of the Secretary 
 of the' Treasury for 1863. A weighted index number with base i860 computed from this 
 material was published by Juergens in American Statistical Association, Quarterly 
 Publications, XII (1910-11), pp. 544-557. 
 
 In computing the index of farm products for 1801—1824 the prices of the following 
 commodities were usedbeef, beans, bacon, butter, cheese, flaxseed, flour, barley, corn, 
 rje, oats, hemp, hops, hides, lard, cornmeal, pork, tobacco. These prices were obtained 
 from manuscript data furnished by Professor Hansen, not published in his article. For 
 the years 1825-1863 the commodities making up the farm-price index are: beef, butter, 
 cheese, wheat, corn, rye, oats, hops, hides, lard, cornmeal, pork, tobacco, and wool. 
 Both indices are simple arithmetical averages. The index numbers are presented in 
 tabular form on page 493 of the Statistical Appendix. 
 
 farmers found little comfort. What they wanted to know was not how to grow 
 greater crops and fatter animals (irrespective of cost), but how and where 
 to sell what they already had produced. Such knowledge the societies were 
 not prepared to supply. In favoring the withdrawal of State aid from the New 
 York societies, a legislative committee called attention to the prevailing busi¬ 
 ness depression and said: 
 
 “Agricultural products especially, if remote from market, will net but very little; 
 and these appropriations necessarily increase the taxes upon the agriculturist, whose 
 
192 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 crops, when raised, will hardly be sufficient to pay them. Were these societies calculated 
 to raise the price and value of crops, as well as to increase their quantity, they wou d 
 perhaps be entitled to additional consideration.” 25 
 
 DISREGARD OF PRODUCTION COSTS IN AWARDING 
 
 PREMIUMS. 
 
 The neglect of economic considerations by the societies in the distribution 
 of their premiums was at the bottom of much of the indifference and even 
 hostility with which they were regarded by working farmers. Complaints were 
 frequent that the societies were undemocratic institutions. However much 
 to be deplored, it cannot be disguised,” said the speaker at the 1823 cattle 
 show of the Berkshire (Massachusetts) society, 26 “that there is a lurking 
 
 jealousy and ill-will toward these societies.” The working farmers 
 
 did not feel kindly toward the gentlemen farmers who usually held the offices 
 in the societies and took all the premiums. But their attitude was not mean 
 envy. They showed a justifiable disgust at the award of premiums to livestock 
 and crops without regard to the costs involved in producing the specimens. 
 Naturally, they had no chance in a competition purely of production. A 
 Dutchess County farmer wrote to the New York Board of Agriculture as 
 
 follows: 27 
 
 “I have killed, without any other feeding than was common to my working oxen 
 and cows, two stag steers short of four years old, the beef of which weighed about 
 900 lbs. and in New-York sold for $8 and $9 per cwt. and made beautiful beef, although 
 they were bulls until after they were two years old. And yet if I was to exhibit my 
 stock (which for beauty of form cannot be exceeded,) I am persuaded, from the ex¬ 
 amples I have seen, that the premiums would be awarded to some ill-formed, over-fed, 
 monstrous animal, that has been fed for the purpose, in a manner that, if adopted by 
 any farmer, would ruin him; while the raising of stock according to my method, would 
 be one of the most profitable articles that could engage the attention of a piactical 
 
 farmer. < . 
 
 “ The above is so well understood to be the manner in which the state bounty is dis¬ 
 posed of, that very few of the best practical farmers in this part of the country will 
 become members of agricultural societies, or attend their exhibitions.” 
 
 WHAT THE COUNTY SOCIETIES ACCOMPLISHED. 
 
 In spite of many defects, the county societies of this period should be cred¬ 
 ited with valuable accomplishments. Their annual cattle shows were the first 
 agencies for agricultural education which had a popular appeal. The exhioi- 
 tion of Merino sheep, of English cattle, and of new tools and machines spread 
 the knowledge of these improvements among practical farmers more rapidly 
 than could any other existing institution. For example, the introduction in 
 the years 1820 to 1830 of the cast-iron plows was much hastened by their 
 exhibition and practical demonstration in the plowing matches at the shows. 
 The annual addresses contained flowery rhetoric and copious references to 
 
 25 N. Y. Assembly Journal, 44th session (1820-21), p. 842. . . 
 
 26 N. E. Farmer, II (1823-24), p. 212. See also Mass. Agricultural Repository, A 
 
 (1828-32), p. 103. . 0 
 
 27 Memoirs, II (1823), p. 188. See also N. H. Agric. Soc. Transactions, 1850, 1851, i«o2, 
 
 p. 29; N. Y. Fanner, VII (1834), p. 151; Welby, in Thwaites, Early Western 
 
 Travels, XII, 320. 
 
ORGANIZATION AND EDUCATION OF FARMERS 193 
 
 Pliny, Columella, and Virgil which passed harmlessly over the heads of the 
 majority of the audience. Much of the advice which the speakers gave was 
 fortunately neglected, such, for instance, as the exhortations to plant hemp 
 and to raise silkworms, and, in New England, to grow wheat. 
 
 The social and recreational features of the cattle shows, early emphasized 
 by Watson, were perhaps no less important than the purely educational. They 
 satisfied the farmers need for more social contacts and, on the whole, they 
 can hardly have failed to stimulate better farming. Even if the majority of 
 attending farmers disdained to compete for premiums, their ambition must 
 have been stirred. Moreover, the association in each county of hundreds of 
 farmers in an organization of their own must have given rise to a new com¬ 
 munity of interest and have created a new feeling of their importance as an 
 economic group. 
 
 REVIVAL OF STATE AID—CROP BOUNTIES—AGRICULTURAL 
 
 SURVEYS. 
 
 The years 1835 to 1840 mark the beginning of a new era in the policy of 
 State aid to agriculture. State legislatures were besought on all sides for ap¬ 
 propriations, for the aid of county societies, for the establishment of State 
 boards of agriculture, for agricultural schools, for the collection of informa¬ 
 tion, for crop bounties, and for the eradication of insect pests. In New York, 
 the State capitol was besieged each year by a State agricultural society and 
 a State agricultural convention, pointedly holding their meetings at Albany 
 while the legislature was in session. In 1841 the lawmakers capitulated, grant¬ 
 ing a substantial appropriation for agricultural purposes. 28 
 
 In Massachusetts and in Maine the State legislatures revived the old policy 
 of direct subsidies to encourage the production of certain crops. Massachu¬ 
 setts in three years, 1838 to 1840, paid out $27,900 in bounties for the produc¬ 
 tion of 288,065 bushels of wheat. 29 
 
 The experiment, as this result proves, was a failure. And although each claimant 
 for the bounty was obliged to make a minute statement of his process of culture, no 
 new light was obtained of practical importance. There was much complaint of injury 
 to the crop by drought, grain insect, smut, &c., and but little enterprise and perseverance 
 shown in continuing its cultivation.” 30 
 
 A bounty on the production of raw silk was also ineffective. In the 5 years 
 1836 to 1840, when bounties were offered, $2,430 was paid out on 14,160 
 pounds of cocoons, 956 pounds of reeled silk, and 344 pounds of thrown silk. 
 In Maine a bounty on wheat was offered in 1837 and in 1838 a bounty on 
 corn. Both acts were repealed in 1839 after claims amounting to $231,500.86 
 had been paid. 31 
 
 AGRICULTURAL PERIODICALS. 
 
 The origin of the American agricultural press, comprising weekly and 
 monthly journals devoted wholly or in large part to agricultural interests, falls 
 
 28 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, XXIII (1863), pp. 151-155. 
 
 29 Massachusetts Legislative Documents, 1841, Senate Doc. No. 25, House Doc No 40 
 
 (1839). 
 
 30 Mass. Bd. Agric. gth Annual Report (1861), p. 123. 
 
 81 Maine Legislative Documents (1843), Treasurer's Report, 12. 
 
194 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 in the second and third decades of the nineteenth century. The first Amer¬ 
 ican “ farm paper ” was the American Farmer, which began in Baltimore in 
 1819 a career of continuous publication lasting until 1833. The New England 
 Farmer, established in 1822, The New York Farmer (1826), The Genesee 
 Farmer\ 1831), The Cultivator (1834), The Maine Farmer (1835), were all 
 ably conducted and widely read. In addition there sprang up in the years 1830 
 to 1840 a number of short-lived journals, published principally in western 
 cities. Altogether there were more than 30 agricultural periodicals in circula¬ 
 tion at the end of the period, with, perhaps, 100,000 readers. 32 
 
 There was much in the early periodicals which was but poorly adapted to 
 the needs and understanding of the mass of rural people. A letter to the 
 New England Farmer 33 complains 
 
 “there is so little matter in it of use to the small, poor, middle-interest farmer. . . . 
 and there is so much about flowers, tulips, geraniums, etc., etc., and so much about 
 this and that great farm, managed by the rich and opulent, all of which is beyond the 
 reach and calculated to discourage the great mass.” 
 
 On the whole, however, they were important educational agents. They 
 cooperated with the agricultural societies, publishing their premium lists and 
 announcing their awards. They printed extensive accounts of the annual 
 cattle shows, with excerpts from many of the addresses. They reprinted ex¬ 
 tensively the more important English agricultural treatises; they gave sum¬ 
 maries of foreign and domestic news. By quoting regularly the prices of farm 
 products in the principal city markets, they attempted to keep their readers 
 in touch with price fluctuations and market conditions. 
 
 AGRICULTURAL SCHOOLS. 
 
 A beginning was made in formal instruction in agriculture in American 
 educational institutions in I79 2 > when a professorship of natural history, 
 chemistry, and agriculture was established at Columbia University. The funds 
 for the support of the new chair came in part at least from an appropriation 
 by the New York legislature. It was not until 1822, however, that there was 
 opened at Gardiner, Maine, the first American institution devoted exclusively 
 to training young men for the vocation of farming. The Gardiner Lyceum, 
 named from its founder and principal benefactor, Robert Hallowell Gardiner, 
 opened its doors in January 1823, with a faculty of one, a lecturer in natural 
 philosophy. By February 1828, there had been under instruction 191 students. 
 The elective system, short winter courses, and an experimental farm, where 
 students might earn a part of their board, were notable features of the school. 
 The Maine legislature voted $2,000 of State funds to the lyceum in 1823 and 
 continued the appropriations until 1831. After that date the school lost its 
 distinctive agricultural character. 34 
 
 Schools for farmers’ sons were actively discussed in other New England 
 States, and in Connecticut, at Derby, a school, opened in 1824, seems to have 
 had considerable success for a year or two. 
 
 32 Estimates of Jesse Buel, in The Cidtivator, V (1838-39), p. 29; VI (1839-40), p. 67. 
 , 33 XVII (1838-1839), p. 406. . , 
 
 34 See Stevens, America’s First Agricultural School, in Scientific Monthly, XIII, No. 0 
 (Dec. 1921), pp. 531 - 540 . 
 
ORGANIZATION AND EDUCATION OF FARMERS 
 
 195 
 
 The agitation for agricultural training had become so pronounced that many private 
 enterprises took advantage of it to organize schools. Into these schools were incorporated 
 more or less of the new doctrines ot manual labor, application of science, training for 
 occupation, democracy of education, while usually holding in the main to the classical 
 or literary routine as a framework or background. Some of these institutions were no 
 ou t more or less speculative. Some of them were pretentious in their announcements 
 and were likely to assume the name of college, but they were what we would now 
 call private schools.” 85 
 
 The ideas of vocational training in agriculture developed by Fellenberg 
 in Switzerland were incorporated in the policies of a number of American 
 schools, notably those founded at Bristol, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, in 
 i 83 i , stid Whitesborough, Oneida County, New York, in the same year. 
 A cardinal feature of these schools was the insistence on manual labor by the 
 students. At the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute at Troy, New York, in¬ 
 struction in agriculture was given at first according to Fellenberg’s methods, 
 but later the manual requirement was abandoned. 
 
 The idea of a State agricultural college was given a great deal of discussion 
 in the agricultural periodicals and in the annual addresses of the agricultural 
 societies. In New York the State society in 1833 outlined a plan for a school 
 and a farm to be supported by State funds, and the next year a joint committee 
 of the legislature reported favorably a bill to carry out the plan, but no action 
 was taken. 36 It was not until the decade before the Civil War that the State 
 agricultural schools became a reality. 37 
 
 35 Bailey, in Bailey, Cyclopedia of American Agriculture IV 377 
 It N. Y. Farmer, VI (1833), p. 84; VII (1834), p. 151. 
 
 - Many of the facts in this section have been taken from the article by L. H. Bailey, 
 ducation by Means of Agriculture, in Bailey’s Cyclopedia of American Agriculture, 
 IV, chapter VIII. I have also used A. C. True’s article, Agricultural Education in 
 the United States, in U. S. Dept. Agric. Yearbook (1899), pp. 157-190. 
 
Chapter XV. —Foreign Trade and the Home 
 
 Market. 
 
 DECLINE IN RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF EXPORTS OF 
 
 FARM PRODUCTS. 
 
 Export trade in farm products was relatively of less importance to the 
 northern farmer in the early decades of the nineteenth century than in the 
 late colonial period. Then the foreign market had offered practically his 
 sole opportunity for sales, but now shipments to the West Indies and to 
 Europe were overshadowed by sales to the manufacturing villages at home. 
 The period 1790 to 1807 was characterized by a large European demand for 
 American breadstuffs, to supply the deficiencies caused by war and crop fail¬ 
 ures. At this time, too, England was forced, owing to the war-time interrup¬ 
 tion of communication with her colonial possessions in America, to tempo¬ 
 rarily remove the restrictions on exports from the United States to the West 
 Indies. 1 
 
 Table 28. —Average annual exports of selected farm products. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Commerce and Navigation Reports. See tables 66 and 67, pp. 493 , 494 -] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Wheat, a 
 thousands of 
 bushels. 
 
 Corn, b 
 thousands of 
 bushels. 
 
 Pork and c 
 pork products, 
 thousands of 
 pounds. 
 
 Butter and 
 cheese,thou¬ 
 sands of 
 pounds. 
 
 Beef and 
 tallow, thou¬ 
 sands of 
 pounds. 
 
 1791 
 
 to 1807.... 
 
 4,169 
 
 1,838 
 
 14,289 
 
 2,786 
 
 17,334 
 
 1808 
 
 1814.... 
 
 4,214 
 
 i ,457 
 
 5,590 
 
 1,677 
 
 8009 
 
 1815 
 
 1820. . . . 
 
 4,695 
 
 1,379 
 
 12,042 
 
 1,546 
 
 7,012 
 
 1821 
 
 1830.... 
 
 4 ,Il 6 
 
 1,322 
 
 21,130 
 
 1,951 
 
 14532 
 
 1831 
 
 1840.... 
 
 4,446 
 
 1,035 
 
 20,730 
 
 1,734 
 
 8,510 
 
 This table shows exports from Baltimore, New Orleans, and other southern ports, as well as from 
 the ports of Northern States. 
 
 a Including wheat equivalent of flour exports. 
 b Including corn equivalent of corn-meal expoits. 
 c Pork, hams, bacon, and lard. 
 
 Foreign trade was subject to serious interruption in the years 1808 to 1814, 
 first by the embargo and non-intercourse acts and then by the War of 1812. 
 After 1815 the disposal of stocks accumulated during the war caused large 
 exports to Europe for a few years, but the temporary prosperity was soon 
 brought to an end by the crisis of 1819. In the remaining 20 years conditions 
 in both the European and West India markets were not favorable to our export 
 trade. Europe, now at peace, was able to supply her own breadstuffs. In 
 England the corn laws imposed heavy duties on the import of foreign wheat. 
 The trade with the British West Indies, according to the commercial treaty 
 of July 1815, was to be regulated as either nation (i. e., England or the United 
 States) desired. The result was that shipments of American flour, provisions, 
 
 1 See p. 135 - 
 196 
 
FOREIGN TRADE AND HOME MARKET 
 
 197 
 
 corn, rice, lumber, and livestock were limited, and American ships were ex¬ 
 cluded from the ports of the British Islands. The United States replied by 
 forbidding the exportation of these supplies in British vessels. Direct inter¬ 
 
 course being thus at an end, the islands were nevertheless supplied in rounda¬ 
 bout fashion through the ports of Swedish and Danish colonies. Not until 
 1830 did the final adjustment of the controversy again permit direct trade. 2 
 
 Fig. ii. —Exports of wheat and corn (including wheat, flour and cornmeal), 1791-1846. 
 
 The fluctuations in the principal exports of northern produce are shown 
 in figures 10, 11, and 12. The data from which the charts were prepared will 
 be found on pages 493 and 494. 
 
 THE HOME MARKET.—ITS SIGNIFICANCE. 
 
 In the first half of the nineteenth century an industrial revolution was in 
 progress in our Eastern States, comparable in its significance and in many of 
 
 2 See Johnson, et al., Domestic and Foreign Commerce of United States, II, chs. XXIII 
 and XXIV; American State Papers, Commerce and Navigation, II, 631. 
 
198 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 its characteristics to the industrial revolution in England of the last half of 
 the preceding century. On this side of the Atlantic as on that, power machinery 
 replaced hand tools, and the processes of manufacture were transferred from 
 the farmhouses and from the shops of craftsmen to factories. Manufacturing 
 split off from agriculture, and there arose a specialized non-agricultural class 
 in the community, consumers but not producers of farm products. The foreign 
 market after 1815 was shrinking, and at best it had been casual and precarious. 
 But now a sure and growing market was established, as it were, at the farmers’ 
 very door. 
 
 The importance to agricultural development of the home market thus 
 created can hardly be overemphasized. 3 By giving the farmer an opportunity 
 
 near at hand to sell his produce it did what all the exhortations of agricultural 
 societies and publicists had failed to do. It stimulated increased production, 
 better tillage, and improvement of livestock. Self-sufficing farming was 
 given up. The farmer, having something to sell, could now buy his clothes, 
 furniture, and tools. He got better goods at less cost and his standard of living 
 rose. Like manufacturing, agriculture became an independent, specialized 
 industry. By becoming less of a jack-of-all-trades, the farmer became more 
 of a farmer. He became more efficient by specialization. The development of 
 the market caused also a territorial division of labor in agriculture. Under 
 the old conditions all the products consumed in a locality had to be raised 
 there, but when the opportunity of profitable sale was afforded, each locality 
 
 3 The “ home market ” received much attention from economists and politicians in the 
 years 1820 to 1840. The necessity of tariff protection to manufactures in order to 
 stimulate agriculture was the basis of Clay’s “ American system.” The superiority 
 of the home market to the foreign market was strongly emphasized by Henry 
 Carey, the foremost American economist of his day, in his Principles of Social 
 Science, II, 28-31. 
 
FOREIGN TRADE AND HOME MARKET 
 
 199 
 
 tended to concentrate its attention on the products for which it was best 
 fitted on account of soil and climate and location in respect to market. And 
 so by the fuller utilization of the advantages of each locality, the productivity 
 of farming was increased. 
 
 But all these remarkable changes did not happen at once. In fact, all the 
 possible advantages of commercial agriculture have not yet been completely 
 realized. In the period under consideration only their beginnings can be traced. 
 The market at first developed but slowly, and farmers, for a great many 
 reasons, were slow to take advantage of their new opportunities. Conserva¬ 
 tive, with but little scientific knowledge, and perhaps even less business experi¬ 
 ence, they not unnaturally hesitated and clung to the old ways. Gradually they 
 gave up household manufactures and modified their farm management to 
 meet market demands, and then came the competition of the West in grain, 
 provisions, and wool, which upset many of their calculations and forced a 
 reconsideration of their problems. 
 
 INCREASING DENSITY OF POPULATION IN THE EAST. 
 
 Statistical evidence of the growth of a home market is found in the increas¬ 
 ing density of population east of the Alleghenies and in the beginnings of 
 urban concentration. 
 
 Table 29.— Population east of Allegheny Mountains, 1790 to 1840. 
 
 [Thousands of people.] 
 
 
 1790. 
 
 1800. 
 
 1810. 
 
 1820. 
 
 1830. 
 
 1840. 
 
 Maine . 
 
 97 
 
 142 
 
 85 
 
 379 
 
 69 
 
 238 
 
 184 
 
 339 
 
 325 
 
 152 
 
 184 
 
 154 
 
 423 
 
 69 
 
 251 
 
 211 
 
 572 
 
 405 
 
 229 
 
 214 
 
 218 
 
 472 
 
 77 
 
 262 
 
 246 
 
 884 
 
 520 
 
 298 
 
 244 
 
 236 
 
 523 
 
 83 
 
 275 
 
 278 
 
 1,107 
 
 659 
 
 399 
 
 269 
 
 281 
 
 610 
 
 97 
 
 298 
 
 321 
 
 1,512 
 
 819 
 
 502 
 
 285 
 
 292 
 
 738 
 
 108 
 
 310 
 
 373 
 
 1,881 
 
 995 
 
 New Hampshire . 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 Eastern New York 3 . 
 
 Eastern Pennsylvania b . 
 
 Total® . 
 
 1,858 
 
 2,421 
 
 3,122 
 
 3,704 
 
 4,607 
 
 5,484 
 
 Density per Square Mile at Successive Census Dates. 
 
 Maine . 
 
 3-2 
 
 5 -i 
 
 77 
 
 10.0 
 
 134 
 
 16.8 
 
 New Hampshire . 
 
 15-7 
 
 20.4 
 
 237 
 
 27.0 
 
 29.8 
 
 3 i -5 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 9.4 
 
 16.9 
 
 23.9 
 
 25-9 
 
 30.8 
 
 320 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 47.1 
 
 52.6 
 
 58.7 
 
 65.1 
 
 75-9 
 
 917 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 64-5 
 
 64.8 
 
 72.1 
 
 77-8 
 
 91.1 
 
 102.0 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 49.4 
 
 52.1 
 
 54-3 
 
 57 -i 
 
 61.8 
 
 64-3 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 24.5 
 
 28.1 
 
 32.7 
 
 36.9 
 
 42.7 
 
 497 
 
 Eastern New York. 
 
 9-5 
 
 16.0 
 
 247 
 
 30.9 
 
 42.2 
 
 52.5 
 
 Eastern Pennsylvania . 
 
 15-4 
 
 19.1 
 
 24-5 
 
 3 i.i 
 
 38.6 
 
 47-0 
 
 Summary . 
 
 147 
 
 19.1 
 
 24.7 
 
 29-3 
 
 364 
 
 42.9 
 
 a See note a, Table 22 , p. 152. 
 b See note b, Table 22. p. 152. 
 c Including fractions of thousands. 
 
200 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The increase of the manufacturing and commercial population was rapid 
 after 1810, and in some localities the whole gain in numbers between 1810 
 and 1840 was thus explained. In southern New England (Massachusetts, 
 Rhode Island, and Connecticut) in 1810 there were 811,000 people; by 1840 
 this number had increased to 1,157,000. Analysis of the history of the com¬ 
 mercial and manufacturing communities shows that their growth explains the 
 entire increase. The population of agricultural townships, on the other hand, 
 showed a tendency to decline. 4 In Northern New England little manufactur¬ 
 ing had developed before 1840 and the gain in population was therefore 
 largely agricultural. 
 
 URBAN CONCENTRATION. 
 
 Selecting as urban centers all communities of over 8,000 5 people, we find 
 in 1790, in the territory north of Maryland and east of the Alleghenies, only 
 three such towns, Boston, New York, and Philadelphia. Their combined 
 population was less than 80,000 and made up but 4*2 per cent of the total. In 
 1840 there were in the same territory 33 urban communities, whose combined 
 population was nearly 1,000,000, or 17.9 per cent of the total. West of the 
 Alleghenies in the northern region there were no towns of 8,000 in 1790. In 
 1840 there were 7; Buffalo, Rochester, Pittsburg, Allegheny, Cincinnati, Louis¬ 
 ville, and St. Louis, with a combined population of about 150,000. The loca¬ 
 tion of urban centers and their relative size is indicated in figure 13. 
 
 In 1790, Boston had 18,000 inhabitants; in 1840 there were in the city 
 93,000, and in the surrounding suburban area (towns whose central points 
 were not more than 10 miles distant) about 80,000 more. New York had 
 grown from 33,000 to 313,000. Its suburban area (including the adjoining 
 counties. Queens, Kings, Richmond, and Westchester and portions of Essex 
 and Union counties in New Jersey) contained about half a million people, a 
 large part of whom were purchasers of farm products. The density of popu¬ 
 lation in this area averaged 400 to the square mile. Philadelphia, including 
 the county as well as the city, had 55,000 in 179° an d 258,000 in 1840. 
 
 THE INFLUENCE OF THE HOME MARKET. 
 
 The beginnings of better farming in the East were found principally in 
 the neighborhood of the three largest towns—Boston, New York, and Phila¬ 
 delphia. In these suburban areas the farmers, stimulated by the educational 
 and inspirational propaganda of the agricultural societies and encouraged by 
 rising prices, made substantial progress. They improved their soil with gyp¬ 
 sum and clover, and they improved their sheep and cattle by importation of 
 European breeds. But about 1820 export markets failed, prices collapsed, 
 and the agricultural societies went out of business. Agricultural improvement 
 must have received a severe set-back had it not been for the new home market, 
 which at this time was just beginning to make itself felt. 
 
 4 Bid well, in Am. Statistical Asso. Quarterly Publications, new series, XV, 813-839. 
 
 5 The task of selecting communities which were urban presents marked difficulties. 
 
 (See U. S. Census of 1880, I, Population, p. xxviii, and Census of 1910, I, Popula¬ 
 tion, p. 53.) The 8,000 limit is conservative for there were in 1840 many industrial 
 communities in New England of between 5,000 and 8,000 inhabitants. 
 
FOREIGN TRADE AND HOME MARKET 
 
 201 
 
 With new markets growing up at the farmer’s front door, agriculture went 
 forward, and now the progress was democratic and widespread. The economic 
 force of the market worked on dirt farmers ” as well as on gentlemen far¬ 
 mers. With the new iron plows, harrows, and cultivators came better tillage; 
 with the horse rakes larger hay crops were harvested. The hay was better, for 
 clover and other artificial grasses were sown more generally. Potatoes and 
 other roots were for the first time grown in quantities for fodder. Livestock 
 
 [Bony 0 * 
 
 
 Hand I 
 
 j*Lou/sville\^ Richmond** ^^orfolk 
 
 Petersburg 
 
 mSt.Loutsj 
 
 Charleston* 
 Savannah •> 
 
 7obi/<&i 
 
 o 
 
 / Providence 23, / 7/ 
 2 Lowell 20,796 
 3. Sa/em / 5,082 
 9. New Haven / 2,923 
 
 5. NewBedford / 2,087 
 
 6. Charlestown //,989 
 7. Springfield /0,985 
 8 Fishkill 10,937 
 
 9. Poughkeepsie 10,006 
 9,968 
 8,333 
 9,539 
 9,367 
 9,089 
 9,0/2 
 8.959 
 8,909 
 
 10. Hartford 
 // Newport 
 \J2. Smith field 
 13. Lynn 
 /9. Roxburg 
 IS Nontuckei 
 ft6. Alexandria 
 / 7 Cambridge 
 
 Fig. 13 .— Urban concentration, 1840 . 
 
 were better kept and more attention was paid to the breeding of sheep, cattle, 
 and swine. Barnyard manures were more carefully preserved; gypsum and 
 lime were more widely used. By 1840 the results were evident. Buel 6 
 observed that the depleted soils in some of the older districts had been renewed 
 by intensive cultivation. He wrote: 
 
 “ The counties of Dutchess, Orange, Columbia, and a large portion of Long Island, 
 m our own state [New York] and many districts in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, &c! 
 sufficiently attest this fact. In these, exhaustion has given way to a system of augmenta¬ 
 tion and improvement.” 
 
 6 The Cultivator, IV (1837-38), p. 93. 
 
202 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 IMPROVEMENTS IN NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 In New England there was a general atmosphere of improvement. Said 
 the speaker at the Middlesex County (Massachusetts) Fair in 1847: 7 
 
 « Within the last twenty years agriculture has made great advances in this county. 
 meadows have been reclaimed; drains have been opened; beautiful orchards have been 
 planted; tasteful cottages, improved houses and barns, have been constructed; the races 
 of animals have been improved; the sources of fertility have been guarded, land more 
 highly cultivated; and the society I have the honor to address has, no doubt, contributed 
 
 to the progress of agriculture.” 
 
 The prosperity of farmers was reflected in a greater interest in civic better¬ 
 ment. The pastor of a small town in New Hampshire related in 1837 the 
 remarkable changes that had occurred there. 8 
 
 “As this is an age of enterprise and improvement, it would be expected, that even 
 in the history of a small town, something would be said on this subject. And I would 
 say that whoever recollects the aspects of the roads, the fields and the buildings, as 
 they were forty years ago, and looks on them now, and considers what vast labor and 
 cost of a hale and enterprising people have been expended, he would be surprised 
 
 at the change. . . , . n , 
 
 “ The meeting-house was all tattered and torn, without a steeple, without a bell, and 
 
 almost without a covering; and might have remained so for an age, or till it jotted 
 down, if it had not been for the people of God, who, with their own money and hands, 
 by divine aid, put it in a better condition. The roads were full of stones, or in some 
 places of mire; but now for almost six miles, .... they are paved underneath with 
 stone, and covered with gravel. The buildings, which were mostly old and shattered, 
 are now repaired or displaced for new ones, and many new and handsome houses are 
 reared up where there were none before. The fences, reeling and decaying, are turned 
 into stone wall, of which, perhaps, there is more than in any other town of the same 
 size in the state. The swamps, which were full of useless bushes and hammocks, are 
 now levelled and replenished with luxuriant grass.” 
 
 MARKET INFLUENCES MORE EFFECTIVE THAN 
 
 EDUCATIONAL WORK. 
 
 Partial credit for the progress of the period is due to the agencies for the | 
 diffusion of agricultural knowledge, the annual fairs held by the few surviv¬ 
 ing or reorganized societies, and the farm papers, but market influences were ^ 
 by far more important. Wherever a paper mill or a woolen mill, a chair or 
 cabinet shop, or an iron foundry was established, farmers began to sell raw , 
 materials, straw, wool, lumber, and building materials, firewood and meat, 
 grain, dairy products, and vegetables for the mill-hands. Leaders of agricul¬ 
 tural opinion realized the significance of the home market. After enumerat¬ 
 ing the measures adopted by the New York Board of Agriculture to increase 
 production by the diffusion of knowledge, etc., a contributor to its Memoirs 
 
 wrote: 9 
 
 “ I have long been of the opinion, that the most powerful inducements which could 
 have been held out, has been omitted. I mean that of providing prompt and ready 
 markets for these productions.A ready demand for agricultural productions, at 
 
 ^ Address of E. H. Derby, in Abstract from the Returns of Agric. Socs., in Mass., 
 
 8 Rev. John Keily, Sketch of Hampstead (New Hampshire), in N. H. Hist. Soc. Col¬ 
 
 lections, V, 192. 
 
 9 Tibbitts in vol. Ill (1826), p. 289. 
 
FOREIGN TRADE AND HOME MARKET 
 
 203 
 
 remunerating prices, it is presumed, is the only adequate inducement which can be 
 relied upon, for insuring a careful cultivation of the land, or for increasing the quantity 
 of its produce. It appears almost certain, that no bounties or encouragements, which 
 it is in the power of the state, or of societies to pay directly to the agriculturist, can 
 induce him to make much improvement in his modes of cultivation, or to raise any 
 thing beyond the immediate demands of his family; while any surplus which he may 
 rmse, beyond that amount, shall be worth nothing; or where it cannot be sold, or ex- 
 c anged* upon terms of comparative equality with the profits of the capitals and labor 
 employed in the production of all the other articles required for his support.” 
 
 Concrete instances might be multiplied of the direct connection between the 
 niar ^ et an<d better farming. Ihe following item- from the Kennebec 
 (Maine) Journal 10 describes the relation of manufactures to agriculture in 
 Winthrop, Maine: 
 
 No one can ride through the town of Winthrop without observing the greater beauty 
 of the farms, and the higher state of cultivation, than prevails generally in the State 
 This has been in a great measure effected by the Agricultural Society in that town • 
 but m connexion with this there is another cause for a thrifty agriculture, viz. a cotton 
 factory. Do not smile, reader; the factories of the Eastern States have been the im- 
 peUing and most efficient causes of agricultural improvement and the increased value 
 of land. They have furnished the ready home market for the wool, the hides, the fuel 
 timber beef, pork, hay, butter, cheese, apples, cider, potatoes, and a great many other 
 vegetables, besides eggs, lamb, veal, and many other things, most of which cannot be 
 exported because of their perishable nature, and for none of which there is any foreign 
 market to be depended upon. The Agricultural Societies, agricultural publications, and 
 the experiments and study of scientific farmers, have diffused that knowledge of 
 
 f7/ Sb fZ d u y - WhlCh ^ aS , enabled the farmers to supply, from the same land they before 
 i ed, the increased demand created by the manufacturing cities, towns and villages.” 
 
 DIFFERENTIATING EFFECT OF THE MARKET. 
 
 Notwithstanding the optimistic tone of the above quotations, the agricul¬ 
 tural millennium had not arrived in the East in 1840. There was still much bad 
 farming, pastures covered with weeds, barnyards that were mud-holes, cruelly 
 neglected stock, and scanty harvests. Such farming was typical of the eigh¬ 
 teenth century; in unprogressive regions not touched with market influence 
 it was perhaps no worse than it had been, but it seemed worse by contrast 
 to the progress made elsewhere. It is true that better farming was not evenly 
 
 • *11 1 c 1 ^ ^ t was spotty,” and the spottiness was an 
 
 inevitable result of the beginnings of commercial agriculture. As long as 
 agriculture was self-sufficient and farm production was only for farm con¬ 
 sumption, the superiority of one piece of land over another, and of one farm 
 manager over his neighbor, were not obvious. But as soon as the two pieces 
 of land and their managers were brought into business competition in pro¬ 
 ducing for sale, then the differences in fertility and in location resulted in 
 differing costs of production. Thus the market acted as a selective force. 
 Under its influence good land became more sharply differentiated from poor 
 land. The latter, even entire farms, was abandoned to grow up to woods while 
 the farmers’ efforts were concentrated on the better soil. * 11 
 
 10 Quoted in New England Farmer, X (1831-32), p. 149. 
 
 11 A catalogue of farms abandoned in Milford, Massachusetts, between 1750 and 1850 
 
 is given in Ballou, Milford (Mass.), 389 et seq. On the conversion of pasturage to 
 woodland in Plymouth and Norfolk Counties (Mass.), see 4th Report Aoric of 
 Mass., 389. 
 
Chapter XVI. —Farm Labor and Labor-Saving 
 
 Machinery. 
 
 The contribution to agricultural progress which we think of as character¬ 
 istically American is the invention and development of labor-saving machin¬ 
 ery. Scarcity of labor, which for two centuries had been a characteristic of 
 northern farming, was rendered even more acute in the years 1810-1840 by 
 the growth of manufactures and by the competition of factories for the man¬ 
 power of the community. 
 
 The importance of agricultural machinery to the Eastern farmer (and it 
 was in the East that the new inventions were mostly used before 1840) can 
 be appreciated only when we realize that the industrial communities were at 
 the same time demanding from the farmer increased production and depriving 
 him of an essential factor of production. Almost all farms east of the 
 Alleghenies were probably on the stage of diminishing returns by 1840. 
 Many of them had been in that condition for over a century. Unless im¬ 
 provements were made in the methods of farming, increased output could 
 be obtained only at higher costs. 
 
 Farm wages were rising, and unless some way were found to make farm 
 labor more effective it seemed that at the very outset eastern farmers would be 
 baffled in their attempts to take advantage of market opportunities and to 
 develop commercial agriculture. Had the new farm tools and machines not 
 appeared manufactures would have been checked by rising labor costs, result¬ 
 ing from an increased cost of living, and consequently the home market itself 
 
 would have developed less vigorously. 
 
 The invention, therefore, in this period, of a number of important machines 
 such as the horse rake, the cultivator, the thresher, and the reaper, by which 
 eventually horse power was to a large extent substituted for man power on 
 the farm, and the improvement of ploughs and hand tools, making both horse 
 labor and man labor more effective, were full of significance for the progress 
 of the whole community and not alone of the farm people. 
 
 TREND CITYWARD AGGRAVATES FARM-LABOR PROBLEM. 
 
 There never had existed in the North a class of landless men who could be 
 relied upon as agricultural laborers, and consequently farm work in that 
 section was normally performed by members of the farm family. Orphans 
 and the children of the poorer farmers who were “ bound out ” were prac¬ 
 tically the only other labor force. With the growth of the factory villages 
 and towns the farmers’ sons and daughters were drawn away from agricul¬ 
 tural pursuits. The boys who were dissatisfied but who wanted to continue 
 farming still went west, as the boys of earlier generations had done. But for 
 a time after 1820 the competition of the cities seems to have largely checked 
 
 204 
 
FARM LABOR AND LABOR-SAVING MACHINERY 
 
 205 
 
 western migration. 1 The younger generation had the idea that farming was 
 bound to be unprofitable and, besides, were oppressed with a growing sense 
 of social inferiority to city folks. Speakers at cattle shows felt called upon 
 to protest against the prevalent low estimation of agriculture as a “ menial 
 employment. Wrote a contributor to the New England F anner ; 3 
 
 Every farmer s son and daughter are in pursuit of some genteel mode of living. 
 After consuming the farm in the expenses of a fashionable, flashy, fanciful education, 
 they leave the honorable profession of their fathers to become doctors, lawyers, mer¬ 
 chants, or ministers or something of the kind.” 
 
 Jesse Buel, writing in the Cultivator, described the same situation in New 
 York. 4 
 
 ‘ Thousands of young men do annually forsake the plough, and the honest profession 
 of their fathers, if not to win the fair, at least from an opinion, too often confirmed by 
 mistaken parents, that agriculture is not the road to wealth, to honor, nor to happiness. 
 And such will continue to be the case, until our agriculturists become qualified to asssume 
 that rank in society to which the importance of their calling, and their numbers, entitle 
 them, and which intelligence and self-respect can alone give them.” 
 
 Immigration afforded the farmer little help in the solution of his labor 
 problem. The Irish and English laborers, who were arriving by the thousands 
 every year in eastern ports, showed but slight aptitude for the varied tasks 
 
 of American agriculture. A farmer from St. Lawrence County, New York 
 wrote: 5 
 
 “We have, for a year or two past, had the offer of labour from British and Irish 
 emigrants, but with general pretensions to a knowledge of farming, few of them can 
 earn their board at the kind of labour required among us. The system of division of 
 a our, so beneficial in the arts, manufactories, and some of the agricultural employ¬ 
 ments, of a country overstocked with hands, renders the labourers accustomed to it, of 
 little use, among a people differently situated, who have been obliged from childhood 
 to practice twenty different employments, with equal dexterity.” 
 
 FARM WAGES, IN CHESTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 In the absence of more general data, the scale of farm wages in Chester 
 County, Pennsylvania, in 1828 6 may be taken as typical of the general wage 
 level in progressive communities of the East. By the year, agricultural labor¬ 
 ers received $80 to $100 with board and lodging or $8 per month in summer 
 and $5 in winter. By the day, the laborer received 40 cents with board, or 
 if he found himself, 62^ cents. For harvest hands, piece-work rates were 
 as follows ^reaping wheat, $1.75 to $2 per acre; for mowing “ an acre of 
 stout grass,” about $1; for mowing barley or oats, about 50 cents. When 
 paid by the day, harvest hands received from 62J to 75 cents with food. Al¬ 
 though these wages seem small according to modern standards, the labor 
 cost of farm operations was nevertheless high. A good workman could reap 
 about a half-acre of wheat in a day, making the cost of harvesting that 
 
 1 Worcester Magazine, I (1825-26), p. hi; II (1826), p. 35; N. E. Fanner, IV (1825- 
 
 26), p. 186. 
 
 2 Address of Peter Eaton, before Essex County (Massachusetts), Agricultural Society 
 
 3 ywtt 82 / 2 1’ S' 5 * x See als 5 ) N ' E ‘ Farmer > VIII (1829-30), p. 26; XVIII (1839-40), p. 206. 
 •XVI 1 (1838-39), P. 406. 
 
 IV (1837-38), p. 190. 
 
 In N. Y. Bd. Agric. Memoirs, II (1823), p. 87. 
 
 8 Letter of IVm. Darlington in American Farmer, X (1828), p. 73. 
 
206 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 crop 87^ cents to $1 per acre. Mowing barley and oats at 3 acres a day, the 
 usual rate, cost the farmer 16J cents per acre. For threshing, the price was 
 usually J 2 i cents per bushel for wheat, 7 cents for barley, and about 5 cents 
 for oats, the laborer finding his own food. The usual daily output of the 
 laborer at this work was 8 bushels of wheat or 15 bushels of barley or 20 
 
 bushels of oats. 
 
 TREND OF FARM WAGES IN MASSACHUSETTS. 
 
 Data for agricultural wages in this period for Massachusetts 7 show an 
 unmistakable upward tendency. (See fig. 14.) The data on which the 
 curves are based will be found in table 69, p. 495 - 
 
 Fig. 14.—Wages of farm labor and prices of farm products, 1801-1836. 
 
 Summarizing by decades, the average annual wages paid by the day without 
 board were : 1791 to 1800, $0,478 ; 1801 to 1810, $0,779 ; 1811 to 1820, $0.782; 
 1821 to 1830, $0,803; 1831 to 1840, $0,875. 
 
 Table 30. —Farm wages and farm prices. 
 
 Annual average for 
 • the years— 
 
 Corn, 
 
 bus. 
 
 Beef, 
 
 bbl. 
 
 Pork, 
 
 bbl. 
 
 Rye, 
 
 bus. 
 
 Farm 
 
 wages 
 
 per 
 
 day. 
 
 1801 180^ . 
 
 $0,920 
 
 .666 
 
 -m 
 
 •— 1 
 
 00 M 
 
 61 CO 
 
 0 0 
 
 $18.40 
 
 12.30 
 
 $ 0,990 
 
 •734 
 
 $0,696 
 
 765 
 
 1826—18^0 . 
 
 
 The rising cost of labor was much more serious for the farmer than these 
 figures of money wages indicate, for while wages were rising the prices of 
 farm products were falling. The contrasting tendencies in wages in prices 
 over a period of 25 years are shown in table 30. 8 
 
 7 prom Wright, Wages and Prices: 1752-1860. In Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics 
 
 of Labor, 16th Annual Report (1885), parts III and IV, p. 434 - 
 
 8 The wages are from Wright, in 16th Annual Report, Massachusetts Bureau of Statis¬ 
 
 tics of Labor, parts III and IV, 434- In the absence of data for 1829 and 1830 the 
 figures for 1825 and 1831 have been substituted. The prices are from Hayward, 
 Gazetteer of Massachusetts (Rev. ed., 1849), PP- 39 2_ 395 - 
 
FARM LABOR AND LABOR-SAVING MACHINERY 207 
 
 The quantities of produce necessary to purchase 30 days’ farm labor at the 
 prices and wages given above are shown in table 31. 
 
 Table 31.— Quantities of produce necessary to purchase 30 days 
 
 of farm labor in Massachusetts. 
 
 [Source: See Table 30.] 
 
 Years. 
 
 Corn, 
 
 bus. 
 
 I Beef, 
 
 [ bbls. 
 
 Pork, 
 
 bus. 
 
 Rye, 
 
 bbls. 
 
 1801-1805 . 
 
 27.70 
 
 3446 
 
 1.77 
 
 2.77 
 
 II 3 
 
 I.87 
 
 21.09 
 
 31.27 
 
 1826-1830 . 
 
 
 AGRICULTURAL TOOLS. 
 
 In hand tools important changes were effected. The clumsy wooden or 
 iron-shod shovels, hoes, and forks were replaced by lighter and better designed 
 implements with blades or tines of cast steel. The grain cradle came into 
 
 general use, displacing the sickle. A new cradle, lighter and more effective, 
 was designed, which was known as Vaughan’s cradle, after the inventor, 
 Charles Vaughan, of Hallowell, Maine. It was called also the Scotch bow or 
 Scotch cradle. 9 A contributor to the Maine Farmer wrote : 10 
 
 It is much lighter, more easily made and kept in repare, than the common clumsy 
 cradle > which is burdensome for a man to bear on his shoulder, and which to swing 
 
 9 A cut and description are given in Maine Farmer, V (1837), p. 178. 
 
 10 ibid., 251. 
 
208 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 all day, requires great strength and effort. To reap half an acre of grain, is considered 
 a fair day’s work; and to do this well, a man must have had some experience in the 
 business To use the old-fashioned cradle, requires so much dexterity, that, with us, 
 it is almost a trade by itself; and a cradler demands and receives two or three times 
 as much pay as a common laborer.-With the improved cradle, after a little use, a good 
 mower will be able to reap as much ground in a day, as he could mow, and to leave the 
 grain in good order to bind up. It is no inconsiderable advantage to cut the straw 
 
 close to the ground.” 
 
 AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY.—IMPROVEMENTS IN 
 
 THE PLOW. 
 
 Plows, harrows, and two-wheeled carts were the only kinds of farm equip¬ 
 ment to which animal power had been applied at the beginning of the nine¬ 
 teenth century. The more effective design of plows and harrows and the 
 substitution of the horse-drawn, four-wheeled wagon for the ox-cart consti¬ 
 tuted a great step forward in agricultural progress. Of equal if not greater 
 importance was the extension of the application of horse power to other farm 
 tasks, corn-planting and cultivating, hay-raking, reaping, and threshing. The 
 
 development of a better plow took two directions; (i) the improvement in its 
 design or form, and (2) the substitution of iron at first and later steel for 
 wood in the moldboard, share, and landside. To Thomas Jefferson belongs 
 the credit of having first in America designed a moldboard on true mathe¬ 
 matical principles. 11 Although Jefferson’s plow did not prove a practical 
 success, yet by his researches he demonstrated that plows could be made by 
 rule and set forth one of the many rules that are applicable to their construc¬ 
 tion. To Jefferson, therefore, belongs the credit for taking the first step in 
 removing plow-making from the domain of empiricism. Each plow need no 
 longer be an individual product whose design was determined by the fancy 
 or skill of its maker. It was now possible for moldboards to be produced by 
 many plowrights on a common model. 
 
 In 1797, Charles Newbold, of Burlington, New Jersey, obtained a patent 
 for a cast-iron plow, having the moldboard, share, and landside all in one 
 casting. Before his time moldboards had been of wood, protected by iron 
 plates, and some of these plows had been equipped with cast-iron shares. 1- 
 Newbold had no success in persuading farmers to adopt his invention, al¬ 
 ii Jefferson described his moldboard in a letter of March 23, 1798, to Sir John Sinclair, 
 printed in Am. Philosophical Soc. Transactions, IV (i 799 ), PP -.313 et seq. 
 
 12 a cast-iron share was exhibited before the N. Y. Society for Promotion of Useiu 
 Arts in 1794. See Transactions, I (2d ed., 1801), p. 1 73 - 
 
ail 
 
 
 Fig. 16.— Cradling and binding 
 
 wheat in the old 
 
 Fig. 17.— Cradling wheat. (Photograph taken in Montgomery County, Indiana 
 
 July 2, 1918.) 
 
FARM LABOR AND LABOR-SAVING MACHINERY 
 
 209 
 
 though he spent large sums of money in the attempt. They are said to have 
 objected that the iron poisoned the soil and encouraged the growth of weeds. 
 Undoubtedly better tillage did cause weeds as well as crops to grow faster, 
 but probably a more important cause of their rejection of the new invention 
 was its cost, and the fact that when the share was dulled or broken the whole 
 plow must be replaced. 
 
 Between 1800 and 1830 a great many new plows were presented to the 
 farmers. In all, 124 patents were granted in this period, and, in addition, a 
 number of English and Scotch models were imported for sale. The most 
 important of the patents were those granted in 1814 and 1819 to Jethro 
 Wood, of Scipio, New York. He improved the design of the moldboard, lessen¬ 
 ing its resistance. Like other inventors of his day he did not regard the 
 
 pulverization of the soil as an essential object in plowing. It was not until 
 1839 that a patent was taken out by Samuel Witherow and David Pierce 
 which was designed to twist and bend the furrow-slice so as to leave it broken. 13 
 Wood’s plow, in contrast to Newbold’s, was not cast in one piece, but was 
 made up of several castings joined together and fastened by lugs and inter¬ 
 locking pieces. “ It was the first plow in which the parts most exposed to 
 wear could be renewed in the field by the substitution of cast pieces.” 14 Wood’s 
 invention, therefore, was one of the first instances, if not actually the first, of 
 the application in the manufacture of agricultural machinery of the principle 
 of standardization and interchangeability of parts. 15 (See fig. 19.) The 
 
 13 Roberts, Fertility of the Land (1897 ed.), p. 49. Chapter II of this work contains an 
 
 excellent discussion of the improvement of the plow from the earliest times. 
 
 14 Gilbert, Jethro Wood, 67. 
 
 15 A detailed description of Wood’s plow is found in Ploughboy, II (1820-21), p. 123. 
 
 Wood’s specifications for the construction of his improved plow of 1819 are given in 
 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, XXVII (1867), pt. I, pp. 465-468. 
 
 IS 
 
210 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 process of cold chilling the landside and lower edge of the share, invented by 
 Edwin A. Stevens of New Jersey in 1817, added greatly to the wear of these 
 parts. 16 A number of ploughs with a reversible or revolving moldboard and 
 share were invented and came into use. Their principal use was in plowing 
 across hillsides where it was desirable always to throw the furrow down the 
 slope. The upper and lower sides of the share and moldboard were made iden¬ 
 tical, so that either might form the sole. The moldboard was pivoted so that it 
 might be thrown around from right to left or left to right. 17 
 
 Newbold’s plow, as we have seen, was rejected by the farmers. Until about 
 1820 they went ahead with their old-fashioned, clumsy “ bull plows,” and 
 then, suddenly, in a single decade they abandoned their wooden plows and 
 adopted those of cast iron. A committee of the Massachusetts Society for 
 Promoting Agriculture reported in 1830 that at their first plowing-match held 
 in 1817 “not one cast-iron moldboard plough was in our vicinity, if in the 
 State.” At the 1830 event all the plows which entered were of cast-iron. 18 
 
 In Ohio the new plows were introduced about the year 1825, and by 1840 
 had displaced the old-style timber plows. 19 In the west it was found that the 
 cast-iron plows would not scour well, and this difficulty led to the invention 
 about 1835 of the steel moldboard, which took a high polish and so did not 
 clog in sticky soils. 
 
 SAVING OF LABOR EFFECTED BY NEW PLOWS. 
 
 The saving effected by the new plows in the labor of both men and draft 
 animals was remarkable. At the plowing-matches held in connection with 
 cattle shows by the agricultural societies, double teams of oxen with a man 
 to drive and another to hold were at first used, but by 1830 a single plowman 
 and one yoke of oxen was the standard outfit. 20 Wrote a contributor to 
 The Ploughboy: 21 
 
 “ With the old ill-shaped ploughs, with wooden soles and mould boards, the strength of 
 three horses were requisite for breaking up a piece of sward land. With the best con¬ 
 structed ploughs, now getting into use, more particularly those of Wood’s and Burden’s, 
 two horses can easily perform the same labour; of course, with the use of such newly 
 constructed ploughs, the farmer need keep but two horses, while with the old sort 
 of plough he has to keep three. Here then is a saving of about $35 a year, for such, at 
 least, will be found the yearly expense in keeping a common working horse.” 
 
 HARROWS AND CULTIVATORS. 
 
 The old triangular or “A” harrow was still used on fields obstructed with 
 stumps and rocks, but on clear land a new invention, the two-horse hinged 
 harrow, proved more economical. (See fig. 20.) 
 
 The cultivator, introduced about 1820, had largely supplanted by 1840 the 
 plow and the hand-hoe on eastern farms in working between the rows of 
 
 16 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, XXVII (1867), pt. I, p. 470. 
 
 17 Ohio State Bd. Agric. 14th Annual Report (1859), p. 529. An illustration and de¬ 
 
 scription of one of these plows is given in N. Y. Farmer, VII (1834), p. 77. 
 
 18 Massachusetts Agricultural Repository, X, 233. See also Futhey and Cope, Chester 
 
 County, Pennsylvania, 337, 340; Chase, History of Old Chester, New Hampshire, 427. 
 
 19 Burkett, Agric. of Ohio, 155. 
 
 20 New England Farmer, IX (1830-31), 107; XVII (1838-39), 114. 
 
 21 II (1820-21), p. 331. 
 
FARM LABOR AND LABOR-SAVING MACHINERY 
 
 Fig. 21.—The cultivator. 
 
212 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 corn. The new machines were cheap, costing only $15 or $20, and although 
 clumsy and heavy according to modern standards they were much lighter 
 than plows, and, by doing away with hoeing, saved much hand labor. It was 
 estimated, in 1826, that more corn could be tilled in a given time with one 
 cultivator than with three plows. 22 Two types of cultivators are shown in fig¬ 
 ures 21 and 22. The expanding cultivator, a later model, has a device for 
 adapting it to crops planted at varying distances between rows. Note the 
 short necks of the teeth on both models. 
 
 HARVESTING MACHINERY. 
 
 The farm-labor problem has always been most acute at harvest time. With 
 the development of markets for grain and hay, it became obvious that the 
 possibilities of profitable production were limited by scarce and dear labor 
 at this critical period. Consequently the problem of the application of animal 
 
 Fig. 23.—Bailey’s mowing machine, 1823. 
 
 power to the slow and exhausting tasks of mowing, reaping, and threshing 
 claimed much attention from inventors. 
 
 The substitution of the cradle for the sickle in reaping wheat and other 
 small grains had been a notable accomplishment. But the cradle was still a 
 hand tool. The invention of American horse-power mowing and reaping ma¬ 
 chines dates from patents issued as early as 1803, but not until a generation 
 had passed were any effective devices introduced, and before 1840 their use 
 was so limited as to have no effect on harvesting costs or crop acreage. A 
 tew mowing-machines were in use on river flats in Herkimer County, New 
 York, about 1840. In New England they were not in use until after 1850. 23 
 Among the numerous impracticable machines which were put forward by their 
 enthusiastic designers, one of the most interesting was that patented by 
 Jeremiah Bailey, of Chester County, Pennsylvania, in 1822. (See fig. 23.) 
 The cutting mechanism was a circular disk 5 i feet in diameter (in later 
 
 22 American Farmer, Y III (1826), p. 55. 
 
 23 See N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1841), p. 138; Mass. Bd. Agric. Annual 
 
 Report 1856, part I, p. 175; Maine Bd. Agric. 18th Annual Report (1873), pt. I, 
 
 P. 370 . 
 
FARM LABOR AND LABOR-SAVING MACHINERY 
 
 213 
 
 models / feet), on the circumference of which a knife-edge was attached in 
 sections. The machine was mounted on two wheels and drawn by a horse 
 walking m shafts ahead on the left side. By gearing to one of the wheels the 
 disk was made to revolve in a horizontal plane “ with great velocity.” 24 
 Meanwhile, in England the fundamental features of the modern reaper had 
 been devised the side-draft, the receiving-platform, and the reciprocating 
 cutter-bar. In 1833 and 1834 two Americans, Obed Hussey and Cyrus Mc¬ 
 Cormick, obtained patents on reaping machines which were destined to be of 
 great significance in the later development of our agriculture. In this period 
 the new reapers had hardly come into use, and consequently discussion of 
 them is deferred to a later chapter. 25 
 
 HORSE RAKES. 
 
 The hay crop became of steadily increasing importance in the East, and 
 although farmers must still be content to mow by hand, a machine for raking 
 
 Fig. 24.— The horse rake. 
 
 by horse power gave them great assistance. (See fig. 24.) As originally con¬ 
 structed, it was simply a big comb 10 feet wide, with 15 or 18 teeth 20 inches 
 long, which was dragged along the ground by a horse attached to the frame 
 by ropes. Handles served to guide the rake, to lift the teeth over rocks or 
 stumps, and to empty the accumulated hay. Such rakes were in use on Long 
 Island as early as 1812, and in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania in 1820. The 
 so-called revolving horse-rake had teeth on both sides of the scantling which 
 formed the head. The latter was pivoted so that the rake might be emptied 
 without stopping the horse. (See fig. 25.) None of the rakes in use before 
 1840 was mounted on wheels. 26 
 
 24 American Farmer , V (1823), p. 199. A similar machine (Wilson’s) propelled from 
 
 the rear is described in Maine Farmer, V (1837), p. 238, and in The Cultivator III 
 (1836-37), P. 128. 
 
 25 See Chap. XXIII, pp. 287 et seq. 
 
 26 Descriptions of horse rakes are given in Philadelphia Agric. Soc. Memoirs, III (1814) 
 
 P- 212; Ploughboy, II (1820-21), p. 310; New England Farmer, III (1824-25),’ 
 p. 361; XII (1833-34), p. 393. 
 
214 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The saving in labor accomplished by these simple devices was remarkable. 
 A writer to the Pittsfield (Massachusetts) Sun 27 claimed for the home¬ 
 made rake which he described : 
 
 “ Jt will enable one man, with a steady horse and boy, to perform at least as much 
 work in gathering hay into winrow and pile as six good men can accomplish, and as 
 clean as is commonly done in raking by hand.” 
 
 In the American Farmer for 1825 " 8 we read: 
 
 “ The horse hay-rake is in very general use in most of the eastern counties of Penn¬ 
 sylvania and in New Jersey, with which they can rake as much hay, and glean the grain 
 
 Fig. 25.—Revolving hay rake. 
 
 stubbles as fast as seven men can do with the hand rake—which is a saving in both 
 time and crop.” 
 
 A New York farmer, after 6 or 7 years of experience, estimated that one 
 man and a horse rake could equal the work of 10 men with hand rakes. 29 The 
 farmers of Massachusetts were slower in adopting the horse rakes than those 
 in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. William Buckminster 30 doubted whether 
 one farmer in a thousand in his State had ever seen one. 
 
 “ As a wagon load of them was passing, last summer, to Boston, many inquired what 
 those sharp wooden-tined things were made for, and whether they were not to dig 
 
 potatoes with.” ____ 
 
 27 Quoted in N. Y. Bd. Agric. Memoirs, II (1823), p. 378. 
 
 28 VII, 163. 
 
 29 Cultivator, VI (1839-40), P- 121. 
 
 30 In New England Farmer, XVII (1838-39), p. 114* 
 
FARM LABOR AND LABOR-SAVING MACHINERY 
 
 215 
 
 THRESHING MACHINES. 
 
 Threshing machines utilizing hand-power were introduced from Europe 
 at the end of the eighteenth century and several of Scotch make were set up 
 in 1802 in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey. But since “ they required 
 more care than common labourers would bestow in feeding the machine to pre¬ 
 vent its choking; and as common workmen could not repair it when out of 
 
 order, and the maker was at a distance, they did not multiply.” 31 
 
 Small hand-power and horse-power machines of a number of makes were 
 advertised in the agricultural press in the years 1820 to 1830. The most 
 successful and widely used seems to have been Pope’s thresher. It utilized an 
 
 endless belt to carry the grain under a revolving beater whose blows dislodged 
 the wheat from the straw. 
 
 The best machine on the market before 1840 was Pitt’s thresher, a cylinder 
 and concave machine, invented by Hiram and John Pitt, of Winthrop, Maine, 
 in 1836. (See fig. 51.) It was unique in combining the functions of thresher 
 and separator. In The Cultivator 32 it was described as follows: 
 
 “ It is a thrashing machine and fanning-mill combined. It thrashes, separates the 
 straw from the grain, and cleans and delivers the latter, in the best order, for the 
 sacks or bags —in one operation. It may be constructed for the power of one horse or 
 more, though usually adapted for two horses, attached to an endless chain power, 
 though it may be attached to other horse or propelling power; and the whole is so 
 
 31 Appendix to Address by James Mease, M. D., in Philadelphia Agric. Soc. Memoirs, 
 IV, p. xxxiv (1818). 
 
 82 Vol. V (1838-39), p. 138. 
 
216 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 portable, that it may readily be transported, horse-power and all, by a two-horse team, 
 and put in operation on a twelve foot barn floor. The cylinder and bed are of cast 
 iron, the former rendered doubly secure by strong iron bands. The teeth are wrought 
 iron, secured by nuts, are not liable to do injury if broken, and are readily re- 
 
 “ There are two prominent advantages in this machine, over others that we have seen 
 
 in operation, viz. . . 
 
 “ i. It thrashes, separates the straw, and perfectly cleans the grain, at one operation, 
 
 demanding only the additional labor of a man to bag the grain as it comes from the 
 
 machine. And, . . 
 
 “ 2. It may be used any where—under cover during rain, or in the open held during 
 
 fair weather, as there is no scattering or loss of grain even in the field. This we consider 
 an important advantage in the great grain-growing districts of the south and west.” 33 
 
 The machine with the horse-power cost $200 and had a capacity of 100 
 bushels of wheat per day. Other smaller machines ranged in price from 
 $75 to $150. 
 
 In regions where wheat was an important crop, as for example in eastern 
 Ohio and western New York, threshers were in general use by 1840 and 
 in some counties little grain was threshed in any other way. A great saving 
 of labor was effected by the application of animal power to threshing. A 
 contributor to the Nezu York Farmer 34 in 1829, wrote: 
 
 “ One of the most slow, laborious, expensive and wasteful operations performed on 
 a farm is that of threshing grain by the flail. If the laborers are hired by the day, week, 
 or month, they will not generally, if they do the work well, average more than five or 
 six bushels per day. If they are allowed one tenth, they will, indeed, often thresh out 
 ten bushels; but the attendance and inspection of the owner is necessary to check the 
 preponderating influence of self interest in slighting the work.” 
 
 With horses one or two men and a boy could tramp out and v/innow from 
 20 to 40 bushels in a day. 35 
 
 In addition to the saving of labor, the threshing-machines did their work 
 more effectively, saving much grain that would have been lost by other 
 methods. They worked more quickly, enabling the farmer to sell his grain 
 in the fall if the market was favorable. 
 
 38 See also Maine Farmer, IV (1836), p. 178; V (1837), pp. 73, 138. 
 
 84 II, (1829), p. 161. 
 
 35 Burkett, Agriculture of Ohio, 161; Conner, Indiana Agriculture, 8. 
 
Chapter XVII. —Livestock—Improvement and 
 
 Specialization. 
 
 COMMERCIAL WOOL GROWING. 
 
 The development of wool-growing on a commercial basis was a spectacular 
 incident of eastern agriculture in this period, directly resulting from the 
 growth of a home market. Wool-growing for home consumption was a stand¬ 
 ard feature of seventeenth and eighteenth century agriculture, and coarse wool 
 sheep of a hardy but rather unproductive type were kept on every farm. The 
 inhabitants of the commercial towns bought their woolen goods from Eng¬ 
 land at prices which prevented the establishment of American factories. In 
 1807 there began a period of 9 years when foreign trade was seriously inter¬ 
 rupted, first by the embargo and non-intercourse acts and then by the War of 
 1812. The import of foreign woolens was largely cut off, and prices rose 
 rapidly. Under such conditions woolen mills sprang up in the Eastern States 
 almost overnight. At first their demand was for the finer grades, and the 
 Merino craze resulted. With the outbreak of the War of 1812, however, the 
 coarser wools were largely used for army supplies. Wool production in gen¬ 
 eral was stimulated, bringing the farmers more widely under market influences. 
 
 INTRODUCTION OF MERINO SHEEP. 
 
 Between 1800 and 1815, a noteworthy effort was made to improve the 
 native stock by the importation of rams and ewes from Spain. The Spanish 
 Merino sheep had long been famous for the weight and excellent quality of 
 their wool, but on account of rigid exportation restrictions it had been prac¬ 
 tically impossible to bring representatives of the stock to this country. These 
 restrictions were broken down about the year 1800, during the disorganization 
 of the government of Spain following the Napoleonic invasion. Advantage 
 of this state of affairs was taken by our ambassadors in Spain and France, 
 Colonel David Humphreys and Robert Livingston, as well as by certain other 
 Americans who were abroad at that time. They secured a few of these valu¬ 
 able animals, which they shipped back to America. The most important of 
 the early importations was that of Colonel Humphreys, who in 1802 brought 
 to his home in Derby, Connecticut, a flock of 91 sheep—21 rams and 70 
 ewes. Robert Livingston also sent a pair from France to his home in New 
 York State. 
 
 LIVINGSTON’S DESCRIPTION. 
 
 It was probably with these animals before him that he penned the following 
 description of the Merino breed. 1 
 
 “ The race varies greatly in size and beauty in different parts of Spain. It is commonly 
 rather smaller than the middle-sized sheep of America. The body is compact, the legs 
 
 1 Livingston, Essay on Sheep, 31. 
 
 217 
 
218 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 short the head long, the forehead arched. The ram generally (but not invariably) car¬ 
 ries very large spiral horns, has a fine eye and a bold step. Ihe ewes have generally 
 no horns. The wool of these sheep is so much finer and softer than the common wool, 
 as to bear no sort of comparison with it; it is twisted and drawn together hke a cork- 
 screw; its length is generally about three inches, but when drawn out it will stretch 
 to nearly double that length. Though the wool is, when cleaned, extremely white, yet 
 on the sheep it appears of a yellowish or dirty brown colour, owing to the closeness 
 of the coat, and the condensation of the perspiration on the extremities of the fleece. 
 The wool commonly covers great part of the head, and descends to the hoof of the hind 
 feet, particularly in young sheep; it is also much more greasy than the wool of other 
 
 sheep.” 
 
 Neither Livingston’s nor Humphreys’s sheep seem to have attracted much 
 attention for a number of years. In the absence of woolen factories there 
 was no market for fine wool, while for domestic manufactures the wool of the 
 common sheep was more satisfactory as well as cheaper to produce. The 
 establishment of woolen factories gave rise to the first demand for the finer 
 grades of wool. The small available supply was soon exhausted and prices 
 rose to unheard of figures. In 1810 pure-bred Merino wool sold for $2 a 
 pound and half-blood at 75 cents, whereas common wool would bring less 
 than 40 cents. * 2 In 1814 pure Merino wool at Steubenville, Ohio, sold for 
 $2.75 a pound. 3 The public now became interested in Spanish sheep and 
 prices responded immediately. 
 
 In 1810 Livingston sold four full-bred rams at $1,000 apiece, 4 and Colonel 
 Humphreys disposed of two rams and two ewes for $6,ooo. 5 Importations 
 were stimulated, and owing to the energetic efforts of the American consul 
 at Lisbon, William Jarvis of Vermont, about 4,000 sheep were shipped in 
 the years 1809 and 1810 from Spain to this country, over one-half going to 
 New York and New England ports. It became so general a practice for ships 
 touching at Spanish ports to bring back a few Merinos, that in little over a 
 year 20,000 were landed here. The fabulous prices vanished, but the Spanish 
 sheep still sold at between $100 and $300 each in Boston in 1810, 6 and in 
 1813, in New York, a lot of 68 full-blooded ewes brought on the average 
 over $125 each. 7 
 
 RAPID SPREAD OF MERINOS, 1810 - 1815 . 
 
 With the encouragement of premiums from agricultural societies and 
 from State legislatures the Merinos spread rapidly between 1810 and 1815. 
 
 “In Vermont, Windsor County was a famous centre. Here, among others, Consul 
 Jarvis kept his flock of several hundred pure merinos, picked from those he had sent 
 over from Spain. In Massachusetts, Berkshire County was the chief seat. In 1815 there 
 were reported to be within a mile of Pittsfield over eight thousand sheep, at least half of 
 which were three quarters merino or better. In Rhode Island, the islands of Narragansett 
 Bay held many a valuable flock. Humphreys’ was the most noted in Connecticut. New 
 
 2N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, XXII (1862), p. 66. Quoted in Wright, Wood 
 
 Growing and the Tariff, 23, a book to which the author acknowledges indebtedness 
 for many references and facts. 
 
 3 Niles Register, XXXV 1 , 399 - . f _ 
 
 4 U. S. Bureau of Animal Industry, Special Report on the Sheep Industry, 144. 
 
 5 N. Y. Gazette, March 16, 1810, quoted in U. S. Bureau of Animal Industry, Sheep 
 
 Industry in the United States, p. 167. 
 
 6 Ibid., 198. 
 
 7 Niles Register, V (1813-1814), p. 207. 
 
*&&**£*- . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *wf 1 
 
 - 
 
 . . Wajgr 
 
 Spr r > vc’f M 
 
 • * «r 
 
 p ’ ? 
 
 ■ y .'i-V-’ 
 
 .V ‘ *'• ' i C. . .-VV 
 
 1 Attjiy . r rtftKS 
 
 
 * Si 
 
 
 
 
 
 Fig. 27.—Spanish Merino ram (about 1810). (Reproduced from U. S. Bureau of 
 Animal Industry, Special Report on the Sheep Industry. 
 
 Fig. 28.—Electoral escurial (Saxony) ram No. 177 of Von Thaer’s sheep-fold at 
 Moeglin in Prussia. (Drawn from nature by Charles L. Fleischmann for U. S. 
 Patent Office, 1847. Reproduced from U. S. Bureau of Animal Industry, Special 
 Report on the Sheep Industry. 
 
LIVESTOCK-IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIALIZATION 219 
 
 York probably had more sheep than any other state, Dutchess County and Long Island 
 being the homes of the best stock. In New Jersey, the returns to the state authorities in 
 1814 showed that out of a total of 285,049 sheep, 3,807 were pure merinos, while 25,826 
 more were grade merinos. In Pennsylvania, the prominent sheep districts were the 
 locality about Philadelphia in the east and \\ ashington County in the west. In Delaware 
 and Maryland, they were to be found about Wilmington and Hagerstown respectively. 
 In the W est,. there were excellent flocks in the blue-grass region of Kentucky, and a 
 band of merinos had been carried to Indiana when Rapp moved his colony to New 
 Harmony in 1814. The chief center, however, was about Steubenville, Ohio, where Wells 
 and Dickinson had a large and valuable flock in connection with their woolen mill The 
 
 neighboring parts of Virginia and Pennsylvania, as well as Ohio, abounded in fine- 
 wooled sheep. 8 
 
 END OF THE MERINO CRAZE. 
 
 The popularity of the Merino sheep came to a sudden end with the collapse 
 of the woolen industry and the consequent fall in the price of fine wool. 
 
 In January of 1816 merino wool was quoted at $1.06 a pound in New York, 
 and in October of the same year it had fallen to 68 cents. 9 After fluctuating 
 between that price and 80 cents it reached a new low figure of 62 cents in 
 October of 1819, and two years later (July 1821) fell to 57 cents. Seeing 
 their hopes thus disappointed, farmers turned against the Merinos with a 
 disgust as unreasoning as had been their former enthusiasm. Many abandoned 
 commercial wool-growing and ruthlessly sacrificed their stock. They almost 
 drove them away from their farms. 
 
 “ Thus entire flocks of the finest merino sheep were devoted to the knife, for no other 
 reason but that, contrary to the wish and expectation of the owner, they would persist 
 in eating. The extent of these sacrifices is scarcely credible. A very respectable butcher 
 assured me, that he bought, for one dollar a head, a flock of merinos, among which 
 was an imported ram, who the owner declared, and I have no doubt truly, had cost one 
 thousand dollars. That extravagance has now passed.” 10 
 
 8 Wright, Wool Growing and, the Tariff, 29. 
 
 9 Prices Current in N. Y. Shipping and Commercial List, 1816. 
 
 10 American Farmer, IV (1822), p. 70. 
 
220 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Only the saner leaders of agricultural opinion ventured to say a good word 
 for the despised breed, pointing out their undoubted merits and predicting 
 with truth that they would eventually be accorded recognition as conferring 
 great benefits on American wool growers. 11 
 
 IMPORTATION OF SAXONY SHEEP. 
 
 About 1821 the wool industry began to show signs of recovery and in the 
 succeeding 5 or 6 years another fine-wool mania affected farmers in the East¬ 
 ern States. This time it was the Saxony sheep which were the objects of 
 speculation. In 1765 Spanish Merinos were taken to Saxony, where in the 
 course of 60 years of careful breeding they had developed into an animal 
 greatly different from the original stock. (See fig. 29.) Extreme fineness 
 of wool had been developed, but at the sacrifice of size of carcass, weight of 
 fleece, and constitutional vigor. 
 
 “ These sheep, when introduced into the United States, lacked at least one-fifth, and 
 often more, of the weight of the parent Spanish Merino, as * then was ; they were 
 longer legged in proportion to size, slimmer, finer boned, and thinner in the neck 
 and head. At every point they gave indications of a more delicate oi : ganlzatl0 " nd T f ^ r ^ 
 fleeces averaged from one and half to two pounds of washed wool in ewes, and from 
 
 two to three pounds in rams.” 12 
 
 The first Saxony sheep arrived in Boston in 1822, but importations were 
 not large until 1824, when 75 animals, ewes and rams, were sold at auction at 
 Brighton market. 13 Purchasers from New York as well as from New Eng¬ 
 land attended this and subsequent sales. 14 Saxony sheep were also imported 
 at New York, so that the new breed received wide distribution. In 1826 
 there were landed at Boston, New York, and other ports 2,500 ewes, rams, 
 and lambs. This marked the climax; the next year prices declined greatly, 
 several cargoes selling for about $15 a head, which was not enough to coyer 
 the costs of transportation. The discovery that extensive frauds were being 
 imposed upon American buyers was partly responsible for the sudden collapse 
 of prices. Another more important cause was the depression in woolen man¬ 
 ufacturing in this country and the consequent fall in the price of fine wool. In 
 January 1826, it had sold in New York for 55 cents; in January of the follow¬ 
 ing year the price was 36 cents. 15 
 
 INTEREST IN MUTTON TYPES—NEW LEICESTERS. 
 
 The depression in wool prices caused the farmers in the neighborhood of 
 the largest towns, Boston, Philadelphia, and New York, to turn their atten¬ 
 tion to the production of mutton rather than wool. For this purpose they 
 improved the native breed by crossing their ewes with English rams of the 
 so-called Bakewell or New Leicester breed. In 1820 the latter were said to be 
 “ extensively diffused in various degrees o f blood throughout the states of 
 
 11 Address of John Lowell, Mass. Agric. Repository, V (1819-1820), 230; Address of 
 
 R. Sullivan, American Fariptr, III (1821), p. 58. 
 
 12 Randall, Fine Wool Sheep Husbandry, 17. 
 
 13 4th Report, Agric. of Mass. (1841), p. 450. 
 
 1 *Ibid., Ill (1824-25), 413; IV (1825-26), 391. 
 
 15 Wright, Wool Growing and the Tariff, 347. 
 
 \ 1 
 
 / 
 
LIVESTOCK-IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIALIZATION 221 
 
 Pennsylvania and New Jersey.” 16 These sheep were described by J. H. 
 Powell, 1 ' a progressive Pennsylvania farmer, as follows: 
 
 different flocks of sheep called Bakewell, which are found in New Jersey, Penn¬ 
 s' vania, e aware and New \ork, are a mongrel race, derived principally from an 
 lrnpor at ion o is i ey, Teeswater, and Southdown sheep; or from a few Teeswater 
 s eep, \\ ic were carried to New York in a prize, during the late war. The char¬ 
 acteristics of these breeds, are occasionally detected in individuals of this race. The 
 smutty faces, finer wool, and smallest frames, are indicative of the Southdown origin; 
 
 le largest frames, coarser bone, heavier offal, and larger heads, mark others of the 
 c eeswa-ter race; the long wool, often twisted at the ends, the narrow faces, broad backs, 
 snort legs, and fine bone, prove the presence of the Dishley, or Bakewell blood." 
 
 SUMMARY OF PROGRESS TO 1830 . 
 
 The year 1830 marked the close of the preliminary period of commercial 
 \\ool growing in the East a period of experiment, of frantic enthusiasm 
 followed by equally irrational despair. The number of sheep had in¬ 
 creased, especially in the West, but this increase had been mostly in 
 the common variety, whose wool was in constant demand for household 
 industries. The violent fluctuations in the woolen manufacturing industry 
 had been responsible for equally violent variations in the price of the raw 
 material. The experiments with fine-wool sheep had been highly speculative, 
 •and perhaps on that account they have been given undue importance. Wright’s 
 conclusion is that on the whole the wool-growing industry made quantitatively 
 little advance. As a result of the successive reactions against the Merino and 
 the Saxony sheep, little progress had been made in building up pure-bred 
 flocks. But the dispersion of the pure breeds had led to the improvement 
 of the quality of the common or native animals. The latter still supplied the 
 raw material of the household industries, moving westward with the expansion 
 of population and of farming. 
 
 CLIMAX OF WOOL GROWING IN THE EAST. 
 
 In 1830 began the period of greatest prosperity in Eastern wool growing. 
 Woolen manufacturing was at last firmly established and, encouraged by 
 tariff protection, increased its output and demand for raw material. The total 
 consumption of wool in the factories was estimated in 1837 at 38,300,000 
 pounds, of which about 10,000,000 pounds was of foreign origin. 18 Although 
 imports of raw wool increased rapidly, the foreign shipments were confined 
 principally to coarse wools from South America and from Turkey and its 
 Mediterranean dependencies. (See fig. 30.) Shipments from Ohio and States 
 west of the Alleghenies had begun, but were not large enough to cause eastern 
 growers serious concern. As a result, wool prices in the East rose rapidly 
 and continued high. (See fig. 29, p. 219.) Merino wool, which during the years 
 1825 to 1829 had been selling for between 40 and 50 cents a pound, reached 
 70 cents in October 1830. The average of the quarterly quotations from 
 
 16 Ploughboy, II (1820-21), p. 241. 
 
 17 In American Farmer, VII (1825), p. 316. 
 19 Benton and Barry, Statistical View, etc., 
 
 Tariff, 85. 
 
 quoted in Wright, Wool Growing and the 
 
222 
 
 MILLIONS 
 
 OF 
 
 POUNDS 
 
 23 
 
 22 
 
 21 
 
 20 
 
 19 
 
 18 
 
 17 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Fig. 30.—Imports of wool (1822-1846), U. S. Commerce and 
 
 Navigation Reports. 
 
LIVESTOCK-IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIALIZATION 223 
 
 then until January 1837 was 65 cents; at the later date the price was 72 cents. 
 Common wool followed very closely the fluctuations in the fine grade. 
 
 \\ ith such encouragement wool growing flourished everywhere, and in the 
 Cast the number of sheep reached its maximum. There was renewed specula¬ 
 te e activity in the production of fine wool from Saxony sheep, but the common 
 breed also were not neglected. In 1840 the census estimate fixed the number 
 of sheep in the country at I9>3 00 > 00( T of which nearly 60 per cent were in 
 New England and the Middle Atlantic States. With the increase in numbers 
 came also increased tendency to specialization. Before 1830 it had been ob- 
 ser\ed that the rising price of land around Boston had caused a movement 
 of sheep-raising westward into the interior. 19 By 1840 a well-defined wool¬ 
 growing area in New England had developed in Vermont and the Berkshire 
 region of western Massachusetts and Connecticut. In Vermont official returns 
 indicated an increase of 1,000,000 sheep in the years 1832 to 1837, with a 
 decrease of 40,000 head of cattle in the same period. 20 In Berkshire the 
 
 success of wool-growers was causing decreased attention to dairying and 
 tillage. 21 
 
 THE IMPORTATION OF ENGLISH CATTLE. 
 
 The leadership in the improvement of cattle, as well as sheep, came from 
 a few wealthy men who made a hobby of progressive farming. Their atten¬ 
 tion was directed to the importation of representatives of English stock 
 rather than to the betterment of the native or common animals by selective 
 breeding. A few English cattle were brought to this country before 1800, 
 probably of the Lancashire or Bakewell breed, but the period of greatest 
 activity dates from about 1820. Between that date and 1840, representatives 
 of all the important English breeds had been introduced, including Herefords, 
 North Devons, Alderneys, and Guernseys and, most important of all, the 
 Improved Durhams or Shorthorns. They were kept with great care by their 
 owners and exhibited frequently at the annual cattle shows, where they at¬ 
 tracted much attention. Auction sales of pure-blood stock were social events 
 in the neighborhood of New York and Philadelphia, where distinguished city 
 folk vied with one another in paying high prices for animals of exceptional 
 pedigrees. . The efforts of cattle-breeding enthusiasts in this period were 
 directed chiefly to building up herds of pure-blood stock. The improvement of 
 native stock by judicious crossing of breeds seems to have hardly begun 
 before 1840. 22 
 
 THE NATIVE CATTLE. 
 
 The cows of the common or so-called native breed showed little improve¬ 
 ment over their colonial ancestors. Those who fattened cattle found it profitable 
 to provide comfortable shelter and nutritious rations, but the market influences 
 seem not to have reached back to the breeders. Except in a few instances, 
 no attempt had been made to improve stock by selection in breeding; often 
 
 19 Mass. Agricultural Repository, X (1828-32), p. 125. 
 
 20 The Cultivator, VI (1839-40), P- 102. 
 
 21 2d Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1838), p. 136. 
 
 22 Connecticut State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1854), p. 99. 
 
224 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 the likeliest heifers were sold to the butcher. In winter they stood in cold 
 stables, often with the snow piled on their backs and with no fodder but hay. 
 Colman 23 exclaimed with the indignation of a humanitarian as well as of an 
 
 economist: 
 
 “The result is what might be expected; and there is nothing more striking nor more 
 painful to a benevolent observer, than the withered, lean, lanthorn-visaged condition in 
 which the stock of the farmers of New England generally come out in the spring 
 Even their milch cows, who pay for their keeping in the most honorable manner and 
 whom the farmer should as little think of stinting and half-starving as he would his 
 children, since without them, he could not raise his children, are treated with a se\erit>, 
 which admits of no apology; and which is as inconsistent with the farmers true 
 interests, as with the dictates of common justice and mercy.” 
 
 A contributor to the Cultivator 24 described the native cows in more careful 
 phrases: 
 
 “They are a mixture of every breed, and the intelligent and observing breeder, sees 
 in them traces of almost all the English varieties, such perhaps as they were before 
 science and attention had improved them, such as might offer to the American breeder 
 the original materials of their most improved and valued stock, but requiring more time 
 and perhaps more talent, skill and attention, than the American farmer would be 
 willing to bestow on the subject, and yet necessary to enable him to arrive at the same 
 results. This mixed breed are not very celebrated for any thing; some of them are 
 good milkers as far as quantity is concerned, but as to quality of the milk and aptitude 
 to fatten, they generally fail. Their calves are of diminutive size, rarely giving more 
 than 20 lbs. per qr. when killed, at four weeks old; and if reared, of slow growth, 
 seldom coming in till the third year, and then requiring two or three years more to give 
 them standing and character, such as it is, in the dairy. As to their characteristic mar s, 
 they are small, short bodied, thin and coarse haired, steep jumped, slab sided, having 
 little aptitude to fatten, or to lay the fat on the right place. 
 
 The weights of cows when slaughtered averaged 45 ° pounds; steers 
 weighed 600 pounds and oxen 875 pounds. 25 
 
 BEEF PRODUCTION IN THE CONNECTICUT VALLEY. 
 
 Beef production as a specialized industry showed considerable expansion 
 in the East in this period, with increasing concentration in the areas in which 
 it was already well established by 1800, viz.: the Connecticut Valley and the 
 southeastern counties of Pennsylvania. At the beginning of the nineteenth 
 century, grazing had been accounted a profitable business in any of the in 
 terior counties ” of Massachusetts, but during the years 1800 to 1840 the 
 competition of other lines of farming, wool-growing in the western counties 
 and market gardening in the eastern led to increasing concentration of beef- 
 fattening in the counties bordering on the Connecticut River. In 1817, Dickin¬ 
 son wrote of Deerfield, Massachusetts. 2 
 
 “ 500 of the finest cattle, mostly purchased of the farmers in the upland towns, 
 
 are annually fed, in the best manner, from the beginning of December to May, the 
 weight of which may be computed at 550,000, and tlto proceeds of their sale in market, 
 at $40,000, with a profit of about one half the amount.” 
 
 23 Addresses at New Haven, Norwich and Hartford, Connecticut, in 1840, p. 57 * 
 
 2* The Cultivator, V (1838-39), P- 23. „ . , D . . j- r1J n ur( , 
 
 23 Estimates of the official reporter of the Brighton Market in 4th Report, Agriculture 
 
 of Massachusetts (1841), p. 302. Other estimates are to be found, Ibid., p. 5 L in 
 American Farmer, VII (1825), p. 113. 
 
 26 Description of Deerfield, 5 - 
 
LIVESTOCK-IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIALIZATION 225 
 
 The fertile ‘ intervales ’ or bottom lands of the river supplied an abun¬ 
 dance of hay, which was supplemented by commeal, peas, oats, and potatoes. 
 Experiments were made with rations of broom-corn seed and oil-cake. In 
 Franklin County, Massachusetts, beef fattening, chiefly stall feeding, was the 
 chief interest of farmers in 1840. Colman described the business as follows : 27 
 
 The fatters of beef depend, for their cattle to be stall-fed, upon animals brought 
 from Vermont, Xew Hampshire, and New York. In these cases the experienced and 
 practical have great skill and shrewdness in selecting small-boned, neat, and thrifty 
 animals as the best for their purposes. Many of them find great advantage ‘ in turning 
 their cattle soon, rather than keeping them on hand a long time. After graduating a 
 class early in the season, they go into the neighboring hill-towns and purchase fat 
 cattle already far advanced for the market, and finish them so as to have another class 
 to send off in the spring. These cattle are generally fed upon hay and potatoes in the 
 hill-towns, where corn is not raised to any considerable extent as in the river-towns; but 
 when brought to the river-towns they are fed almost exclusively upon hay and meal, 
 and the change of diet greatly favors their thrift. Another kind of stock much approved 
 for stall-feeding are three and four year old steers, which are kept well in the winter 
 upon good hay, and for about two months in the last of the winter and first of the 
 spring have a moderate allowance of provender, such as the meal of Indian corn, or 
 corn and oats or pease and oats ground together, and are then turned into the pastures 
 as soon as they can get a living. In a good pasture these animals do well, and are 
 generalh sent to market in June and July, when they command a good price.” 
 
 At the end of our period the farmers of Franklin County were discouraged. 
 The price of stock cattle in the fall was as high per hundred pounds as that 
 obtained for fat steers in the spring, and the markets were capricious and 
 uncertain. The farmers suspected the drovers, who took their cattle on com¬ 
 mission, s and the butcher who bought them, of collusion and fraud, which 
 they lacked effectual means to prevent. They were inclined to feel fortunate 
 if at the end of the season s operations they were able to pay the notes given 
 to local banks for the purchase of stock. Allowing current prices for the 
 grain and hay consumed their accounts showed production at less than cost, 
 but as Colman pointed out, they did not credit the cattle account with the 
 value of the manure produced and returned to the farm. 
 
 THE BRIGHTON CATTLE MARKET. 
 
 Connecticut Valley cattle were occasionally marketed in New York, but 
 most of them were driven to the historic Brighton market just outside of 
 Boston. In this town a weekly cattle fair had been held since Revolutionary 
 days. 29 Farmers, drovers, butchers and commission men met there on Mon¬ 
 days to buy and sell. Wrote Colman: 30 
 
 “Cattle, sheep and swine are brought here from the interior of the State, from 
 Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont—from New York, and sometimes from Pennsyl¬ 
 vania, Ohio, Indiana and Kentucky. Ordinarily few sheep are ever brought to market 
 except it be wethers fatted or to be fatted. Great numbers of pigs and shoats are 
 driven here to be sold for keeping, but except an occasional drove from some dis¬ 
 tillery establishment few fat hogs are sold here either alive or dead. Nor is it any 
 
 27 4th Report, Agric. of Massachusetts (1841), p. 54. 
 
 28 The cost of droving to Brighton was $2 per head plus the loss of about 100 pounds 
 
 in weight. 
 
 29 The picturesque features of the fair were described by Hawthorne in his American 
 
 Note Books, Collected Works (nth ed., 1887), IX, p. 248. 
 
 30 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), p. 297. 
 
 16 
 
226 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 mart for horses, though occasionally they are brought here for sale. The cattle 
 principally consist of young stock for wintering, working oxen, milch cows with 
 their calves, and fat cattle for barrelling and for the retail market in the city and 
 vicinity. The cattle for barrelling are taken at once to the large slaughtering and 
 packing establishments, where they are disposed of accordingly; and fat cattle are 
 likewise purchased for the butchers by the slaughterers, who kill and dress for one 
 dollar per head with the customary perquisites, or else purchase and kill on their own 
 account, and supply the marketmen in the city and vicinity with such beef and with such 
 amounts of beef as they may desire. The drover generally waits for two or three days 
 until he gets the returned weight of his cattle after being slaughtered, and receives his 
 money. The butchers who come from a distance in order to get supplies for the small 
 and remote villages and towns, of course drive their cattle to their respective homes to 
 be slaughtered; and large numbers go from hence to Lowell, New Bedford, Fall River, 
 Providence, R. I. and other considerable towns. The number of head of cattle, of all 
 descriptions, brought here frequently exceeds eight thousand on a market-day. Five 
 thousand sheep have sometimes been driven there in a single day. The cattle are often 
 sold on the hoof—which is, on many accounts, a preferable mode for both parties, as it 
 leaves no room for fraud or suspicion of fraud in regard to their weight.” 
 
 BEGINNING OF MARKET INFORMATION SERVICE. 
 
 Beginning in 1830, market reports were issued weekly, giving the number 
 of animals of various kinds sold and notes on the average prices prevailing. 
 The reports appeared Tuesday morning in the Boston papers and were widely 
 copied in journals having a circulation throughout the state. 
 
 “ Before this arrangement, farmers and drovers in the interior depended on mere 
 rumors, which seldom reached them in season to regulate their movements in regard 
 to the market, and were not always to be relied on. The exact reports now given, are 
 received with confidence, and are of great importance to the farmers and drovers. They 
 now learn whether the markets are glutted or thin, and the prices which they may 
 calculate upon. This saves them from many mistakes and disappointments.” 31 
 
 A typical report is that of Monday, April 3, 1837. 32 
 
 “ At Market 280 Beef Cattle, 40 pairs Working Oxen, 235 Sheep and 760 Swine. 
 
 “ Prices— Beef Cattle. —An advance was realized and we advance our quotation viz. 
 extra at $9.50; first quality $850 a 900; second quality $800 a 850; third quality 
 
 $6 75 a $7 75 - . .. .... 
 
 “ Working Oxen. —A large proportion were ordinary and purchasers were unwilling 
 
 to pay the prices asked. We notice a few sales only viz: $80, $85, $100, and 115. 
 
 " Sheep.—We notice a lot taken at $5.25 each, a lot at $8 00 each, a lot of 100 from 
 Conway at $11 each and a lot from Princeton at $20 each. 
 
 “Swine— We notice the sale of several lots at ill for sows and nf for barrows. 
 At retail ii? a 12I and 13.” 
 
 The average number of animals of various kinds sold each year at Brighton 
 in the 10 years 1831 to 1840 was as follows: beef cattle, 36,600; stores, 
 12,900; sheep, 97,793; swine, 22,700. 33 
 
 WESTERN CATTLE IN EASTERN MARKETS. 
 
 The occasional presence of cattle from Kentucky, Ohio, and Illinois at 
 Brighton in the years 1830 to 1840, indicates the beginnings of western com¬ 
 petition. Such competition was sporadic, however, occurring only when the 
 
 3 ! 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), p. 301. 
 
 32 Quoted in New England Farmer, XV (1836-37), p. 311. 
 
 33 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), p. 302. 
 
LIVESTOCK-IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIALIZATION 227 
 
 New York market was overstocked. 34 Just before 1840, the railroads were 
 being used occasionally to transport livestock to Brighton, a few yokes of very 
 large cattle, a drove of sheep, and, in extremely cold or hot weather, consider¬ 
 able numbers of swine, but for regular shipments freight rates were too high. 
 
 CATTLE GRASS-FATTENED IN MAINE. 
 
 Grass-fattened cattle and sheep were driven from Maine to the markets 
 at Salem and Boston, beginning about 1820 at the rate of several thousand 
 each year. The cattle were sometimes taken “ on drift,” the commission for 
 driving and selling amounting to $2 per head. The quality of Maine beef, if 
 the following description is accurate, could not have been highly regarded. 
 The editor of the Maine Farmer 35 wrote: 
 
 “ Much of the beef made in this vicinity is from cows which, through age, have be¬ 
 come unfit for the dairy, and from oxen which are worn out with hard labor. It is 
 customary to milk the cows until August or September, and as soon as they can be dried 
 of their milk, begin to feed them, first with green corn stalks, small corn, potatoes 
 and meal; and the value of the feed given them is generally much more than the value 
 of the beef when slaughtered. The oxen intended for beef are generally worked in the 
 spring as long as they are able to drag the plough, because it is the last springs work 
 which they will do, for the owner intends to fatten them.” 
 
 The prices received by Maine farmers for their stock in 1835 and 1836 
 were: For i-year-olds, $3 to $5; 2-year-olds, $7 to $10; 3-year-olds, $10 to 
 $15; cows, $10 to $12; oxen, per pair, $35 to $40. 36 
 
 CATTLE FATTENING IN CHESTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 In southeastern Pennsylvania, especially in Chester County, cattle were 
 fattened for the Philadelphia and New York markets. As early as 1819 the 
 business was so prosperous that grazing farms in the neighborhood of Phila¬ 
 delphia were selling at from $100 to $300 per acre. 37 The stock came from 
 many sources, from Maryland, Virginia and South Carolina; from Ohio, 
 and from northern and western New York. William Darlington 38 wrote 
 in 1828: 
 
 “They [the stock cattle] are of various sizes, and the average weight, in a lean 
 state, may be estimated at about 500 pounds, and when killed for beef, at about 700 or 
 800 pounds. The greater portion are fattened on pasture during the summer, but for 
 fattening large oxen a longer time is required, and they are fed most successfully during 
 the winter season. These are usually fed about one year, running on good pasture 
 through the summer, and stall-fed, through the winter, on meal, made of maize and oats 
 ground together.” 
 
 DAIRY PRODUCTS—CHEESE, BUTTER, MILK. 
 
 The readjustments in eastern farming caused by the rise of manufactures 
 are clearly evident in the regional distribution of dairy products. In the 
 
 34 4 *h Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), 305.; New York Farmer, III (1830) 
 p. 146; New England Farmer, XIII 11834-35), p. 354. 
 
 85 I (1833), P- 5 i. 
 
 36 Maine Bd. Agric. igth Annual Report (1874), p. 275. 
 
 37 Johnson, Letters from Pennsylvania, p. 76. 
 
 3 * American Farmer, X (1828), p. 66. 
 
228 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 neighborhood of the larger cities the sale of milk had largely supplanted the 
 making of cheese, and of butter as well, except for small amounts of the 
 fresh article for immediate sale. A great many farms within a distance of 
 12 to 14 miles of Boston were selling milk daily to the city. The larger pro¬ 
 ducers. those with 40 or more cows, evidently did their own peddling; the 
 smaller farmers, keeping 4 or 5 cows, sold their milk to dealers. 39 The winter 
 ration included carrots and potatoes as well as cornmeal and hay. Experiments 
 in soiling had been made, but the practice was not generally adopted. 40 
 
 In the neighborhood of New York there were a number of large milk 
 farms keeping several hundred cows each, some of them in connection with 
 distilleries, from the waste of which they received a large part of their fod¬ 
 der. In general, the milk furnished to New York did not have a high reputa¬ 
 tion and complaints of adulteration were frequent. 41 
 
 The production of butter and cheese as a commercial industry was found 
 in 1840 chiefly north of New York city, in the Berkshires, and in a newly 
 developed section in central New York State. In these areas dairying was a 
 safe and profitable business. With increasing urban concentration and a rising 
 standard of life in the cities, their markets were steadily expanding, and in 
 addition they furnished most of the cheese consumed in Pennsylvania, along 
 the southern seaboard, and in the Mississippi and Ohio Valleys. In the 
 Berkshire region of western Massachusetts and Connecticut the manufacture 
 of butter and cheese for sale furnished strong competition with wool-growing 
 for the farmer’s land, labor, and capital. The market for dairy products was 
 New York, accessible via the Hudson River. Colman’s study 43 of two Berk¬ 
 shire towns showed that on 45 farms in Cheshire, 913 cows were kept which 
 produced for sale 311,050 pounds of cheese and 19,050 pounds of butter. 
 In Pittsfield, 221 farms kept 812 cows, which produced 58,046 pounds of 
 butter and 26,048 pounds of cheese. 
 
 WESTWARD SHIFT OF DAIRYING.—DEVELOPMENTS IN 
 
 CENTRAL NEW YORK. 
 
 In New York State, Orange and Ulster Counties had long been producing 
 high-grade butter and cheese for market. 44 With the opening of the Erie 
 Canal a new area of dairying developed in the Mohawk Valley, concentrated 
 chiefly in Herkimer and Oneida Counties, but extending also to some parts ol 
 Fulton and Saratoga Counties. Since about 1780 the Mohawk Valley had 
 been one of the chief wheat-producing areas of the north. The transition from 
 wheat-growing to dairying after 1825 was the result partly of the competition 
 of Genesee wheat, now cheaply transported via the canal, in the New York 
 market, and partly of the ravages of the grain worm, which first appeared 
 there between 1825 and 1830* The canal, moreover, afforded the ^Mohawk 
 
 X.--- 11 
 
 3 0 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), pp. 198, 252. . 
 
 40 See letter of Hon. Josiah Quincy, Dec. 27, 1815, in American Farmer, II (1820-21;, 
 
 p. 292. 
 
 4! 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), p. 253* 
 
 42 The Cultivator, III (1836-37), p. 41. 
 
 43 2d Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1838), pp. 59 > 106-122. 
 
 44 John Burroughs, in My Boyhood, pp. 11-23, describes the production and marketing 
 
 of butter in Ulster County about 1840. 
 
LIVESTOCK-IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIALIZATION 229 
 
 Valley farmers cheap transportation for their cheese. From six towns the 
 exports of cheese for 1832 were estimated at 1,000 tons; from one town alone 
 about 400 tons were sold. 45 Only in one town, Steuben, was butter produced 
 for market. 1 he peculiar ability of the Welsh immigrants who settled there 
 was probably the cause of its specialization. Although a small town (2,000 
 inhabitants, 1840), in 1832 it sent 150 tons of butter to the New York market. 
 Marketing conditions were good; large dealers of New York and other cities 
 came to select and purchase their supplies. 
 
 One of the results of the growth of commercial dairying in this section, 
 besides a higher income for farmers, was a tendency to larger-scale produc¬ 
 tion and an increase in the size of farms. A pioneer in the industry wrote to 
 The Cultivator: 46 
 
 “ Most of the little farms are now so amalgamated, that it is said to be difficult to 
 sustain district schools, and open roads in winter, or hire any laborers by the day in 
 some sections.” 
 
 OUTPUT OF DAIRY COWS. 
 
 Judging by current estimates, the productivity of dairy cows had consider¬ 
 ably increased between 1800 and 1840. At the earlier date, according to 
 answers to the inquiries of the Massachusetts Society for Promoting Agricul¬ 
 ture, 70 to 100 pounds of butter or from 50 to 150 pounds of skim-milk 
 cheese were considered fair amounts for ordinary cows. 47 About 1830 it was 
 estimated that a milch cow of medium quality in Massachusetts would give 
 1,500 quarts of milk in a year, which would make 166 pounds of butter or 
 375 pounds of cheese. 48 In New York State, about 1835, a good cow “ under 
 proper management ” was expected to produce 200 pounds of butter a year 
 or between 300 and 400 pounds of cheese. One farmer in Herkimer County 
 produced 32,000 pounds of cheese from 78 cows, averaging 410 pounds each. 49 
 The increase in productivity is explained partly by better food and shelter 
 and partly by better management of calves, taking them earlier from their 
 mothers. 
 
 SWINE SHOW MARKED IMPROVEMENT. 
 
 In no class of domestic animal was such striking improvement effected as in 
 swine. Coming early to maturity, they are easily modified in type by selective 
 breeding and consequently the results of crossing with improved breeds im¬ 
 ported from England, China, and Spain were soon obvious. The introduction 
 of the Woburn or Bedford hogs from England dates from the end of the 
 eighteenth century. They first became common in Maryland, Delaware, and 
 Virginia, and later were bred by Colonel Timothy Pickering in Massachusetts, 
 where they were soon widely known. 
 
 “ There is no doubt they were splendid animals, with many fine points, small bones, 
 deep, round barrel, short legs, feeding easily, and maturing early, and often weighing 
 
 45 New York Farmer, VI (1833), p. 290. 
 
 40 Letter of Ephraim Perkins, I (1834-35), p. 84. 
 
 47 Massachusetts Agricultural Repository, V (1818-19), p. 74. 
 
 48 Ibid., X (1828-1832), p. 312. 
 
 49 New York Farmer, IX (1836), p. 108; The Cultivator, I (1834-35), p. 84. 
 
230 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 at a year or a year and a half old, from four to seven hundred pounds, with light offal, 
 and the first quality of flesh. They were mostly white somewhat spotted. 
 
 In New York there was developed early in the century a type known as the 
 grass-fed hog. They were described as having 
 
 “short legs and noses, white sleek hair, small bones, and may be called a very comely, 
 fat, indolent, good natured sort of swine—a race of animals in which the devil would 
 
 never think of entering for any mischievous purposes. 
 
 “ In point of profit there can be no kind of comparison between the best of the grass 
 breeds and the old lean sort of swine; while the latter usually cost more in raising and 
 preparing for market than they are worth; the former afford a handsome profit to 
 those who raise them, but more especially if the rearing of them be suitably combined 
 with the business of the dairy.” 51 
 
 At the age of 18 months or 2 years the grass breed would weigh (dressed) 
 between 300 and 450 pounds. 52 
 
 Many other breeds were developed from imported animals in various 
 localities—the Byfield and the Mackay breed in Massachusetts and the 
 Chester County Whites in Pennsylvania. There was at least one epidemic of 
 speculative fever in swine-breeding, connected with the importation of Berk¬ 
 shire hogs about 1830. Although excellent animals, they were too delicately 
 organized for the rough and ready methods of treatment in this country, and 
 farmers who had bought them at high prices lost heavily. 53 In general, how¬ 
 ever, the new breeds adapted themselves successfully to American conditions. 
 By 1840 the old race of native swine had almost disappeared. A contributor 
 to the New England Farmer 54 wrote : 
 
 “ Formerly New England was over-run with a raw-boned lank-sided race of animals, 
 which devoured the substance of the farmer, and like Pharioh’s [sic] lean kine, ‘ were 
 still ill-favored and lean as before,’ and whose chief return to the owner, was skin, 
 bone, and bristles. But we think we may now congratulate the Society on the almost 
 entire extinction of this race, whose very existence was a waste, and whose disgustful 
 and uncouth appearance was a mere nuisance. We now generally find a small boned, 
 well proportioned breed of Swine, whose handsome appearance and good qualities, 
 abundantly compensate for the exchange.” 
 
 The market demand did not lead to as marked geographical concentration 
 in the case of swine as of cattle in the East. The increase in numbers which 
 undoubtedly occurred was widespread, but was especially notable in dairying 
 regions, such as the Berkshires, where they were fed on cheese whey and 
 skim milk. It was estimated that there one hog was kept for every four cows. 55 
 Pork was produced as a by-product at distilleries, where swine were fed on 
 the mash, and large numbers were fattened on the offal from slaughter-houses 
 in the vicinity of the cities. 
 
 COMPETITION OF WESTERN SWINE AND PORK. 
 
 Western competition from western New York and Ohio in swine and salt 
 pork was more seriously felt by Eastern farmers than in any other kind of 
 
 50 Flint, in Kettell, Eighty Years’ Progress, I, 63. 
 
 51 The Ploughboy, II (1820-21), p. 234. 
 
 52 N. Y. Bd. Agric., Memoirs, II (1823), p. 77. 
 
 53 Coburn, Swine Husbandry, 42. 
 
 54 XI (1832-33), P- 126. 
 
 55 Second Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1838), p. 74. 
 
LIVESTOCK-IMPROVEMENT AND SPECIALIZATION 231 
 
 livestock. Worcester County, Massachusetts, which about 1830 was sending 
 out 2,000,000 pounds of pork to Boston, in 1836 was buying western pork 
 from Boston. 50 In 1840 the swine sold at Brighton came principally from 
 New York State. 5 ' In the Mohawk Valley as early as 1828 farmers were 
 complaining that they could no longer advantageously make pork for the 
 Albany and New York markets. “ The farmers to the West, where Indian 
 corn is cheap, can now, assisted by the canal, afford to undersell us.” 58 
 
 DRAFT ANIMALS. 
 
 In New York and Pennsylvania there seems to have been an increasing use 
 of horses instead of oxen in farm work, especially after the introduction of 
 hay-rakes, cultivators, and other horse-drawn tools. The New Englanders 
 clung to their oxen, using them still in preference to horses for plowing and 
 teaming. A single horse was kept by well-to-do farmers “ to go to mill, and 
 to church, and for the convenience of the family.” Occasionally a horse was 
 hitched ahead of a yoke of oxen to add strength to the team. In the East, 
 little attention was given to improving the breed of horses, except those used 
 for pleasure driving and riding. In the West, horses were much more used 
 than in the Eastern States, many farmers keeping a half dozen or more. 
 
 “ Much of the travelling throughout the western country, both by men and women, 
 is performed on horseback; and a large proportion of the land carriage is by means 
 of large wagons, with from four to six stout horses for a team. A great proportion 
 of the ploughing is performed by horse labor. Horses are more subject to diseases 
 in this country than in the old States, which is thought to be occasioned by bad manage¬ 
 ment, rather than by the climate. A good farm horse can be purchased for fifty dollars. 
 Riding or carriage horses, of a superior quality, cost about seventy-five or eighty 
 dollars. Breeding mares are profitable stock for every farmer to keep, as their annual 
 expense in keeping is but trifling: their labor is always needed, and their colts, when 
 grown, find a ready market. Some farmers keep a stallion, and eight or ten brood 
 mares.” 59 
 
 66 New England Farmer, XV (1836-37), p. 249. 
 
 57 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), p. 304. 
 68 New York Farmer, I (1828), p. 268. 
 
 59 Peck, New Guide for Emigrants (1836), p. 281. 
 
Chapter XVIII.—Crops and Tillage. 
 
 The chief improvements in field culture during this period were better tillage 
 by improved implements, the conservation of soil fertility by increased use of 
 manures, and more constant use of tilled land by the elimination of summer 
 fallows. There is little evidence of the development of systematic crop rota¬ 
 tions. Farmers took little account of the effect of cropping systems on soil 
 fertility; they chose the crops which they needed for farm consumption and 
 for which there was a market, and the order in which they shifted a crop 
 from one field to another was determined by tradition, convenience, or chance. 
 
 CROPPING SYSTEMS. 
 
 Grass and corn were standard crops for all eastern farms and, in most 
 districts outside southern New England, wheat as well. Oats, rye, and barley 
 were of minor importance. Potatoes and other roots were not largely grown 
 as field crops and so had no definite place in rotations. The cropping system 
 frequently followed in Lancaster County’, Pennsylvania, about 1825, is 
 probably typical of the better farming of the East. 
 
 “ The land being rich, they crop hard, as will appear by the following rotation, which 
 they frequently adopt: 1st, corn; 2d, barley or oats; 3d, wheat, with manure; 4th, rye; 
 5th, clover and timothy. When they are not likely to have manure for the barley or oat 
 stubble, they omit the barley or oat crop, and break the corn ground for wheat before 
 harvest. Then the rotation is corn, wheat, rye, and grass seed. On the above system, 
 not more than one-fifth of grass land is broken annually, and as they keep few cattle, 
 and these mostly soiled in the stable until after harvest, nearly four-fifths of the whole 
 cleared part of the country is left in harvestable crops.” 1 
 
 In Chester County about this time the “ prevailing and most approved mode 
 of culture ” was a six-year rotation. First, corn followed by spring grain, 
 barley, or oats. When that crop was off, the field was manured and plowed 
 the latter end of August. It remained thus about a month and was then cross- 
 plowed and sown with wheat or rye, well-harrowed and rolled. Grass seed, 
 timothy or orchard grass and clover, were sown on the grain, and after the 
 grain was harvested the field was kept as upland meadow or pasture for 2 
 years, when it was again plowed and sown with corn. 2 
 
 CONSERVATION OF SOIL FERTILITY. 
 
 Barnyard manure was available on every farm in quantities proportionate 
 to the livestock kept. As farms in general became more heavily stocked, the 
 manure produced increased and applications were more frequent. In general, 
 fields were manured every 3 or 4 years. But the applications were scanty, and 
 
 1 American Farmer, Vll (1825), p. 163. 
 
 2 Ibid, X (1828), p. 65. For similar rotations used in New York and Massachusetts, see 
 
 N. Y. Bd. Agric. Memoirs, II (1823), p. 19; 4th Report, Agriculture of Massa¬ 
 chusetts (1841), p. 240. 
 
 232 
 
CROPS AND TILLAGE 
 
 233 
 
 owing to bad management the manure lost much of its fertilizing qualities, 
 hew farmers could afford the labor cost of carting manure, except after 
 harvest in the fall or during the winter. Hence it lay for months in the barn¬ 
 yard unprotected from sun and rain, losing nitrates by fermentation and 
 leaching. 3 
 
 SOIL AMENDMENTS. 
 
 The use of plaster of Paris (gypsum, sulphate of lime) on wheat and grass 
 lands had spread rapidly in the early decades of the nineteenth century. In 
 the neighborhood of New York, on western Long Island, and in Dutchess and 
 Westchester Counties the introduction of gypsum was said to mark “ a new 
 era in agriculture and rural economy/' 
 
 “ By this means, and consequent attention and improvements, the products of the 2d 
 or 3d quality of land have been nearly doubled within the last io years; and land of this 
 description has risen in value 20 to 30 and 40 per cent.” 4 5 
 
 About 1815 the supply of plaster, which up to that time had been received 
 chiefly from Nova Scotia, was increased by the opening of new quarries in 
 western New York and on the Hudson River. The price, which was normally 
 about $18 a ton, had risen to $30 and $40 during the War of 1812, but the new 
 supplies sold for $12 a ton. 6 In western New York farmers made great use 
 of the local supplies of gypsum, hauling it 30 and 40 miles, and in winter, 
 when the sleighing was good, 70 and 80 miles from the quarries. Large 
 amounts were also shipped down the Susquehanna for use in eastern Pennsyl¬ 
 vania. By 1835 the price at the mills was as low as $2 and $3 a ton. 6 Gypsum 
 proved especially valuable on sandy and gravelly soils, but after a few years 
 its benefits appeared to diminish. 
 
 The use of lime, which had been noted before the Revolution in the valley 
 of the Susquehanna, became general after 1820. Limestone, which abounds 
 in the neighborhood, was burned with anthracite coal and sold at local kilns 
 at 10 cents a bushel. A contributor to The Cultivator wrote: 7 
 
 “ The improvement which has been effected within the last twenty years in several 
 of the eastern counties of Pennsylvania, (and especially in Chester), is almost incredible. 
 And the whole is mainly attributed to a regular and judicious use of lime as a 
 
 manure. Some idea may be formed of the estimation in which lime is held 
 
 here as a manure, by the fact, that farmers come from 25 to 30 miles, i. e. from 
 Maryland and the poor district of primitive formation in the southern part of Chester 
 county, bordering on the Maryland line, to my lime-kiln and others in the neighborhood: 
 the lime costing those farmers twenty-five cents per bushel when delivered. To the 
 farmers in that quarter, lime is the ‘anchor of hope’; there it has already made the 
 barren and desert place glad, and is fast putting a new and improved face upon the 
 country.” 
 
 Another calcareous soil amendment which came into rather general use in a 
 limited area was the New Jersey marl. The benefits of marl were known 
 
 3 American Farmer, VIII (1826), p. 122; X (1828), pp. 66, 114; 2d Report, Agriculture 
 
 of Massachusetts (1838), p. 80; 4th Report (1841), p. 131. 
 
 4 Spafford, New York Gazetteer (1813), p. 18. 
 
 5 Niles Register, VIII (1815), p. 136. 
 
 6 Ibid., VII (1814-15), p. 416; Phila. Agric. Soc. Memoirs, III (1814), p. 268; The 
 
 Cultivator, II (1835-36), p. 184. 
 
 7 V (1838-39), p. 77. See also Maine Farmer, IV (1836), p. 364. 
 
234 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 and application had been made in an experimental way as early as 1800, but 
 not until about 1820 did its use become a factor in the farming of the State. 
 The marl district extends across the State in a belt about 10 to 20 miles wide 
 from Sandy Hook to the Delaware River below Red Bank. We read in The 
 
 Cultivator: 8 
 
 “ This region of country is well calculated to be one of the most productive in the 
 State; it abounds in marl, both the green sand and calcareous, or shell marl; the former 
 is dug in many places within two feet of the surface, and the latter generally about six 
 feet; the first is sold at the pit for 31I cents a load of 20 bushels, and the last at 50 cents 
 per load. The application to the soil of both kinds is about the same in quantity, ranging 
 from 5 to 25 loads per acre. The greatest distance to which they have hauled from 
 this neighborhood is about 12 miles. The general use of marl here is quite recent, and 
 no doubt as it becomes better known, the use of it will be greatly extended. 
 
 Fertilizers had for the most part a local use and a local market. Guano, the 
 first imported fertilizer, was already known, and shipments had been received 
 in Boston as early as 1830. 9 But for the most part, farmers used what was 
 available near home. Thus the market gardeners of Rhode Island used 
 quantities of rockweed and fish, and from Boston and New York slaughter 
 house offal, night soil, and stable manures were carted to neighboring towns 
 for use on the fields. In New York about 1840 a firm was advertising, under 
 the name poudrette, night soil in powdered form, disinfected and deodorized. 10 
 
 GRASS LAND—HAY AND PASTURAGE. 
 
 All fields were regularly laid down to grass after two or three grain crops 
 had been taken off and were then mowed or pastured for several years. In 
 addition, there were permanent meadows, usually low land along the margins 
 of rivers and smaller streams, the so-called “ bottom lands ” or “ intervales, 
 which were never plowed. In the management of grass land the market influ¬ 
 ences are clearly evident. The concentration of commercial beef-fattening 
 and dairying in a few areas led to the improvement of upland mowing lands 
 by regular sowing of clover and other grasses, and even permanent meadows 
 were occasionally manured and plowed; but in the back country, where com¬ 
 mercial grazing was not profitable, rough and stony mowing lands reverted 
 to pasture, and pastures growing up with weeds and bushes soon became 
 woodland. * 11 
 
 In Chester County, Pennsylvania, the prosperity of graziers was reflected 
 in increased attention to grass lands. Here, we are told, clover was sown as 
 regularly as wheat. 12 About 1820, during a period of temporary failure in 
 the clover crop, orchard grass was introduced. The sowing of lucerne (alfalfa) 
 did not progress beyond the experimental stage. Oxen were fattened in this 
 country in part on permanent meadows, “ well set with natural grasses,” at 
 the rate of from 30 to 50 animals to 100 acres. 13 Cattle were also grazed on 
 
 8 III (1836-37), p. 179. See also Rogers, Geology of New Jersey, 1st Report (1836), 
 
 p. 46. A map showing the marl region is given in Rogers’s 2d Report (1840). 
 
 9 New England Farmer, IX (1830-31), pp. 54 , I2 9 * 
 
 10 The Cultivator, VI (183&-39), p. 144 - . . n . . 
 
 11 N. H. State Bd. Agric., Agricultural Repository, I (1822), p. 49; Massachusetts Board 
 
 of Agric., 1st Annual Report (1853), pt. I, p. 69; New England Farmer, XVII 
 
 (1838-39), P- u 4 - r , 0 
 
 12 American Farmer, X (1828), p. 65. 
 
 13 Loc. cit. 
 
CROPS AND TILLAGE 
 
 235 
 
 sown uplands, for the high cost of farm labor had stimulated farmers to give 
 up grain crops and lay down many of their fields to grass. A contemporary 
 observer described the management of such pastures in Chester and Delaware 
 counties as follows : 14 
 
 “ I observed, in many parts of Chester and Delaware counties, the farmers followed 
 grazing either for beef or butter. They manure and lime their land highly, until it is 
 sufficiently strong to produce a good crop of smooth stalkmeadow-grass, green grass 
 ( Poa pratensis), and white clover, with which the land is soon covered. As the red 
 clover fails with which the land is laid down after mellowing crops, this sward of white 
 clover and green grass they carefully preserve, without ploughing, for many years; 
 and in order to prevent its running out or becoming hide-bound, as the graziers term it, 
 they sometimes scarify the sod and manure on the surface in the winter. But if they 
 are obliged to renew the grass by ploughing, they give the land a good coat of manure 
 and plough it about four or five inches deep, and turn the sward very neatly; immediately 
 sow it down with wheat, which never fails to produce a good crop; the native grass 
 comes up through the seams, and is much more vigorous. But the graziers plough as 
 little as possible, esteeming a good crop of grass more profitable than grain; when the 
 cost of cultivating grain crops is counted; and when land is got into this state, it fre¬ 
 quently rents for eight dollars per acre. By adopting a regular system of grazing, few 
 hands are required; the land always looks handsomely, while it makes the owner and 
 the land rich together. The grazier calculates that one acre of good rich native grass 
 will make a thrifty steer fat in four or five months, which adds to his value one half,— 
 say he costs twenty dollars, when fat is forth forty.” 
 
 In the Connecticut Valley much of the hay crop was cut on permanent 
 meadows on the bottom lands or intervales, where the annual overflowing of 
 the rivers caused native grasses to yield large crops without ever plowing. 
 The famous Deerfield Meadows, a tract of about 3,000 acres, were mowed 
 two or three times a year, yielding about 3 tons to the acre. 15 In the hill 
 towns of this region, clover, timothy, and red top were sown at the rate of 
 3 pecks of the first, 1 of the second, and from 4 to 6 pounds of clover seed. 
 The land was laid down with wheat, rye, or oats, and the grass seed sown 
 with the grain. The first year, when the clover predominated, the average 
 yield was from 2 to 3 tons, decreasing to little over a ton an acre after the 
 second year. 16 
 
 In Maine, farmers sowed clover about once in 8 years, but few sowed other 
 grasses. Consequently, hay was a variable crop and farmers were at times 
 forced to dispose of their stock at a sacrifice for lack of winter fodder. 17 
 
 GROWTH OF MARKETS FOR HAY IN CITIES. 
 
 The consumption of hay by horses at livery and private stables in towns 
 and cities gave farmers in their vicinity a rapidly increasing market. A single 
 farmer in 1837 was sending between 300 and 400 tons of pressed hay to the 
 New York market. 18 From Essex County, Massachusetts, in the same year, 
 1,035 tons of hay (including some straw) were sold to Boston, 19 and in 
 addition about a thousand stage and livery horses in the county were supplied. 
 
 14 American Farmer, VII (1825), p. 163. 
 
 15 Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), pp. 4, 7. 
 
 18 Ibid., 5, 6. 
 
 17 Putnam, Touches on Agriculture, ch. II, p. 24. 
 
 18 The Cultivator, IV (1837-38), p. 12. 
 
 19 1st Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1837), p. 17. 
 
236 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The hay from Ipswich had a high reputation and great pains were taken in 
 curing it. Many farmers in Middlesex County were increasing their hay crop 
 in the years 1830 to 1840. Hay was selling in Essex at this time at from 
 $12 to $28 per ton; a fair average price was $16. Middlesex farmers received 
 about $15 and figured $2.50 as the cost of harvesting plus $2.50 for market¬ 
 ing. Assuming an average yield of 1^ tons, the farmer would net $15 P er 
 acre for the crop. 20 
 
 WHEAT—IN NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 Of all the crops grown in the north, wheat was most susceptible to changing 
 economic conditions. Its high specific value and its good keeping qualities 
 made transportation possible even under primitive conditions, and in the com¬ 
 mercial towns there was a constant market for wheat flour. Consequently, 
 we found that in colonial days wheat was a commercial product and that the 
 areas of wheat-growing were shifting so as to concentrate pioduction on the 
 best land. In New England, the Connecticut Valley 21 was noted for its wheat 
 before 1700 and supplied other sections with wheat and flour. But early 
 in the eighteenth century the port towns of New England were getting bread- 
 stuffs, principally wheat, from the Middle and Southern colonies, and the 
 wheat areas of New England had shifted to newer soils in northern Vermont 
 and the Berkshires. Elsewhere in New England wheat was generally regarded 
 as a failure. Many causes were assigned, the climate, the rust, etc., but the 
 plain truth was revealed to only a few. Among these was John Adams, who 
 
 wrote: 22 
 
 “Notwithstanding all this [i. e. failure of Siberian wheat], I have no doubt that 
 wheat may be raised in Massachusetts as well as anywhere else, but the land must be 
 under proper cultivation, particularly manured abundantly—the seed sowed so early 
 that it may be forward and vigorous enough to bear the winter, and start early enough 
 in the spring to shoot the grain and ear forward before the season of insects. But this 
 process which I know has succeeded and will succeed, is expensive, and the wheat will 
 not procure a price equal to the labor. What is the reason of this? Here lies the 
 
 mystery. No Russian seed will retrieve this. . 
 
 “ You will never get Siberian wheat or any other wheat to grow in New-England in 
 quantities to constitute a steady staple, without an expensive cultivation, and that 
 expense will never be repaid while wheat, rye, and corn have such a formidable rival 
 in commerce.” 
 
 At this time it was estimated that 90,000 persons in Massachusetts sub¬ 
 sisted on imported flour, requiring, at the rate of a pound a day, between 
 13,000 and 14,000 barrels a month. 23 
 
 • Between 1800 and 1820 wheat-growing developed on new soils in Maine and 
 was still produced for market in western Vermont. Whipple 24 wrote of 
 Maine in 1816: 
 
 “In favorable seasons wheat is more profitably cultivated than corn—Twenty years 
 since, very few people supposed that wheat would ever be cultivated to advantage in 
 
 20 4 th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), p. 237. 
 
 22 Letter^of August 11, 1812, to Elkanah Watson, in Watson, Men and Times of the 
 
 Revolution, 379. . , /x ., 
 
 23 Letter of Thomas Jefferson to Levi Lincoln, August 22, 1808, in Works (Library ed., 
 
 1904), XII, 145- 
 
 24 Geographical and Statistical l tew, 15. 
 
CROPS AND TILLAGE 
 
 237 
 
 Maine—since that time, it has been ascertained that the soil between the Penobscot and 
 Kennebec rivers, is peculiarly adapted to this article; and is found to be more profitable 
 than any other grain.” 
 
 Vermont wheat in 1820 was marketed at Troy on the Hudson River. 25 
 
 EFFECTS OF WESTERN COMPETITION. 
 
 By 1830 the influence of cheap transportation via the Erie Canal was 
 apparent, and by 1840 flour of western wheat was being used everywhere in 
 New England by farmers as well as city folk. Flour prices had suffered a 
 marked decline since the opening of the century. In the years of active for¬ 
 eign demand, prices had been high, averaging $9.44 per barrel in 1800 to 
 1807 and $10.07 i n 1808 to 1814. The decline in export trade brought the 
 average for the succeeding 11 years (1815 to 1825) down to $7.82. The effects 
 
 of the opening of the Erie Canal are seen in a drop of the average price for 
 the next period of 11 years (1825 to 1835) to $5.90. In 1836 and 1837 poor 
 harvests forced up the price temporarily, raising the average for the 5 years 
 1835-1839 to $8. 26 A comparison of the trend of flour prices and general 
 prices is shown in figure 31. 
 
 A historian of Berkshire County 27 recorded in 1829: 
 
 “ The cultivation of wheat and rye has been gradually diminishing for years, and has 
 been considerably reduced since the opening of the Western Canal. Of rye, a sufficient 
 quantity is raised for the use of the inhabitants in the middle and western part of the 
 County, but not enough to supply the eastern and higher part, where the grains are not 
 easily cultivated. 
 
 “ Of wheat, considerable quantities were formerly carried to the market towns along 
 the Hudson River, as Hudson, Kinderhook, Albany, and Troy; but for several years 
 much more wheat flour has been introduced into the County than has been carried 
 out of it.” 
 
 25 Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d Series, IX, 138. 
 
 26 Average annual export prices at New York, from Klippart, The Wheat Plant, 328. 
 
 The prices by years will be found in table 72, p. 499. 
 
 27 Field, Berkshire County, Massachusetts, 87. 
 
238 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 In Vermont it was stated that in a single town (Windsor) $9,500 was paid 
 every year for western flour. 
 
 “A few years ago Vermont raised a surplus of wheat, for which she found a ready 
 market. It is now the reverse; and intelligent men think the amount paid by our farmers 
 for the article of flour the last year, exceeds what they have received for their wool, 
 
 by many thousand of dollars.” 28 
 
 In Maine, in 1837, farmers 100 miles inland were eating bread made of 
 Rochester flour. 29 A legislative committee which investigated wheat produc¬ 
 tion and consumption in Massachusetts reported that in 1830 only 16,073 
 bushels were produced in the entire State and that the imports of flour into 
 the port of Boston for consumption in Massachusetts and in northern New 
 England in the years 1830 to 1837 averaged 389,000 barrels. In addition, 
 flour was regularly brought into other smaller ports and there was 
 
 “ an almost perpetual transportation by means of wagons, from Troy, Albany, and 
 Hudson, into the county of Berkshire, for the supply not only of the inhabitants of that 
 county, but for consumption by the people of many towns in the counties of r rank in, 
 Hampshire, and Hampden.” 30 
 
 Notwithstanding the facts which were thus revealed and the well-known 
 disinclination of farmers to raise wheat, the legislatures of Massachusetts 
 and Maine attempted to stem the tide of western flour by paying bounties to 
 native wheat-growers. The failure of the experiment should have been evi¬ 
 dent from the beginning. Wheat production was slightly increased as long as 
 the bounty was paid, but no permanent gains were secured. 31 
 
 ENEMIES OF THE WHEAT CROP. 
 
 A part of the discouragement of Eastern farmers in respect to wheat-raising 
 was owing to the ravages of crop enemies. The rust was prevalent through¬ 
 out the section, and the Hessian fly, which had first appeared during the Revo¬ 
 lutionary War, had spread rapidly. In Bucks County, Pennsylvania, in 1823, 
 so much of the wheat was destroyed that farmers were considering the 
 abandonment of the crop. Wrote a farmer of that county to the Pennsylvania 
 Agricultural Society: 33 
 
 “ It must be conceded that in many districts, its cultivation has for some time, been 
 an unprofitable part of husbandry; and the present season has shown, that a failure has 
 taken place to an alarming extent, throughout a great portion of our wheat country. 
 It appears that in some places, where the fly had been scarcely known, the crops are 
 now nearly destroyed: and from almost every quarter, we have accounts of the most 
 distressing kind.” 
 
 A new enemy, the grain worm or midge, 34 crossed the border from Lower 
 Canada between 1825 and 1830 to northern New York and Vermont. It was 
 described as a fly with orange-colored body and white wings, which deposited 
 its eggs in the ears of the wheat. When the young were hatched they fed on 
 
 28 Windsor, Vermont, Republican, quoted in New York Farmer, VII (1834), p. 91. 
 
 29 Maine Farmer, V (1837), p. 44- 
 
 30 Mass. House of Representatives, Documents (1838), No. 12, p. 6. 
 
 31 See p. 193. 
 
 32 Described on p. 93. 
 
 33 Memoirs, I (1824), p. 165. 
 
 34 Cecidomyia tritici. 
 
CROPS AND TILLAGE 
 
 239 
 
 the grain. Progressing at the rate of from 40 to 60 miles a year, it had by 
 1840 spread over all of New England and large parts of New York State, 
 being found as far east as Maine, as far south as Dutchess County (New 
 York), and as far west as the Genesee Valley. 35 
 
 Jesse Buel wrote: 36 
 
 “It is believed [that the grain worm] has diminished the product of the wheat crop, 
 
 in the districts which it has ravaged for two or three years, at least three-fourths-_ 
 
 that is to say, it has prevented the sowing of the winter varieties to a very great extent, 
 and it has destroyed, at a fair computation, one-half of the crop which has been sown. 
 Most of the wheat now grown in these districts is of the spring varieties, and these," 
 unless sown late, fare very little better than the winter kinds.” 
 
 INTRODUCTION OF NEW VARIETIES. ' 
 
 It had been discovered that late-sown winter wheat escaped damage by the 
 Hessian fly, but on the other hand, late maturity made the crop peculiarly 
 liable to attacks of the rust and the grain worm. As the result of the endeavor 
 to find a variety which could be sown late and yet would mature early, the 
 so-called Mediterranean wheat was introduced. It was a bearded red winter 
 wheat brought in 1819 from islands in the Mediterranean Sea. 37 
 
 Spring wheat was coming into more general use in place of winter wheat in 
 northern New England and New York, where the crop if sown in the fall 
 was apt to suffer severe losses from winter killing. Although not attacked 
 by the Hessian fly, spring wheat suffered from both rust and the grain worm. 
 In milling flour for export, spring wheat was not highly regarded, although 
 it was mixed sometimes with winter grain. 
 
 One bushel of this kind of wheat is generally sufficient to impart a dark shade to 
 the flour made from five bushels of the best grain. It is only proper for flour of second 
 qualit>, and fine and common middlings—and it would be well if our wheat dealers 
 would keep such wheat separate from good winter grain, and send it to market to be 
 sold by its proper title. This wheat does not possess the oleaginous properties in equal 
 portion with winter grain.” 38 
 
 New varieties of spring wheat introduced before 1840 were the Siberian 
 (bearded), Egyptian or many-spiked, the Black Sea, and the Italian. 39 Of 
 these, the Black Sea variety, on account of its high yields and early maturity, 
 was perhaps the most valuable. 
 
 WHEAT YIELDS. 
 
 The average yield of wheat in New England in 1840 was estimated by 
 Colman at not over 12 bushels per acre. 40 The statistics presented in connec¬ 
 tion with claims for the State bounty in 1838 41 showed the average yields in 
 the most productive areas in Massachusetts to be about 15 bushels per acre. In 
 
 HV? e Cultivator > V (1838-39), p. 27; N. Y. Agric. Soc. Transactions, III (1843), p 146 
 30 The Cultivator, IV (1837-38), 2d ed., p. 189. y 4 
 
 37 Hunt, Cereals in America, 63; Klippart, Wheat Plant, 87, gives a different story of its 
 origin. 
 
 N. Y. Soc. for Promotion of Useful Arts, Transactions, IV (1819), pt. II p 39 
 "The Cultivator, IV (1837-38), pp. no, 174; Mass. Senate, Document No. 77 (1838) ; 
 N. Y. Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1841), p. 360. 
 
 40 Agricultural Addresses, 27. 
 
 41 3d Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1840), pp. 48, 51. 
 
240 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Lancaster County, which had the reputation of having the best wheat crop 
 in Pennsylvania, an estimate of 1820 put the average at 15 bushels, although 
 many farmers got from 20 to 30 and some 30 to 40 bushels. 42 In Chester 
 County, Pennsylvania, the average wheat crop was from 12 to 15 bushels. 43 
 In the interior of New York, according to the New York Farmer , 44 20 to 25 
 bushels was an average wheat crop. 
 
 CORN. 
 
 Corn, like hay, continued a general crop without marked regional concentra¬ 
 tion Unlike wheat, corn was not attacked by destructive crop enemies, and 
 although some localities were better adapted than others for its cultivation, 
 yet the differences were not so marked as to lead to the abandonment of the 
 crop anywhere. However, in New England, corn production did not keep pace 
 with increased consumption, and the deficit was supplied by importation, prin¬ 
 cipally from the Southern States. Pitkin 45 (1835) estimated the amount of 
 Indian corn consumed in New England which was brought from other parts of 
 the Union at between 2.000.000 and 3,000,000 bushels a year. Corn from west¬ 
 ern New York and from the Ohio Valley did not figure in eastern markets in its 
 original form, having too little value to stand transportation costs. Western 
 corn nevertheless competed with the eastern product when condensed into pork, 
 and in this form the competition was serious. 46 
 
 The chief change in tillage methods was the use of the cultivator instead of 
 hand hoeing, to which reference has already been made. Many farmers still 
 “ topped ” their corn for fodder and removed the blades, also, before the ears 
 were ripe, thus considerably decreasing the yield. The southern and western 
 practice of feeding from the stack in the field was advocated, but I have found 
 
 no evidence of its adoption in the East. 
 
 Progress was made in the development of new varieties of corn through 
 seed selection, chiefly for the purpose of obtaining early maturity and conse¬ 
 quent immunity from frost in the high country and in northern New England. 
 The Dutton corn, a variety combining large yield with early maturity, was 
 well known in Vermont. A list and description of 40 recognized varieties was 
 published by Jesse Buel in 183s. 4 ' 
 
 MINOR GRAINS. 
 
 Of the minor grains, rye and barley seem to have been most important. 
 Rye bread was still eaten by farmers remote from markets. A tolerable crop 
 of rye could be raised by even a negligent farmer on poor land and the dis¬ 
 tilleries furnished a ready market. In four towns near Springfield, Massachu¬ 
 setts, in the Connecticut Valley, according to an estimate of 1826, more than 
 100,000 bushels of rye, besides large quantities of corn, were annually dis- 
 
 42 American Farmer, II (1820-21), p. 137. 
 
 43 Ibid., X (1828), p. 65. 
 
 43 ^Commerce of 3 United States, p. 525. See also New England Farmer, XV 
 p. 57; Colman, Agricultural Addresses, 37. 
 
 43 See p. 230. 
 
 4 7 The Cultivator, V (1838-39), p. 43- 
 
 (1836-37), 
 

 CROPS AND TILLAGE 241 
 
 tilled, 43 and approximately the same amounts were used in the distilleries near 
 New York City. 49 Barley was used to some extent for feeding stock, especially 
 horses, and when wheat was scarce barley flour was used for bread, but when 
 raised for sale the principal markets were the breweries. Chester County, 
 Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island were noted for barley production before 
 1820, 60 but the chief area of production was in the neighborhood of Herkimer 
 County, in New York State. The New York Farmer 61 boasted: 
 
 Two-thirds of all the barley grown in the United States is believed to be marketed 
 at Albany and the neighboring towns upon the Hudson. The amount brought to our 
 market last year is estimated at 450,000 bushels. It is of two kinds—two rowed and 
 six rowed, one possessing a thin and the other a thick skin, and larger berry, ill adapted 
 to be malted together, as one kind malts quicker than the other, and becomes sensibly 
 deteriorated before the saccharine matter of the other kind is fully developed. The two 
 varieties are often mixed by the grower; but that which passes through second hands, 
 as the merchant, boatmen, &c. is almost universally so, and is besides frequently adulter¬ 
 ated with oats and other foreign matters, which seriously depreciate its value. It is 
 stated that the deterioration and loss consequent upon the bad condition of the barley 
 brought to market the last season, was equal to ten per cent, or 45,000 bushels—which, 
 expressed in money, at 75 cents the bushel, amounts to $33,750.” 
 
 Oats were often sown when laying land down to grass. They were used as 
 fodder for fattening cattle when mixed with peas. The demand from livery 
 stables stimulated cultivation in the neighborhood of cities. Only in a few 
 sections were oats used for human consumption. 52 Buckwheat was not highly 
 regarded. It had the reputation of being a poor grain, to be cultivated by the 
 indolent and slovenly. Its value in driving out weeds was recognized, how¬ 
 ever, and progressive farmers occasionally turned it under as a green manure. 53 
 
 POTATOES AND OTHER ROOT CROPS. 
 
 The benefits of raising root crops, potatoes, turnips, carrots, mangel-wurt- 
 zel, and ruta baga, for fodder were strongly emphasized by agricultural socie¬ 
 ties and by farm papers, but their exhortations fell for the most part on deaf 
 ears. Potatoes were more generally cultivated after 1820, better seed was used 
 and larger crops were harvested, but except in a few localities they were not 
 fed to stock. In eastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island, and in Maine, pota¬ 
 toes were raised in considerable quantities for market. Maine potatoes in 1840 
 had already achieved a high reputation and were being sold in the Southern 
 States. 54 The more general cultivation of roots for fodder was prevented by 
 high labor costs, particularly at harvesting. A contributor to the Memoirs 55 
 of the New York Board of Agriculture from Onondaga County discussed 
 the objections to raising turnips on a typical 150-acre farm, whose labor force 
 comprised only two men: 
 
 “ Suppose, then, that the turnip husbandry were introduced, and that from six to ten 
 acres of turnips were annually cultivated on every man’s farm; where could sufficient 
 
 48 Hampshire Gazette, quoted in New England Fanner, V (1826-27), p. 159. 
 
 49 Genesee Farmer, quoted in Maine Farmer, V (1837), P- 67. 
 
 50 Phila. Agric. Soc. Memoirs, IV (1818), p. xxxii. 
 
 61 VII (1834), p. 144. 
 
 52 2d Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1838), p. 27; 4th Report (1841), pp. 23, 213. 
 
 The Cultivator, IV (1837-38), 174. 
 
 53 American Farmer, X (1828), p. 114. 
 
 54 The Cultivator, V (1838-39), p. 187; Maine Farmer, V (1837), p. 44. 
 
 55 III (1826), p. 92. 
 
 1 7 
 
242 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 help be obtained for harvesting and securing these crops? The turnip harvest comes 
 at a season of the year which, in this county, is generally very unpleasant-the days 
 short and much of the weather stormy. Frequently, the farmers here find it more 
 than enough to harvest their corn, make their cider, and attend to their numerous other 
 concerns, which are indispensable. If, in addition to their present stock of autumna 
 business, they had large crops of turnips to pull and secure, scenes of distress would 
 
 necessarily ensue.” 
 
 In addition, he pointed out that turnips were a precarious crop, exposed 
 to damage by the fly, grasshoppers, and by drought. The labor cost of feeding, 
 too, was greater than the cost of feeding hay. Experiments with the new 
 roots, mangel-wurtzel and ruta baga, had begun early in the century, but until 
 about 1830 their cultivation was still limited to gentlemen farmers. Within 
 a few years of the close of our period a more general interest in these crops 
 
 was developing. 56 
 
 MARKET GARDENING. 
 
 Specialized areas of market gardening and fruit growing had developed 
 rapidly between 1820 and 1840 in eastern Masachussetts, particularly Essex 
 and Middlesex Counties, in Rhode Island in towns along Narragansett Bay, 
 and in the neighborhood of New York on Long Island and in New Jersey. 
 In these districts was found the most intensive farming in the whole country. 
 Hired labor was regularly used; manures were liberally applied, both those 
 made on the farm and stable manure brought from the cities. Land was re¬ 
 claimed, meadows drained, and dry lands irrigated, and tillage was more 
 like garden culture than field culture. 57 The efforts of farmers in these sections 
 were not limited to supplying local markets; for some vegetables, notably 
 onions and beets, markets were found in the West Indies and in the Southern 
 
 States. 58 
 
 The profits of market gardening led to high land values in these sections, 
 and as a result less intensive types of agriculture were displaced and forced 
 back onto cheaper land. In 1836 the better class of farms in Dutchess County, 
 near New York, were selling for $100 per acre, four times their price in 
 1800; a few years later land just outside of Philadelphia brought $150 per 
 acre. 59 In West Cambridge, Massachusetts, land devoted to garden truck for 
 the Boston market increased in value in the 10 years 1830 to 1840 from $37 
 to $300 per acre. 60 High land values in connection with ready markets pro¬ 
 duced tenancy near the large cities, a condition of land tenure almost unknown 
 elsewhere in the North. Many of the truck farms were leased by immigrants, 
 who had learned gardening in Europe. After a few years they were usually 
 able to purchase their farms. 61 
 
 56 The Cultivator, IV (1837-38), p. 79', Maine Farmer, V (1837), p. 275. 
 
 57 Descriptions of successful farming in Middlesex County, Massachusetts, with details 
 
 of crops and sales are given in 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), PP* 
 400 et seq. For market gardening in Rhode Island, see Jackson, Geological ana 
 Agricultural Survey (1839), PP- 1 3^>, J 48, I 53 > I 55 » 16 7, 
 
 58 New England Farmer, XV (i836-37),P- 441 1st Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts, 
 
 (1838), p. 35 ; 4th Report (1841), p. 222. 
 
 59 The Cultivator, III (1836-37), p. 41. New York Farmer, VI (1833), p. 37°. 
 
 G0 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), p. 354 - 
 
 61 New York Farmer, I (1828), p. 231. 
 
CROPS AND TILLAGE 
 
 243 
 
 ORCHARDS AND VINEYARDS. 
 
 Apples remained the most important orchard fruit everywhere, except in 
 some districts in the Middle Atlantic States, as in New Jersey, where peaches 
 were raised on a considerable scale. The production of cider had long been the 
 chief means of utilizing apples, and but little attention was paid to the develop¬ 
 ment of varieties, or to the pruning and care of orchards. The trees were 
 described as “ bristled all over, from root to top, with branches like whip 
 sticks; hide bound, cankered and covered with moss.” 62 About the year 1830 
 a vigorous temperance reform swept over the Northern States, causing a 
 marked decline in cider drinking. Many farmers cut down their apple trees 
 and all neglected them. But in a few years new uses for apples were discov¬ 
 ered. They were found valuable to feed to hogs, horses, and cattle, and the 
 growth of urban population created a demand for better apples for table use 
 and for cooking. On farms near enough to send apples to market, therefore, 
 there was a renewed interest in apple growing, and new varieties were planted 
 and engrafted. 63 
 
 The beginnings of commercial grape culture are found between the years 
 1780 and 1820, when vineyards were planted near New York and Philadel¬ 
 phia, in York County, Pennsylvania, at Cincinnati, Ohio, Lexington and 
 Glasgow, Kentucky, and Vevay, Indiana, where 30 Swiss families had settled 
 in 1804 on land particularly granted for the encouragement of vine cultivation. 
 For the most part the vineyards were small, from 1 to 5 acres, and were 
 invariably planted with foreign grapes, which proved unsuited to American 
 conditions. The vines were either destroyed by various crop enemies or else 
 did not flourish, even with the greatest care. About 1820 experiments began 
 with native varieties, resulting in the development of the now famous Catawba 
 grapes. A large emigration into the valley of the Ohio of Germans from the 
 Rhine, beginning about 1820, brought many practiced vine dressers and 
 assisted in the establishment there of commercial wine production. 64 
 
 SPECIAL CROPS—HOPS. 
 
 The pressure of western competition on staples such as wheat and pork 
 caused eastern farmers, particularly in New England, to give attention to a 
 number of special crops in an attempt to find commodities which could be 
 profitably marketed under the new competitive conditions. Except in the case 
 of tobacco, all of the special crops proved in the end to be more cheaply raised 
 in the West and their production in the East had begun to decline by 1840 
 or 1850. The growing of hops for market had become localized in 10 or 12 
 towns in the northwest corner of Middlesex County, Massachusetts, as early 
 as 1780, and by 1811 their annual production was over 100,000 pounds. 65 A 
 considerable part of the crop was exported to France and Germany, and in 
 
 62 American Farmer, II (1820-21), p. 170. 
 
 63 N. Y. Bd. Agric., Memoirs, II (1823), p. 75, 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts 
 
 (1841), p. 384; Conn. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, 1855, p. 186. 
 
 ,;4 American Farmer, V (1823), p. 251; VIII (1826), pp. 164, 284; New York Farmer, II 
 
 (1829), pp. 94, 114; III (1830), pp. 212, 221 ; VII (1834), P- 131; Ohio State Board 
 
 Agriculture, 14th Annual Report (1859), p. 465; Flint, Mississippi Valley, II, 149. 
 
 Co Valuation Returns of 1811, MS. in Massachusetts Archives. 
 
244 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 order to improve marketing conditions the Massachusetts legislature in 1806 
 provided for compulsory inspection and grading of all hops packed for ex¬ 
 port. 66 A high standard of inspection was established and conscientiously 
 enforced, with the result that Massachusetts “ first sort ” brand became noted 
 as the best in the United States. 
 
 “ Bv adopting a high standard of inspection, the growers were soon brought to improve 
 their hops, in order to bring them up to the ‘ first sort,’ and the facts and character 
 of such an official inspection becoming immediately known in Europe, those who sent 
 orders from there required hops of Massachusetts inspection, and they in consequence 
 commanded a cent or two on a pound more than those of any other state. 
 
 The average quantities inspected annually under this law were as follows : 68 
 1806 to 1815, 304,377 pounds; 1816 to 1825, 599-7^5 pounds; 1826 to 1S35, 
 
 59545 1 pounds. 
 
 POUNDS 
 
 THOUSANDS 
 
 800 
 
 700 
 
 600 
 
 500 
 
 400 
 
 300 
 
 200 
 
 100 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
 n\/ 
 h v 
 
 
 
 
 
 Prices 
 
 C] 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
 ' 
 
 
 p- 
 
 1 
 
 3 1 
 
 
 
 
 l 1 
 
 1 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 • / 
 
 
 . 
 
 1 
 
 l 
 
 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 \ 1 
 
 \ 1 
 
 \ _L 
 
 -f 
 
 K 1 
 
 /\ 1 
 1 \ 1 
 
 'hri — 
 
 1 \ 1 
 
 /, V 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 » 
 
 \ 
 
 — \ 
 
 }\ . 
 
 
 A 
 
 1 1 
 \ 3 
 \ 1 
 
 _JLi_ 
 
 \ T 
 V ! 
 
 1 \ / 
 \ i\ / 
 1 ! \ / 
 
 pi 
 
 —1 - 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 \ t 
 \ 1 
 
 I »/ 
 
 / 
 
 \ 
 
 4 y 
 
 1 \ 
 
 1 \ 
 
 M^ 
 
 l\. 
 
 1 Y/ 
 
 1 ” 
 
 — 1 — 
 
 Ins 
 
 -44 - Aj 
 
 y C 
 
 pec!ions 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 t 
 
 V 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
 \ / 
 
 V 
 
 
 \/ 
 
 1 1 1 
 
 ! 1 ! J 
 
 __ 1 _ 1 — 1 — 1— 
 
 _1_i_i—1— 
 
 ■ < ' ■ 
 
 _1_t_t—t_ 
 
 1 1 1 1 — 
 
 CENTS 
 ER LB. 
 
 40 
 
 35 
 
 30 
 
 25 
 
 20 
 
 I 5 
 
 I 0 
 
 v 1806 1810 1815 1320 1825 1830 1835 l8A0 
 
 Fig. 32.—Hops: quantity inspected and prices in Massachusetts, 1806-1840. 
 
 In 1836 the high point of the industry in Massachusetts seems to have been 
 reached. In that year about 850,000 pounds were inspected. Before 1840 a 
 marked decline had set in. As in the case of wool, the collapse of prices follow¬ 
 ing the crisis of 1837 seems to have brought western competition, already 
 potentially strong, sharply into the foreground. Farmers in central New 
 York, principally in Madison, Otsego and Oneida Counties, had begun about 
 
 es General Laws of Massachusetts (1823), II, 156. A similar law was enacted in New 
 York in 1819. See Revised Statutes of New York (1829), I, 565 - 
 ct Flint, in Kettell, Eighty Years’ Progress, I, 89. This was not, however, as Mint 
 claims, “the first movement of the kind in the country. Inspection of a number 
 of exported products, notably beef, pork, and flour, had been provided by colonia 
 legislatures beginning in the early eighteenth century. See Rhode Island Records 4 
 III, 527; New Jersey Archives, 1st series, XVI, 340 Cary and Bioren, Laws of 
 
 Pennsylvania, I, 261. ,, _ 
 
 G8 4th Report, Agriculture of Mass. (1841), pp. 490-91. More detailed figures are give 
 
 on p. 498, table 74. 
 
CROPS AND TILLAGE 245 
 
 1825 to grow hops for domestic and export markets. In that year inspections 
 of hops produced in these counties amounted to 450,500 pounds. 09 
 
 The method of cultivating and harvesting hops as practiced in New England 
 in the early decades of the nineteenth century has been described as follows : 70 
 
 “ The hop vine was trained, or trained itself, perhaps, on poles, which in the culture 
 were from two to four inches in diameter at the base and fourteen and fifteen feet 
 in length. The hills in the field were set at a distance of perhaps five feet apart, and 
 averaged about one thousand to an acre. 
 
 “ The picking commenced usually in the last week of August, and continued often 
 until far into the first half of September. The vines were cut and the poles taken out 
 of the ground by men and laid upon long bins sufficient to receive the entire length of 
 the vine, which was usually not less than twelve feet. The picking was done by young 
 people, boys and girls, who stood on each side of the bin. 
 
 “ The product from one acre was about 1,000 pounds, or a pound to a hill, of dry 
 hops. T he drying was carried on in a building erected for the purpose, the hops being- 
 laid over lattice-work on the floor; and a fire of charcoal underneath furnished the heat 
 for drying. This process was a delicate one, as it was necessary to extract all the moisture 
 from the hops and to avoid scorching, as that injured the value in the market.” 
 
 Violent price fluctuations made hop-growing a speculative enterprise, and 
 in order to eliminate this risk farmers were in the habit of making contracts 
 extending over several seasons with buyers who guaranteed to take the product 
 of a certain number of acres at a fixed price. 71 
 
 BROOM CORN AND TEASELS. 
 
 Three special crops were profitably grown on the fertile soils of the Con¬ 
 necticut Valley in this period—broom corn, fullers’ teasels, and tobacco, Of 
 these, the first two enjoyed their maximum prosperity in 1830 to 1840, then 
 succumbing to western competition. The growing of broom corn dated from 
 about the year 1800. In 1825 it had become a staple in the river towns; in 
 the town of Hadley alone 1,000 acres were annually planted. Said a writer 
 in the Boston Gazette: 72 
 
 “ It is presumed there is not a town of equal extent in the United States, in which so 
 much land is employed in the cultivation of this article. In a tour through the state 
 of New York to Cayahoga river in Ohio, a few years since, we did not notice so much 
 as half an acre of it in the whole distance. We understand, however, that its culture 
 is pretty extensive in some parts of New Jersey. The mode of culture, in the towns 
 on Connecticut river, is very similar to that of Indian corn, but it is said to require two 
 or three times as much labour. The produce of an acre varies from 300 to 700 lbs. of that 
 part of the plant which is made into brooms, (a few inches of the stalk, and the 
 panicle divested of seed), and from 25 to 70 bushels of seed. Different opinions are 
 entertained as to the value of the seed. Many assert that it is superior to oats, others 
 estimate it much lower. It is probably worth 25 cents per bushel for hogs and cattle, 
 but is of less value for horses. We are informed that the crops of broom corn in Hadley, 
 Hatfield, &c. in favourable seasons, are worth from 25 to 50 dollars per acre, standing 
 in the field. A considerable portion of the United States and Canada is furnished with 
 brooms by the towns on Connecticut river, and we learn that large quantities are exported 
 to South America.” 
 
 The brush was at first made into brooms by the raisers, as a by-industry of 
 farming. Before 1840 the processes of manufacturing brooms had been trans- 
 
 69 N. Y. Assembly Journal, 49th Session (1826), p. 650. 
 
 70 Letter of George S. Boutwell, in Groton Hist. Series, IV, No. 5 > P- 374 - 
 
 71 Maine Farmer, II (1834), p. 45. 
 
 72 Quoted in American Farmer, VII (1825), p. 300. 
 
246 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 ferred from the farms to factories. Prices were unsteady and the business, 
 like hop raising, was speculative. In 1825 the crops standing in the field were 
 valued at $25 to $50 per acre; 73 in 1835 many farmers sold at the rate of from 
 $70 to $100 per acre. 74 
 
 “ About 1850 the farmers upon the western prairies began the raising of broom corn 
 exclusively for the brush. It was of larger growth, long and straight, cut while green, 
 and kilndried, and was much better than the brush raised in this valley, and soon occupied 
 the market. The brooms made from the western brush were of handsome color, the 
 brush having been cut before ripening; they were a stronger and a better broom in every 
 way, the outside being covered with the hurls of the brush and no broom made from 
 native brush could compete with them.” 75 
 
 Teasels, used by woolen manufacturers to raise the nap on cloth, were also 
 grown in the Connecticut Valley. In 1835 the total American crop was esti¬ 
 mated at 42,000,000 heads, of which 30,000,000 were grown in New England. 
 The consumption exceeded the domestic supply and the deficit was made up by 
 imports from France and England. Teasels were an uncertain crop, carding 
 from an average yield of 40*000 heads per acre to three or four times that 
 
 number. 76 
 
 TOBACCO. 
 
 Early in the century tobacco was a cash crop in the Connecticut Valley. 
 It was bought from the farmers by peddlers and marketed in the hill towns 
 and was exported to the West Indies. The average crop was perhaps 10 tons. 
 Between 1800 and 1820 production was stimulated by the establishment of 
 local shops which began manufacturing plug and twist tobacco and later 
 cigars, employing farmers’ wives and daughters. About 1825, shipments of 
 tobacco leaf were being made to New York, where the Connecticut Valley 
 product had already attained a high reputation. A few years later the broad- 
 leaf plant was first introduced from Maryland. The state of the industry in 
 1836 was described by Henry Colman as follows : 7 ‘ 
 
 “ i n passing through East Windsor, in Connecticut, in December last, I was surprised 
 at the size of many of the buildings erected and used for the puropse of drying tobacco; 
 and at the extent to which I was informed their cultivation of this plant was carried. 
 I was told that one hundred acres cultivated with tobacco the current year in that 
 place, averaged a produce of 2,400 lbs. to the acre; and that fourteen acres out of the 
 hundred yielded 2,800 lbs. to the acre. The price at which it sells this year, is from eight 
 to ten cents per pound. The cultivation is understood to be half more expensive than 
 Indian corn; and the sale is always prompt. Peculiar advantages are enjoyed in this 
 place from the immediate vicinity of very large gin distilleries, with extensive ‘ piggeries ’ 
 annexed. The hogs are fed upon the refuse grains, and great quantities of the most 
 
 valuable manure are in this way furnished.The average crop is about 1,500 lbs.; 
 
 2,000 lbs. are not uncommon to an acre; and it sells from five to seven dollars per 100 
 lbs. This account was given me by a respectable farmer of Long Meadow, Massachusetts, 
 five years ago, who cultivated the plant to some considerable extent. The price has since 
 that time advanced, and the cultivation of it has been extended.” 
 
 73 New England Farmer, IV (1825-26), p. 131. 
 
 74 Jones, The Broom Corn Industry, in Pocumtuck Valley Memorial Association, His¬ 
 
 tory and Proceedings, IV, 108. 
 
 75 Ibid., IV, p. no. 
 
 76 New York Farmer , VI (1833), P- 271; IX (1836), p. 6. 
 
 77 Ibid., IX (1836), p. 33. See also Conn. State Agric. Soc., Transactions, 1856, pp. 432 
 
 et seq.; New England Farmer, XIV (1835-36), p. 171; Temple, Whately, Massa¬ 
 chusetts, p. 176. 
 
Chapter XIX.—The Transition from Self-Suffi¬ 
 cient Economy to Commercial Agriculture, 
 its Difficulties—its Significance. 
 
 'Fhe transition from self-sufficient economy to commercial agriculture was 
 not easily accomplished. The powerful forces of habit and tradition tended 
 to keep the farmers in the old ways of producing what they needed for their 
 own use, selling little and, as a matter of pride as well as of necessity, buying 
 next to nothing. In addition, farmers as a class were hampered by the lack 
 of business experience. They were often the victims of sharp practice in buy¬ 
 ing seeds and implements, and in selling cattle, wool, and miscellaneous prod¬ 
 uce. Once bitten, twice shy. As a result of these experiences they harbored 
 suspicions, often unjustifiable, of all business men, an attitude which prevented 
 their taking full advantage of genuine market opportunities. 
 
 CAPITAL AND CREDIT. 
 
 The lack of working capital was a serious hindrance to improvement and to 
 the development of agriculture as a business. For this the farmers themselves 
 were in part to blame. What surplus funds they had were too often laid out 
 in buying more land, or in building larger houses, or invested in outside enter¬ 
 prises, banks, or shipping ventures, rather than reinvested productively in the 
 farm itself. Consequently, when it came to purchasing the new labor-saving 
 farm machinery, or new varieties of seeds or improved livestock, funds were 
 lacking. Production for market, particularly in the case of the more intensive 
 branches, such as truck gardening and milk farming, required larger outlays 
 for hired labor than farmers had been accustomed to make. Here again they 
 found their working capital inadequate. The farmers as a rule marketed their 
 produce once a year, in the winter, and consequently had to provide, either 
 out of their own or out of borrowed funds, working capital for a whole year 
 before they realized anything from sales. The embarrassments arising from 
 this situation were described in the New England Farmer: 1 
 
 “Their hired hands must be paid in autumn, if not sooner, and if they expect to 
 get store goods and mechanics’ work at a reasonable rate, they must pay as they go 
 along. A farmer sells his pork, butter, cheese, grain, &c. from January to April. The 
 cost of producing all these, was paid, (or ought to have been,) the summer and autumn 
 before. His sheep are sheared in May, and should be able to convert their fleeces im¬ 
 mediately into money, (which he cannot always do,) still the whole expense of pro¬ 
 ducing this wool, excepting about two months spring pasturing, was paid the year before, 
 a considerable portion of it the August before. 
 
 “ It cannot be denied that a farmer can get along after a fashion with little or no 
 
 capital, because it is done by thousands every year. A farmer without capital, 
 
 in the first place, will not perhaps hire more than half as much labor as his farm 
 requires; of course all his work is slighted, and all done out of season, and half crops 
 is the consequence. When the time arrives for paying his laborers, perhaps he will get 
 
 
 X XII (1833-34), p. 346. 
 
 247 
 
248 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 some things out of the store for them on trust, or borrow a little money to pay them in 
 part, and put off paying the remainder until winter or spring, to the no small injury of 
 his credit, otherwise he must force sale of some of his scanty produce at a reduced price, 
 to make out the pay. In the next place he buys of the storekeeper wholly on a long 
 credit, and pays a price accordingly, say twenty to thirty per cent, more than the cash 
 price. His dealings with the blacksmith, shoemaker, and mechanics in general, are after 
 the same fashion. And thus he passes his life continually pinched for the want of a 
 little money, incessantly harassed by duns, and once in a while appalled by a tap on the 
 shoulder, though gentle it may be, of the practised hand of the constable.” 
 
 Very few farmers made use of bank credit. They needed small loans running 
 from six months to a year and such accommodation the commercial banks were 
 not willing to furnish. Henry Colman wrote: 2 3 
 
 “ Bank loans are in general too short and capricious to be safe or convenient for 
 farmers; besides that banks never were designed for farmers; they are only for 
 merchants and manufacturers, and for a much more numerous class, who are the very 
 curse of every industrious community, gamblers and speculators.” 
 
 Bankers, in common with other business men, were distrusted and feared. 
 “ A farmer should shun the door of a bank,” warned the New England Farm¬ 
 er,* “ as he would an approach of the plague or cholera; banks are for men 
 of speculation, and theirs is a business with which farmers should have little 
 to do.” 
 
 The country store, as a previous quotation indicates, was the only source 
 of short time or “ intermediate ” farm credit. The storekeeper granted credit 
 freely, the rate of interest being not definitely specified but implied in the 
 difference between credit prices and cash prices. Losses were large and actual 
 interest charges were necessarily high. Such a system of credit held many 
 dangers for the farmers. 
 
 “ Few farmers keep any accounts, and before they are at all aware they have a long 
 score on the trader’s books, and that not only for the current price of goods, but en¬ 
 hanced by an additional charge for the delay of payment. But there is another circum¬ 
 stance in this case which is not always considered. In many instances, the trader will 
 purchase the produce of the farmer only upon what is called store pay—that is, making 
 his payment in goods from his store. The farmer, in this way, is not only obliged to 
 sell at the lowest market price, and pay the trader the profit upon his goods, but he and 
 his family are induced to purchase a great many things which they do not need and which 
 they would be better without. This leads likewise to the keeping of an open account; 
 which if not most rigidly watched and frequently settled, is as sure as fate to surprize 
 the farmer with an unexpected and heavy balance against him. This usually produces ill 
 blood between both parties, leading to vexatious lawsuits and all their miserable con¬ 
 sequences ;....” 4 
 
 The increase of mortgages after 1830 on eastern farms was noted with 
 alarm. In some of “ the most beautiful New England townships ” half of the 
 farms were said to be thus encumbered. 5 Mortgages resulting from borrowing 
 in order to make permanent improvements might have been good farm finance, 
 but the majority of obligations incurred in this period seem to have been of 
 a different origin, representing either the funding of unpaid bills at the 
 country store or else loans for outside speculation. 6 
 
 2 New England Farmer, XVII (1837-38), p. 78. 
 
 3 XIII ( 1834 - 35 ), P- 368. 
 
 4 Fourth Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), p. 182. 
 
 5 Christian Examiner, quoted in New England Farmer, X (1831-32), p. 1. 
 
 6 New York Farmer, IV (1831), pp. 154, 181. 
 
THE TRANSITION OF SELF-SUFFICIENT ECONOMY 249 
 
 THE ORGANIZATION OF MARKETS. 
 
 The injuries and losses which the farmers suffered from their lack of busi¬ 
 ness experience were aggravated by the imperfect organization of markets. 
 The country mei chant was still, as in colonial days, the chief buyer of farm 
 . products. His business was mostly the exchange by barter of salt, sugar, rum, 
 and miscellaneous dry goods, for pork, beef, cider, household manufactures, 
 grain, and cattle. By the extension of liberal credit he financed, also, the farm¬ 
 ers in his community. The country store combined, therefore, a number 
 of services now rendered by specialized middlemen. It was inevitable that 
 the functions of marketing and financing should have been poorly performed 
 and at high cost. Receiving small lots of miscellaneous commodities of widely 
 differing quality, the storekeeper could make little or no attempt at inspection 
 or grading. The same price was paid for butter, cheese, and pork, whether 
 good, bad, or indifferent. Hence farmers who disposed of their produce in 
 this way had no incentive to improve its quality. 
 
 Specialized middlemen began to develop where particular commodities 
 were bought and sold on a large scale. Such were the drovers who took cattle 
 and swine from the farms in Ohio to eastern markets, and from Franklin 
 County and from Maine to Brighton. Even they combined transportation 
 functions with selling on commission. Farmers near the great markets sold 
 their cattle direct to the butchers, and in outlying townships, where cattle 
 fattening was not a specialty, a few animals were sold each year through the 
 country stores. Progress was evident also in the marketing of wool. In the 
 early years, before 1830, the woolen mills were small and scattered, depending 
 on local supplies of raw material. Some manufacturers had their own flocks 
 of sheep. Farmers sold their wool directly to the factories, trudging 40 or 50 
 miles with their clip and peddling it from one mill to another. 7 Beginning 
 about 1830 we hear of middlemen, agents of the manufacturers, who travelled 
 through the grazing towns, purchasing wool from the growers. 8 
 
 An interesting beginning in the organization of farmers for united action 
 m marketing is found in the meetings of the wool-growers of Winthrop, 
 Maine, in 1833 an d 1834. Complaining of false market rumors circulated by 
 buyers, and of the lack of warehouse facilities, they formulated a program of 
 reform measures which sounds strangely modem. They demanded a decrease 
 in the number of middlemen, and proposed to establish an agency for the 
 collection and dissemination of market information. They planned also tc 
 build warehouses where small lots of wool might be deposited as security 
 for loans to the growers, and they urged united action in holding wool for a 
 minimum price of 50 cents a pound. 9 There seems to be no evidence that 
 the ambitious program was ever carried out or that the organization had more 
 than a brief existence. Somewhat earlier, in 1822, the barley-growers of 
 southeastern Pennsylvania had attempted to remedy unsatisfactory marketing 
 conditions by a bold experiment in cooperation. Believing that the Philadel¬ 
 phia brewers had combined to keep down the price of barley, the farmers 
 
 7 CO \fa > P ‘ l65 '> N ° rth > in Nat * A SSO. of Wool 
 Manufacturers, Bulletin, XXIV (1894), p. 242. 
 
 a Z a \ ne Farmer, I <(1833), p. 211; New England Farmer, XIII (1834-3O o. « 
 
 Maine Farmer, I (1833), p. 178; II (1834), p. 162; New York Farmer, VII (1834), 
 p. 301. * v 
 
250 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 determined to brew their own grain and erected a building for the purpose m 
 the city. The venture did not prove successful, and after a few years 
 plant was sold and the enterprise was abandoned. 10 
 
 THE DECLINE OF HOUSEHOLD INDUSTRIES. 
 
 The best evidence of the extent and the rapidity of the transition from self- 
 sufficient to commercial agriculture is found in the decline of the household in¬ 
 dustries. At the beginning of the nineteenth century the typical northern farm¬ 
 er was still clad in homespun cloth made of wood sheared from his own 
 sheep, spun, dyed, and woven in his own home by the women of his household 
 Many other articles of household furnishing, such as blankets, sheets, an 
 towels were also made by these hardworking women. Before 1840, however, 
 the household textile industry had been largely transferred to the new cotton 
 and woolen mills, the graceful spinning wheels and the noisy hand-looms were 
 being relegated to the attics of the farmhouses, there to accumulate dust and 
 cobwebs until rescued and restored to posts of honor by the antique-collectors 
 of our own generation. The transfer of the textile industries from farm 
 homes to factories constituted an industrial revolution whose significance in 
 our economic history has often been pointed out. The change has been 
 studied heretofore chiefly with reference to the development of the technique 
 of manufactures and the growth of a class of wage-earning industria workers. 
 But from the point of view of the history of the rural population, the decline 
 of household industries was as truly revolutionary. 
 
 As soon as a cash income could be obtained from the sale of wool or gram, 
 pork beef, or livestock, butter, cheese, or milk, or garden truck, the farmers 
 began to buy goods that they had formerly produced for themselves. Linen 
 textiles whose production was more arduous than woolens, were abandoned 
 first and in their place the cotton goods of the new factories were glad y 
 welcomed. Flax, formerly raised regularly on every farm, was almost entirely 
 neglected from Maine to Ohio, except for the production of flaxseed. A 
 contemporary wrote from Ohio in 1838: 1_ 
 
 “ Flax seems to be going out of use, and our people cultivate less of it every year. 
 They prefer cotton to flax, and they prefer too, the cotton cloths of Rhode Islandl and 
 Massachusetts to their own manufactured cloths. The spinning wheel, the reel, and he 
 loom are not much used in Ohio, especially the two former. Our people prefer buying 
 their cloths from the east, to making them here, and they are right. The productioi 0 
 the articles of food—meat and bread, for the hungry laborers of the east, best suits 
 
 our present condition.” 
 
 Homespun woolens, as well as the factory products, were given a consider¬ 
 able impetus during the years 1807 to 1815, when the importation of European 
 cloths was largely cut off. The introduction of water-power carding machines 
 between 1800 and 1810 lightened the tasks of household manufacture, so that 
 the farm women were able not onl y to clothe their families more easily, but 
 
 10 Futhey and Cope, Chester County (Pennsylvania), 336- . . f 
 
 11 Long in N. H. Hist. Soc. Collections, III (1831), p. 205; Hoskins, Vermont, 269, 
 
 Massachusetts Agricultural Repository, VI (1820), p. 309; 2d Report, Agnculture 
 of Massachusetts (1838), p. 45 ; 4 th Report (1841), p. 163; Putnam, Touches on 
 Agriculture, ch. II, p. 22. 
 
 12 Atwater, Ohio, 89. 
 
THE TRANSITION OF SELF-SUFFICIENT ECONOMY 251 
 
 they had yarn and cloth to sell at the country stores. Niles 13 estimated in 1816 
 that in Connecticut 500,000 yards of woolen cloth were made annually in 
 farm homes and dressed at country clothiers’ shops. The years 1815 to 
 1820 probably marked the climax of the household woolen industry. 14 ' By 
 1830 there were evidences of its discontinuance. The reports of the" annual 
 cattle shows of the agricultural societies show that exhibits of home-made 
 textiles fell off rapidly between 1820 and 1830 in counties where manufactur¬ 
 ing and urban concentration were developing most rapidly. 15 Naturally, in 
 districts where the opportunities for the sale of farm products were best, the 
 country people soonest abandoned homespun for boughten cloths. The reports 
 received in answer to inquiries of the Secretary of the Treasury in 1832 em¬ 
 phasize the decline of household manufactures. A report from Connecticut 
 stated: 16 
 
 “ Individual and household manufactures are so far abandoned as to be comparatively 
 inconsiderable. Hand labor cannot compete with the adventitious aids of machinery 
 moved by water power.” 
 
 Massachusetts and Rhode Island reports agreed in stating that except in 
 regions remote from markets, such as the islands of Nantucket and Martha’s 
 Vineyard and the peninsula of Cape Cod, household manufactures had prac¬ 
 tically disappeared. 17 Colman, 10 years later, speaks of the household indus¬ 
 try of Massachusetts as “ completely destroyed,” a broad generalization which 
 must be qualified. In a number of instances he calls attention to the persis¬ 
 tence of self-sufficient economy in remote townships, but such cases were 
 exceptions, sufficiently rare to deserve especial comment. 18 
 
 In New Hampshire a significant decline in household manufactures had 
 taken place before 1830, but at that date about one-half the wearing apparel, 
 bedding, carpeting, etc., used by the population was still home made. 19 
 
 The reports received in 1832 from the Middle States contain little com¬ 
 ment on household manufactures, but indicate a declining tendency, except in 
 western Pennsylvania. 20 In New York the State censuses of 1825, 1835. and 
 1845 showed a rapid decline in the production of all household textiles. The 
 total product in 1825 amounted to 16,500,000 yards or about 9 yards per 
 capita; 20 years later the total product was 7,000,000 yards, or 2J yards 
 per capita. 21 
 
 SIGNIFICANCE OF DECLINE OF HOUSEHOLD INDUSTRIES. 
 
 The significance of the decay of the household manufactures can hardly 
 be exaggerated. Even before the change was wholly completed, its importance 
 
 13 Weekly Register, X (1816), p. 82. See also Ibid., VIII (1815), p. 234. 
 
 14 Wright, Wool Growing and the Tariff, 58. 
 
 15 Massachusetts Agricultural Repository, VII (1821), p. 22: X (1831). 0. 243: New 
 
 England Farmer, VIII (1829-30), p. 126. 
 
 16 Documents Relative to Manufactures in the United States (Ex. Doc. 308, 22 Con«-. 
 
 1st sess.), I, 977. 
 
 17 Ibid., I, 75, 78, 134, et passim. 
 
 18 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), pp. 156, 178; 2d Report (1838) 
 
 p. 61. 
 
 19 Documents Relative to Manufactures in the United States (Ex. Doc. 308, 22 Cong., 
 
 1 sess.), I, 585. 
 
 Summarized in Tryon, Household Manufactures in the United States, 293. 
 
 21 Ibid., 304. 
 
252 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 was recognized by the leading thinkers of the day. Horace Bushnell said to 
 the Litchfield farmers in 1851 *. 
 
 « This transition from mother, and daughter, power to water, and steam-power is a 
 great one, greater by far than many have as yet begun to conceive—one that is to carry 
 with it a complete revolution of domestic life and social manners. 
 
 The prophecy proved true. As self-sufficient farming declined there went 
 with it long-established habits and traditions, not only in the method of getting 
 a living, but also in ways of thinking and of living. The mores of se - 
 maintenance, to use Sumner’s phrase, were revolutionized, and there followed 
 of necessity a change in the ideas and ideals of the rural folk, in family and 
 
 in social relations. . . A 
 
 The self-sufficient economy emphasized the virtues of self-reliance and 
 
 independence, of frugality and thrift. As Bushnell remarked, it harnessed 
 together in the productive process all the members of the family, young and 
 old, male and female; it concentrated attention upon the interests of the family 
 group rather than upon the interests of its individual members. The introduc¬ 
 tion of the cash nexus, the selling of certain articles and buying of others, 
 forced the farmers to confront a new set of problems, calling for 
 the exercise of a new set of faculties. Shrewdness in buying and 
 selling must now be added to the simpler qualities of hard work and saving. 
 Farming became a more speculative business, for to the already existent risks 
 of weather conditions was added the risk of price fluctuations. Thereafter 
 success in getting a living no longer depended on the unremitting efforts of 
 the farm family, aided by Providence, but to a large extent also upon the 
 unpredictable wants and labors of millions of persons in the industrial villages 
 and in the newer farms to the westward. 
 
 NEW EMPLOYMENTS FOR FARM WOMEN. 
 
 It is clear that, in the long run, the transfer of the production of textiles 
 from the farmhouse to the factory must have been of advantage to the rural 
 population. Production was far more effectively carried on in the factories, 
 so that eventually the farmers got more goods for a given amount of labor 
 by concentrating their efforts on purely agricultural operations. But only in 
 the long run were the advantages of the change clearly apparent. In the 
 meantime, during the 20 or 30 years of transition, there were a number of dis¬ 
 couraging difficulties. There was, first of all, the problem of finding a new 
 employment for the farmers’ wives and daughters. Remarks such as the 
 following show how this problem was presented: 23 
 
 “ It is a deceptive and dangerous economy, which induces a farmer to buy all his 
 woolens of the manufacturer, merely because he can buy them cheap cheaper even than 
 
 he supposes he can make them at home.While the farmer is buying at the store, 
 
 what he could make at home, .... the members of his family, whose labour could 
 produce the same articles, are unemployed, or employed to little or no purpose. 
 
 Colman, who was a clergyman as well as an agriculturist, speaks with 
 regret in several instances of the decline of the household manufactures be¬ 
 cause the “healthy exercise of domestic labour” has been exchanged for 
 
 22 Work and Play, 382. 
 
 23 New England Farmer, VIII (1829-30), p. 126. 
 
THE TRANSITION OF SELF-SUFFICIENT ECONOMY 253 
 
 “ the idleness and frivolities of pride and luxury ”; 24 and again, emphasizing 
 the economic rather than the moral aspects of the problem, he speaks of the 
 “ internal resources of the farmer ” having “ dried up.” 25 
 
 Anyone familiar with the exhausting toil of the farm women of the earlier 
 years might have remarked that they had well deserved a rest. But habit and 
 tradition, and economic pressure as well, decreed otherwise. The traditional 
 ethics required all to be producers and none merely consumers. No one knew 
 what evil work the Devil might find for idle hands, especially if these hands 
 were women’s. The fear was expressed that the farmer’s daughters would 
 not only lose skill “ but they will have more time to be idle, and thus will be 
 less fit for good and profitable wives.” 26 Moreover, the wants of the farm 
 family were expanding rapidly. The urban population were establishing a 
 new and higher standard of living; the farmers’ daughters wanted better 
 clothes, and pianos like those of their city cousins. 
 
 The problem of finding new employment for the farm women was solved 
 in two ways: (I) by their leaving the farms and taking employment in the 
 rapidly growing urban centers, either in factories, or as school teachers, or 
 in domestic service; (2) by the introduction of new industrial occupations in 
 the home. We know how important was the migration of the farmers’ 
 daughters to Lowell, Lawrence, and Fall River in the years around 1840, 
 furnishing an indispensable labor force for the new factories, and it would be 
 interesting to trace their fortunes further, but we are concerned here chiefly 
 with those who stayed on the farms. The employments to which the latter 
 now turned their attention were the sewing of shoes, the plaiting and sewing 
 of straw and palm-leaf hats and bonnets, and the production of men’s ready- 
 to-wear clothing. An extreme example of the efforts to utilize the surplus 
 labor force on farms is seen in the misguided attempts to hatch silk-worms 
 and produce reeled silk. 
 
 BY-INDUSTRIES. 
 
 Most of the employments enumerated above were not new. The farm 
 women had long been making their own bonnets and their husbands’ and 
 fathers’ shirts and underclothes; but whereas formerly such articles were 
 produced principally for home consumption, after about 1830 or 1840 they 
 were produced principally for sale. The organization of production was what 
 is known to economists as the commission system, a transitional stage between 
 household and factory production. The employer was a merchant who pro¬ 
 vided the straw, cloth, or parts of shoes. He also undertook to dispose of the 
 finished product, paying the workers on a commission basis. 
 
 In the making of shoes, the most important of these domestic manufactures, 
 the men were also employed. In some townships in Massachusetts a very 
 large proportion of the population was actively engaged in shoe-making. In 
 1837, in the town of Grafton for instance, 1,400, or almost one-half of a 
 
 24 Second Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1838), p. 138. 
 
 25 “ In the changes which, since the introduction of extensive manufactories of cotton 
 
 and woolen among us, have taken place in our habits of domestic labour, some of the 
 internal resources of the farmer have dried up, and new occasions of expenditure 
 introduced.” Fourth Report (1841), p. 181. 
 
 26 Wilder, Leominster, Massachusetts, p. 29. 
 
254 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 total population of 2,900, were officially reported as making shoes. 2 ^ A 
 writer in the New England Farmer said that the industry in Grafton is a 
 domestic manufacture, chiefly carried on by men at their own homes, with 
 their own means, where their labors and those of their families alternate with 
 the care of their gardens and farms, promoting health and furnishing recrea¬ 
 tion.” 28 Of Essex County, where the farmer shoemakers were most numerous, 
 Colman wrote: “ Farming in this county is scarcely pursued as a distinct or 
 exclusive profession \ but as subsidiary to some other business or pursuit. 
 
 The farmers carried on a wide variety of quasi-industrial pursuits, by¬ 
 industries which in some cases were more lucrative than agriculture. Building 
 operations in the growing industrial communities demanded sand, stone, and 
 timber. Besides these, the farms furnished to the city-dwellers enormous quan¬ 
 tities of firewood and charcoal, the products of the winter months. The 
 Yankee had long been famous as a whittler, and in these years he turned his 
 experience in wood-working to good account. The extent and variety of 
 the wooden wares produced in some of the more remote communities is aston¬ 
 ishing. Partly they were made by farmers in small shops on their own prem¬ 
 ises, and partly in small factories utilizing water-power, where the farmers 
 worked intermittently in the winter and between seasons. The numerous by¬ 
 industries carried on by the New England farmers and by their wives and 
 daughters provided an important supplement to the farm income. The pros¬ 
 perity of many communities out of reach of the market influences can be ex¬ 
 plained only by the existence of these quasi-industrial pursuits. 
 
 SUMMARY. 
 
 The first four decades of the nineteenth century were characterized by 
 important beginnings in agricultural progress, rather than by striking or 
 revolutionary accomplishments. It was a period of preparation both in the 
 technical and in the business sides of farming—preparation for subsequent 
 progress and expansion. The home market beckoned to farmers with its new 
 opportunities. But the road to successful commercial agriculture was beset 
 with many difficulties and hindrances. The factory villages were drawing 
 the most ambitious boys and girls away from the farm. The competition of 
 the factories raised the wages of farm hands at a time when the prices of 
 farm products were falling or at best stationary. The farmers were hampered 
 by their inexperience in business affairs, by their lack of capital, by imperfect 
 credit and marketing facilities, and by the persistence of the habits and tradi¬ 
 tions of the self-sufficient economy. The rule that the farm should supply all 
 that the farm consumed had acquired the validity of an article of religious 
 faith. To buy from outside goods which might be produced at home was held 
 to be not only bad economy but also doubtful morality. When production 
 for sale had finally begun there arose the perplexing question what to produce. 
 The eastern farmer discovered he had no monopoly of the home market. 
 Cheaper transportation introduced western competition, causing unstable mar- 
 
 27 Massachusetts, Secretary of State, Statistics of Certain Branches of Industry (1837 ) » 
 
 pp. 50, 206. 
 
 28 XV (1836-37), P- 57 - , 
 
 29 First Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1837), p. 14. 
 
THE TRANSITION OF SELF-SUFFICIENT ECONOMY 255 
 
 kets. Wheat, pork, wool, hops, butter, and cheese all came more cheaply from 
 the West, forcing the easterners to make rapid readjustments. 
 
 The farmer did not have to fight his battle alone. The agricultural societies 
 and the farm papers came to his aid with encouragement and advice. They 
 exhorted him to use manures more liberally, to sow clover, and to plant roots, 
 to take better care of his livestock, and to pay more attention to breeding, 
 d hey called to his notice the new labor-saving machinery and stimulated inter¬ 
 est in new varieties of grain and in improved types of sheep, swine, and 
 cattle. The educational propaganda was necessarily defective, however, for 
 the natural sciences, such as chemistry, biology, and botany, were still in 
 ther infancy and their application to agriculture had scarcely begun. Editors 
 and speakers might urge the farmer to use gypsum or lime, or to choose breed¬ 
 ing stock more carefully, but not one of them could tell him how plants grow, 
 whether they derived nourishment from the atmosphere or the soil, or from 
 both, and no one could explain to him the laws of heredity lying at the basis 
 of all scientific breeding. In matters of farm economics sound leadership 
 was lacking. Both the publications of the agricultural societies and the farm 
 papers contained fallacious arguments against leaving the beaten paths of 
 the self-sufficient economy. We read in the Memoirs of the New York Board 
 of Agriculture: 30 
 
 “ In regard to economy, the general committee would remark, that the farmer who 
 understands and practices his own business, in the right way, is a true economist: his 
 farm should produce every thing necessary to sustain life in a comfortable and respect¬ 
 able manner; and he should surround himself with every thing that he wants, by his 
 own industry.” 
 
 Twenty years later we find Colman 31 asserting that 
 
 “ it must be considered as an established principle in domestic economy that every 
 farmer should look to his farm for all that his farm can furnish him. Though it may 
 seem better to sell his wool and buy his bread, yet in all such cases he pays a double 
 commission, to the purchaser of the wool and the seller of the bread, who must both get 
 their living out of the operation.” 
 
 It was the principle of self-sufficiency applied to the whole region rather 
 than to the single home which explains the absurd attempts to promote wheat 
 cultivation in New England by State bounties. As astute an agriculturist as 
 Ezekiel Holmes denied in 1837 that Maine could not successfully compete with 
 New York in raising wheat. He wrote: 32 
 
 “ The time has been when the citizens of Maine raised more wheat than they consumed, 
 and exported it in large quantities. What has been done can be done again. It is all idle 
 to say that we cannot raise wheat. Our average crop per acre is equal to the average 
 crop of New York per acre. The reason is, we do not cultivate as many acres. It is true 
 we cannot raise winter-wheat so well as they can, and that brings the labor of our 
 wheat crops into a smaller compass of time than theirs, but we can raise as much and 
 make as good flour if we can only sow as much, and were as careful in flouring it. All 
 we need is energy in this matter.—More courage and less crying out ‘ there’s a lion in the 
 way—there’s a lion in the way.’ ” 
 
 Advice of this kind, as subsequent events proved, was not forward-looking. 
 Men who wrote and talked in this strain showed no conception of the readjust- 
 
 30 1 (1821), p. XXX. 
 
 31 4th Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1841), p. 159. 
 
 32 Maine Farmer, V (1837), p. 81; see also IV (1836), pp. 258, 386. 
 
256 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 ments in eastern farming which western competition was to bring about. 
 The advice they gave the farmers was comfortable rather than stimulating, 
 tending to confirm them in their old habits of self-sufficiency and in their 
 traditional isolation from market influences. But in the midst of the confusion 
 of faulty reasoning based on imperfect knowledge, there was occasionally 
 raised the voice of a true prophet, with clearness of vision to foresee the inevi¬ 
 table westward trend in certain lines of production, and courage to proclaim 
 his vision to a doubting generation. Such a prophet was William Buckminster, 
 the orator at the Concord, Massachusetts, cattle show of 1838. He said: 33 
 
 “If more fertile regions can supply our cities with grain at a cheaper rate than 
 we can, let us not lament. We shall find full employment in furnishing what cannot 
 so well be transported from a distance. Fresh meats, butter, hay, and the small market 
 vegetables must be supplied by the farmers of N. England. 
 
 “ Beef cattle cannot cross the North river to compete with ours, and if we fail to supply 
 all the wants of our own markets we can furnish those that are most to our advantage. 
 It is believed that the raising of grain of any kind and fitting it for market is the most 
 laborious and the least profitable employment we engage in; and we should bear in mind 
 
 that grain is the greatest exhauster of the soil. 
 
 “The times are changed and we must change with them. We cannot now, as formerly 
 
 raise much grain for the market. 
 
 “ The virgin soils of the west and the increasing facilities of intercourse with that region 
 render it probable that much of our grain will be imported thence; and when no obstacles 
 are thrown in the way of commerce, this is no evil. We purchase, not because we 
 cannot produce the same commodity, but because we can produce others to more profit.. 
 
 “ Let them supply our cities with grain. We will manufacture their cloth and their 
 shoes. Our artists may eat bread from the west—we will supply them with what cannot 
 be brought from a distance.” 
 
 33 New England Farmer, XVII (1838-39), p. H 3 - 
 
Part IV 
 
 NORTHERN AGRICULTURE 1840-1860 
 
 THE PERIOD OF TRANSFORMATION 
 
 BY 
 
 John I. Falconer, Ph. D. 
 
 18 
 

 
 
 
 
 # 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter XX.—Northern Agriculture in 1840. 
 
 NEW ENGLAND FARMING IN 1840 . 
 
 In New England, in 1840, hay was the leading crop. The “ ne wsystem of 
 agriculture ” had become well established on tillable land, and a rotation of 
 crops was followed, including com, potatoes, or oats, wheat or rye, and grass. 
 Instead of pursuing a definite order of cropping, as in Chester County, 
 Pennsylvania, the land was usually allowed to lie in grass as long as it would 
 yield 1 ton of hay to the acre. More attention was given to grazing in New 
 England and less to grain growing. The purpose of sowing a grain crop was 
 said to be largely to supply the farm with grain and to renew the land in 
 grass. For 20 years improvements had been taking place in the eastern field 
 system. The use of clover had spread rapidly, gypsum and lime had come 
 into extensive use, rotation systems were more widely practiced. Lowlands 
 were more frequently plowed and manured, uplands more frequently seeded 
 to clover and grass. The adoption of the cast-iron plow had allowed much 
 improvement in the preparation of the land. Cattle-grazing, wool-growing, 
 and dairying had developed rapidly. 
 
 Soil improvement was a characteristic of the progress in agriculture in the 
 East during the decades 1820 to 1840. In fact, “the New System of Hus¬ 
 bandry ” had begun, similar to that inaugurated in England. Its principles 
 were summarized by Judge Jesse Buel, editor of The Cultivator, who asserted 
 that lands would not wear out if they were judiciously managed; but, on the 
 contrary, they could be made to increase progressively in productivity. He 
 wrote : 1 
 
 “ The principles of the new husbandry also teach that by carefully saving, and suit¬ 
 ably applying, all the fertilizing matters afforded by the farm; by an alternation or 
 change of crops, and by artificially accelerating or retarding the agency of heat, moisture, 
 air, and light, in the process of vegetable growth; by draining, manuring, ploughing, 
 harrowing, hoeing, etc., we may preserve, unimpaired, the natural fertility of our soils;— 
 and that, with the aid of improved implements of husbandry, and a good system of 
 management, we may also greatly increase the profits of its culture.” 
 
 It was urged by many that the adoption of “the New System of Hus¬ 
 bandry ” was the most effective way for the Eastern States to meet the compe¬ 
 tition of the West. 
 
 During the thirties, fine wool-growing had been considered a profitable 
 enterprise and had been extensively pursued, together with dairying, in all 
 the New England States, especially in Vermont and in the Berkshire region 
 of western Massachusetts and Connecticut. With the general fall of prices 
 after 1837, the price of wool had declined, and by 1840 eastern wool-growers 
 were declaring it no longer profitable to produce fine wool. About this time, 
 moreover, the increasing population and wealth of the eastern manufacturing 
 cities, the extension of cotton planting in the South, and the development of 
 
 1 Buel, The Farmer’s Companion, 21. 
 
 259 
 
260 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 an export trade in cheese were causing an increased demand for meat and 
 dairy products. By 1840, cattle-grazing and dairying were considered more 
 profitable than wool-growing in New England, and were increasing, while 
 the latter was rapidly declining. 
 
 Swine-raising was also receiving decreasing attention on New England 
 farms in 1840, owing to the competition of western pork, to the development 
 of new markets, and to the adoption of improved farming methods. With 
 the coming of cheap western pork the New England farmer found it profitable 
 to keep only enough swine to consume the waste of the farm, and at the 
 same time crop rotation, dairying, and commercial agriculture were tending 
 to reduce farm waste. The potato crop, which formerly had furnished an 
 important part of the swine ration, greatly decreased in amount and increased 
 in value after the appearance of the blight in 1844. Corn, which was formerly 
 used in fattening swine, was now, on account of its increased value, diverted 
 to cattle. Wool, pork, and wheat were all declining in New England by 
 1840, while dairying and the production of hay, corn, vegetables, and fruits 
 were increasing. 
 
 The area of improved lands in farms in the East was not shown in the 
 census of 1840. Production figures, however, seem to indicate a small increase 
 of improved acreage in this region in the years 1840 to 1850. For the eastern 
 farmer the age of farming by extension of area had ceased and that by 
 increased investment of capital had well begun. By 1840 a summer fallow 
 was rarely seen in New England, in eastern New York, or Pennsylvania, 
 except in the more remote regions; the practice was rapidly declining in the 
 Mohawk Valley of New York. Diversified farming with cattle and sheep 
 grazing had become the prevailing system. 
 
 The New England farmer had several other sources of income, aside from 
 the products of his fields. In Maine and in northern New Hampshire farming 
 was still closely connected with lumbering, and in many sections more atten¬ 
 tion was given to the latter than to the former. Working in the woods in 
 the winter and on the farm in the summer was a common practice. Teaming 
 to the cities and to seaboard towns was another source of income. In Ver¬ 
 mont, the manufacture of maple sugar was a flourishing enterprise. 
 
 IN EASTERN AND CENTRAL NEW YORK. 
 
 In eastern and central New York, conditions of farming in 1840 were much 
 the same as in New England. Cattle-grazing and dairying were receiving 
 increased attention, the latter having taken the place of wheat as the chief 
 source of income. 2 The Hudson and Mohawk Valleys were the leading dairy 
 sections of the country. Orange, Dutchess, Herkimer, and Oneida Counties 
 were all famous for their dairy produce. Wool-growing, one of the former 
 chief sources of income, was rapidly declining. Wheat and hogs showed a 
 tendency to decrease. 
 
 Throughout the East, the growth of cities, as yet without railroad connec¬ 
 tions with the interior, was leading to intensive farming in their vicinities. 
 On Long Island, wheat, rye, and corn had formerly been the staple products; 
 
 2 N. Y. Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1841), p. 135. 
 
NORTHERN AGRICULTURE IN 1840 
 
 261 
 
 but the opening of the Erie Canal and the consequent competition of western 
 grain, together with the development of the New York market, had changed 
 the type of agriculture. The central part of the north shore of the island 
 in 1840 were largely devoted to corn, oats, and hay, with vegetable crops in 
 those parts best suited for their production. On the south side of the island, 
 where the soil was light, sandy, and warm, early vegetables and small fruits 
 were grown with great success by the aid of ashes and manure brought out 
 from the cities. 3 Two crops were frequently taken from the land in one year. 
 Market gardening and small-fruit growing were developing in New Jersey, 
 Delaware, and along the shores of Chesapeake Bay in Maryland. 
 
 In the vicinities of the large eastern cities, such as Philadelphia and New 
 \ ork, the selling of veal calves was found a very profitable enterprise. In 
 Queens County, New York, which supplied the New York market, a good 
 calf at a month or six weeks old was said to be worth as much as at 2 years of 
 age. 4 The supply of milk for many of the large cities was furnished in part 
 by herds of 200 or 300 head of cattle, fed the entire year on brewers’ grains. 
 In the vicinity of Rochester, New York, it was said to be profitable to keep 
 a cow to an acre of land. 
 
 IN SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 In southeastern Pennsylvania, one of the old and important centers of im¬ 
 proved agriculture in 1840, three systems of husbandry were practiced: (1) 
 The cropping system, which was usually followed by the German farmers on 
 the best land. In this system nearly all the land was cropped in a rotation of 
 corn, oats or barley, wheat, and clover. (2) A mixed system, in which a part 
 of the farm, well watered, was kept aside for permanent pasture and received 
 a frequent top-dressing of lime, or short manure. The remainder was cropped 
 as in the first system. (3) The grazing system, uniformly adopted in the east¬ 
 ern counties near Philadelphia for dairy purposes, and for feeding cattle for 
 the shambles. Very little plowing was done in this system, and merely enough 
 grain was raised for the consumption of the family and livestock, the re¬ 
 mainder of the farm being given to pasture and hay. 5 Near the cities and large 
 towns, where the farms were generally smaller, fruit, vegetables, poultry, fresh 
 butter, and other articles for immediate consumption were found profitable and 
 occupied much attention. Scarcely a farm was to be found without its apple 
 orchard of choice and selected varieties. Chester County, especially, was 
 constantly held up by the agricultural papers and periodicals of the time as a 
 striking example of the “ improved system ” of agriculture; in particular it 
 was noted for the feeding of western cattle. The adjoining county of Delaware 
 was famed for the quantity and quality of the fresh butter, veal, and poultry 
 which it furnished to the Philadelphia market. Both counties were praised for 
 their clean and well-arranged farms, for the well-built fences that divided the 
 farms into 7 to 12 inclosures, for the well-constructed farm buildings located, 
 where practicable, in the immediate vicinity of a spring. 
 
 3 Cultivator, new series, VI (1849), P- 298. 
 
 4 N. Y. Agric. Soc. Transactions, II (1842), 187. 
 
 5 Ibid., I (1841), p. 168. 
 
262 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 THE PENNSYLVANIA BARNS. 
 
 The barns were large enough to permit the storage of all the produce of the 
 farm, the livestock, and the tools. Writing in 1843, Trego reports : 6 
 
 “ The traveller in older settled parts of Pennsylvania is particularly struck with the 
 neat and substantial appearance of the buildings, fences, etc., as well as the order and 
 convenience of the whole domestic arrangements of a well regulated farm. The pride 
 of a Pennsylvania farmer is his barn, many of which are from 60 to 120 feet in length 
 and substantially built, either wholly of stone, or the lower story of stone and the 
 superstructure of wood, handsomely painted or white-washed. The interior arrangement 
 of stables, thrashing floors, granaries, places for depositing hay, etc., is admirably con¬ 
 venient and useful. The horses, cattle and other domestic animals are comfortably 
 sheltered during the winter, and like their master and his family, enjoy the plenty pro¬ 
 vided by good husbandry and provident industry. Within the last few years consider¬ 
 able attention has been given to improving the stock of domestic animals; a subject 
 which has been too much neglected by our farmers." 
 
 LACK OF PROGRESS IN MARYLAND AND IN DELAWARE. 
 
 The Chester County system of farming was also carried on in central New 
 Jersey and northern Delaware, and to a limited extent in Maryland. But in the 
 latter State, as in Virginia, continued cropping to wheat, corn, or tobacco, 
 together with the failure to keep much livestock, had so greatly reduced the 
 fertility of the soil that it was widely proclaimed that there was no longer 
 profit in farming. While the States to the North had greatly improved their 
 agriculture by 1840, Maryland and Delaware had made but little progress. A 
 common practice in the tobacco region of the west shore of Maryland was to 
 cut down and clear as much land during the winter as could be planted in to¬ 
 bacco the following spring, and to continue that crop on the land until it would 
 no longer raise tobacco. Then wheat, corn, and oats were grown until they 
 were no longer profitable, and finally the land was thrown out as “ old fields.” 
 While one piece of land was in the course of exhaustion, another tract was 
 cleared and treated in the same manner. Shallow plowing was said to be one 
 of the most prominent defects in Maryland agriculture. 7 Gideon Smith thus 
 expressed his opinion of the agriculture of Maryland in 1842: 
 
 “ The crops are generally inferior in quantity to those of the northern states. There 
 
 are exceptions, it is true, but they are mere exceptions. It is believed that the 
 
 average yield of corn per acre will not exceed twenty bushels, and that of wheat not 
 twelve; and that the average profits of agriculture in the state will not exceed three 
 per cent on the capital invested.” 8 
 
 THE MIDDLE REGION.—WHEAT AND ITS MANAGEMENT. 
 
 Western New York, the western counties of Pennsylvania, and eastern 
 Ohio was the leading wheat-growing region of the North in 1840. Wheat, 
 sheep, and cattle were the leading sources of income. Dairying was rapidly 
 developing in the Western Reserve of Ohio and in a few counties of western 
 New York. The opening of the Erie Canal in 1825 and of the eastern Ohio 
 Canal in 1832 had given an outlet to eastern markets to the farmers of western 
 
 6 Geography of Pennsylvania, 112. 
 
 7 N. Y. Agric. Soc. Transactions, II (1842), p. 225. 
 
 8 Ibid., p. 223. 
 
NORTHERN AGRICULTURE IN 1840 
 
 263 
 
 New York and of eastern Ohio. Large quantities of cheese were annually 
 exported through the Erie Canal to the East, and also carried by canals and 
 rivers to the South, and by the Great Lakes to the West. 
 
 In 1840, Ohio led the States in wheat production. Summer fallowing, which 
 in the northeastern States had largely ceased by 1840, was a characteristic 
 feature of the cropping system. This ancient practice had already passed from 
 New England, and with the rapid development of dairying it was rapidly 
 disappearing from the region of the Mohawk Valley. In the prairie region 
 it did not prevail to any wide extent. The earlier practice of bare fallow from 
 April to seeding time, however, had been largely abandoned. It was now 
 usual to begin the fallow by plowing under a crop of clover, peas, or a pas¬ 
 ture sod during the last of June, to plow again in August, and again about 
 the first of September, and then to sow the wheat and harrow it in. In western 
 New York it was not uncommon to take two or three crops of wheat from the 
 same field with only a fallow intervening. Then the land was seeded with 
 clover which was mowed or pastured for 2 or 3 years, after which the land 
 was again seeded to wheat. On the newer and richer lands of eastern Ohio 
 some farmers were producing wheat in a rotation of wheat, corn, and oats, 
 without fallow or manure. Others were sowing wheat after wheat for a succes¬ 
 sion of years with only an occasional crop of corn intervening. However, more 
 attention to rotation and the application of manure began to be evident. Gyp¬ 
 sum was extensively used on clover and wheat. Drainage and suboil plowing 
 were much discussed and sometimes practiced. 
 
 THE WEST. 
 
 There were over a million people living in the States of Indiana and Illinois 
 in 1840, 200,000 in Michigan, and 31,000 in Wisconsin. West of the Mississ¬ 
 ippi River, Missouri had a population of 380,000, and Iowa had about 45,000 
 settlers, mostly living along the river. (See fig. 33, p. 277.) The total popula¬ 
 tion living west of Ohio was only slightly greater than the population of that 
 State. The population of Ohio was only three-fifths that of New York State. 
 The total area of improved land in farms in the territory of Indiana, Illinois, 
 Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota was only slightly greater than 
 that of New York State alone. While the agriculture of the East was under¬ 
 going a change in character, the West was entering upon a period of rapid 
 expansion of the area of land in use. In 1840, the chief region of production 
 in the West extended along the Ohio and Illinois Rivers and northward along 
 the Mississippi and westward along the lower course of the Missouri River. 
 The open prairie to the north was as yet hardly entered, for settlement had 
 held close to the woods and rivers. The early settlements along the Ohio and 
 lower Missouri and the Mississippi Rivers had benefited by cheap transporta¬ 
 tion to southern markets. Southern Michigan, at the western end of Lake 
 Erie, was now attracting settlers. Railroads had not as yet been built. 
 
 Because of the distance of markets and the lack of means of transportation, 
 agriculture was chiefly of a self-sufficing character. The pioneer farmer had 
 only recently cleared his farm from the wilderness, or perhaps was still 
 engaged in that task. He still produced his own meat and grain, and much of 
 his clothing, with the implements which he had at hand, while outside work, 
 
264 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 or the sale of a few hogs or cattle or wheat or corn, procured salt and other 
 bare necessities of life. 
 
 FARMING IN KENTUCKY AND MISSOURI. 
 
 In a few centers in the West, however, a thriving commercial agriculture 
 had already developed. The vicinity of Cincinnati, Ohio, including the Blue- 
 grass region of Kentucky, was the leading agricultural district. Just as 
 Chester County, Pennsylvania, was regarded as the model of improved agricul¬ 
 ture in the East, so the limestone region of Kentucky was famous in the West 
 as the center of prosperous and contented agriculture. Its bluegrass pastures 
 were widely known, and its wealthy farmers, who raised corn, hogs, and mules 
 and grazed large herds of Shorthorn catle and saddle horses. The agriculture 
 of western Kentucky was of a type decidedly different from that of the blue- 
 grass region. Crops were scanty. The inhabitants lived almost entirely on the 
 scanty production of their rough fields, breeding a few scrub steers, making 
 baskets, burning out tar, and digging ginseng root. 9 West of the Mississippi 
 River there was a small center of commercial agriculture along the lower 
 Missouri River. Corn, swine and cattle, with hemp and tobacco in Kentucky 
 and tobacco and mules in Missouri, were the leading sources of income in these 
 regions. In southeastern Ohio, western Kentucky, and central Missouri 
 tobacco was extensively produced. Nearly 6,000,000 pounds of tobacco were 
 raised in Ohio in 1840, almost entirely in the southeastern counties. 
 
 CORN AND CATTLE FATTENING. 
 
 The corn-producing region of the North,, in 1840, comprised central Ken¬ 
 tucky, southwestern Ohio, central Indiana and Illinois and later southeastern 
 Iowa, and the lower valley of the Missouri. (See fig. 74, p. 339.) Climatic 
 conditions were suitable to the crop, and the fertile, easily worked, river-bottom 
 lands seldom failed to produce a large yield. So rich were they, indeed, that 
 often wheat could not be grown upon them profitably for several years after 
 breaking, because the rank growth of straw caused lodging and made the crop 
 especially liable to attacks of rust. But large crops of corn were frequently 
 grown for 30 years in succession. The Mississippi, the Ohio, and the Missouri 
 Rivers, and their numerous important tributaries, such as the Scioto, the 
 Wabash and the Illinois, not only furnished in their bottoms the richest corn 
 ground, but also afforded an outlet for the crop to the market which was rapid¬ 
 ly developing in the South. The Scioto Valley had become the Western feeding 
 center for fat cattle to be driven to the East. The large quantity of corn 
 which could be produced with a small amount of labor, the market for the 
 grain in the South, the fact that pork production required only corn and 
 clover and a few oats and peas, and that beef could be raised on corn and 
 the open prairie, with a little clover and timothy, all combined to make corn a 
 favored crop. Cattle pastured on the prairies, partially fattened on corn, and 
 driven East, were a leading source of income. Swine and the manufacture 
 of whisky consumed much of the surplus corn, which, in its original form, 
 would not bear the cost of transportation to market. 
 
 9 Country Gentleman, VIII (1856), p. 121. 
 
NORTHERN AGRICULTURE IN 1840 
 
 265 
 
 Wheat-growing, however, was by no means neglected in the West. In 1840, 
 southwestern Ohio and southeastern Indiana raised notable crops of wheat. 
 Michigan was beginning to attract attention as a wheat-growing State, and the 
 settlers moving into Wisconsin were turning their attention largely to this 
 grain. 
 
 While a few small areas, such as that around Cincinnati and in the Bluegrass 
 region of Kentucky, had a well-developed agriculture by 1840, the farming west 
 of the Alleghenies was distinctly of the pioneer type, characterized by limited 
 markets and capital, abundant land, and the absence of intensive farming. 
 The prairie country had nearly all been left for future settlement. A study of 
 the maps showing the distribution of population and of the crops and live¬ 
 stock shows that northwestern Ohio, northern Indiana, northern Illinois, and 
 northern Wisconsin were sparsely populated in 1840. Population had thus 
 far followed the rivers and wooded regions and avoided the prairies, but the 
 latter were now attracting attention and were destined to wield a powerful 
 influence upon the future progress and character of American agriculture. 
 
 The western pioneer was living in a dynamic age. Crops were in a measure 
 untried. No one could say whether the western farmer would best produce 
 grass or fruit, corn or wheat, sheep, hogs, or cattle. The new territory with 
 its unknown possibilities of soil, climate, healthfulness and markets was now 
 being occupied by a generation of men many of whom had seen the pioneer 
 emerge from a forest-covered area to the prairies, where an abundance of 
 fertile land lay ready for the plow. High expectations were held of the results 
 which would follow the development of agricultural machinery, cheaper trans¬ 
 portation, and the connection of science with agricultural practice. Immigrants 
 were coming from the wheat, corn, and fruit-growing regions of the East 
 and South, from the dairying and sheep-raising regions of the East, from the 
 hemp and tobacco-growing regions of the South, and from various countries 
 of Europe. To many the new situation seemed to afford boundless opportuni¬ 
 ties, but others were doubtful and uncertain. The distance from markets and 
 the high cost of transportation limited the sales of the farmers to products 
 of high specific value. A period of severe depression and low prices had fol¬ 
 lowed the panic of 1837. The lack of means of the majority of immigrants, 
 together with the wealth of the productive soil, favored the production of 
 such commodities as derived a large part of their cost from the land and as 
 afforded most immediate profit. Farmers and immigrants were all asking what 
 they could raise that would sell. 
 
Chapter XXL —The Influence of the Prairies on 
 
 the Progress of Agriculture. 
 
 If one reads an account of the agricultural history of England during the 
 middle years of the nineteenth century, and then turns to the records of 
 American agriculture during the same period, he must be impressed with the 
 very evident fact that those features regarded as distinctive and characteristic 
 of agricultural organization in the northern portion of the United States during 
 this period had their foundation largely in the presence of an abundant, avail¬ 
 able supply of practically free but fertile land. Extensive farming, soil 
 exploitation and the development of farm machinery were outstanding char¬ 
 acteristics of American agriculture. The westward expansion of settlement 
 and agricultural production was a dominant feature of the period. 
 
 The preemption act of September 4, 1841, was the most important legislation 
 of the period affecting the disposal of the public lands of the West. Heretofore 
 land had been sold at public auction; the act of 1841, however, allowed actual 
 settlers to buy their land at private sale at the minimum price of $1.25 per acre. 
 This method of sale prevailed throughout the period and until the passage of 
 the homestead act of 1861. Tracts as small as 80 acres could be purchased. 
 After 1850, railroad lands were also placed in the market. The emigrant to 
 the West could now select and buy his farm as soon as he arrived. 
 
 Until about 1830, the extension of the region of agricultural production into 
 the “ west ” had been largely through a forest-covered region. At the begin¬ 
 ning of the century a nearly unbroken forest extended from the Atlantic coast 
 westward to the far end of Lake Erie on the north and beyond the Mississippi 
 on the south. In the settlement of western Pennsylvania and New York, 
 eastern Ohio, Kentucky, southern Indiana, and southern Illinois the first task 
 of the immigrant in the production of crops was the clearing of the land of 
 brush and trees. The fertile limestone region of Kentucky and the bottom 
 lands of the Ohio, when first occupied by the pioneer, were covered with 
 large timber, beneath which was an undergrowth “ plentifully interspersed 
 with briers and thorns.” To grub the trees and remove the undergrowth was 
 a laborious task. 1 Many years of hardship and toil were required before 
 enough land was cleared to maintain a family. The first year “ a patch,” per¬ 
 haps, was cleared for potatoes and corn, the next year a field for wheat. 
 Even after the trees were felled and burned, the stumps and roots remained 
 to interfere with the plow and harrow. Fifteen or even 20 years were com¬ 
 monly estimated as the period of time elapsing between the deadening of the 
 trees and the disappearance of the logs from the fields; to open a farm of a 
 hundred acres was the work of years. 2 
 
 1 Beddall, Blue Grass Region of Kentucky, 90. 
 
 2 Howells, Recollections, 115; Beddall, Blue Grass Region of Kentucky, 90; Beatty, 
 
 Essays, 62-69; American Farmer, II (1820-21), p. 130. 
 
 266 
 
INFLUENCE OF PRAIRIES ON PROGRESS OF AGRICULTURE 267 
 
 THE OAK OPENINGS AND SMALL PRAIRIES. 
 
 By 1840 the movement westward had emerged from the timber and had 
 reached the prairie region. (See fig. 33, p. 277.) Many of the small prairies 
 of Ohio and Indiana adjacent to rivers and timber had already been settled, 
 including the prairies of Stark County, the leading wheat county of Ohio, 
 which were first farmed about 1833. 3 4 Ellsworth, in his Valley of the Upper 
 Wabash (1838), stated that only within the last few years had the settlement 
 of the small prairies of that region begun. Oak openings, the small prairies, 
 and the large prairies adjacent to timber in Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, 
 Illinois, and Missouri were then being settled. Here the expense of develop¬ 
 ing a farm was considerably less than in the forest region. Southern Mich¬ 
 igan, typical of much of the region settled during this period, was thus de¬ 
 scribed by a resident in 1847 : 4 
 
 “ These portions of Michigan which are classed as * openings/ are usually a beautifully 
 varied country, sparsely timbered, chiefly with oaks. Among the several species of these, 
 the white is predominant, and has the largest growth; next the black or yellow and 
 burr oaks. Hickory is often intermixed to a considerable extent. What are called 
 ‘plains/ resemble the openings but have less timber, and are often almost destitute, 
 approaching the character of ‘ prairies.’ Somewhat more than half of the peninsula 
 consists of openings and plains, and these are occasionally varied by tracts of heavily 
 timbered land, and by prairies destitute of timber. The latter are not frequent, and are 
 of much less extent than the prairies of Illinois, comprising from a few acres to 15,000 
 acres. ‘ Marshes/ or wet prairies frequently occupy the hollow and level spots of the 
 openings and plains, and consist of an accumulation of peat and vegetable matter, 
 
 producing a rank growth of wild grasses. These grasses are relished by all 
 
 kinds of cattle, and are so abundant and esteemed that in many parts of the country 
 they constitute the only winter fodder of cattle, horses, and sheep. Many farmers think 
 
 them preferable to any of the cultivated grasses, for all kinds of stock.To new 
 
 settlers these marshes have proved invaluable, by enabling them from the first to sup¬ 
 port their stock with scarcely any cost.” 
 
 The timbered openings comprised the larger part of the land under cultiva¬ 
 tion in Michigan before 1847. 5 The openings of Dane County, Wisconsin, 
 have been described as 
 
 “ Immense ‘ orchards ’ of stately oaks—usually the burr oak—standing well apart, their 
 superb tops spreading over a radius of forty or fifty feet, yet with plenty of room for 
 wind and sunshine between, favoring the presence of prairie grasses or hazel brush.” 6 
 
 Frequently there were but two or three dozen oak trees to the acre, the 
 ground beneath being covered with oak and hazel brush, with an indifferent 
 show of prairie grasses. In other places the ground was free from underbrush, 
 except at the edges of the timber, where the hazel brush seemed to be an 
 advance guard constantly encroaching on the prairie. The “ barrens ” of Iowa 
 were about half-way between prairie and timber land, the trees standing apart 
 like an orchard, the ground beneath being covered with grass, the sod of 
 which was much less tough than that on the prairie. The land in these oak 
 openings and plains was usually broken “ by powerful ox-teams hitched to 
 plows of immense proportions, and only occasionally was it necessary to turn 
 aside from some oak, or to use grub-hoe and axe to remove roots too large or 
 
 8 Klippart, The Wheat Plant, 343. 
 
 4 Cultivator, new series, IV (1847), p. 270. 
 
 5 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1847, p. 405. 
 
 0 Hibbard, Agriculture in Dane County, Wisconsin, 83. 
 
268 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 too hard to be cut by the share.” 7 Much of the labor necessary during the 
 previous decades in clearing the underbrush and timber before the crop 
 could be planted was now avoided. In southern Michigan and Wisconsin 
 and in northern Ohio and Indiana the timber land, openings, and small prairies 
 were generally intermixed; but west of Ohio, larger prairies were found, and 
 the timber areas were smaller. The northern and east-central portion of 
 Illinois was largely prairie with very little timber. 8 The timber usually skirted 
 the rivers and small water-courses or was scattered through the prairie in 
 groves. 
 
 WHY HAD EARLIER SETTLERS AVOIDED THE PRAIRIES? 
 
 Settlement in the prairie region before about 1850 had taken place in the 
 openings, on the smaller prairies, or near the junction of prairie and timber, 
 but the open prairie had been generally avoided. 9 The numerous groves and 
 the timbered land bordering the rivers and creeks of the prairie region had 
 been favorite locations for settlers, although, as early as 1845, a few of the 
 more venturesome had gone far into the prairies. 10 The appearance of the 
 prairie near Peoria, Illinois, was thus described in 1849 :11 
 
 “ We went up on ‘ Holbrook’s knoll/ a height a short distance southwest of the 
 present village of Waterman, and from that elevated point surveyed the land. South¬ 
 ward an immense tract of treeless, undulating prairie, dotted by scattered cabins near the 
 timber, was spread out before us, the view bounded by Shabbona Grove, Pritchard’s 
 Grove and Ross Grove to the right, by Indian Creek timber in front and by Somonawk 
 timber to the left. Eastward was Squaw Grove and northward was the boundless 
 prairie, the view in that direction unbroken by house or tree so far as the eye could 
 reach.” 
 
 Idealists and practical men differed regarding the ultimate usefulness of the 
 Illinois prairies for agricultural purposes. Some thought that they had been 
 especially reserved for the agricultural millennium which was now about to 
 dawn; others that they would not be brought into cultivation for centuries to 
 come. One urged speculators to buy up the centers of the large prairies and 
 plant them with trees. 12 Another writes: “ I have not a single doubt that 
 Illinois alone, is capable of sustaining a population of twenty millions.” 13 The 
 great objection to the prairies as a place of settlement during the early years 
 was the absence of wood and water. Roads into the prairies were nearly 
 impassable in the spring because of the deep mud. It was difficult to make the 
 wooden-moldboard plow, or even the cast-iron plow, do satisfactory work in 
 prairie soils. It is said that immigrants from the wooded regions of the East 
 and South, or from foreign countries, frequently chose timber land, because 
 it resembled the country from which they came. In the eyes of many an 
 eastern traveler the lack of stone material for building was a serious deficiency. 
 The fever and ague also were frequently urged as reasons for avoiding the 
 prairies. It was thought by some that for farmers without capital the timbered 
 
 7 Hibbard, Agriculture in Dane County, Wisconsin, 84. 
 
 8 Gerhard, Illinois As It Is, 276. 
 
 9 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Reports, 1850, Agriculture, 403. 
 
 10 Ibid., 1845, P- 388. 
 
 11 Marsh, Recollections, 1837-1910, p. 36. 
 
 12 Sears, Pictorial Description of the United States, 548. 
 
 13 Western Farmer, I (1839), P- 147. 
 
INFLUENCE OF PRAIRIES ON PROGRESS OF AGRICULTURE 269 
 
 land was the better; but that, when capital was added, the openings and plains 
 were preferable. 14 Of the many reasons advanced for avoiding the prairies, 
 that which was most often repeated by contemporary writers, was the lack of 
 wood and water. 
 
 So long as land was available for settlement on the smaller prairies or along 
 the edge of the timber, the newly-arrived immigrant was able to provide him¬ 
 self with a farm consisting of both wood and prairie land. The timber land 
 furnished him fuel and fencing material, lumber for his buildings, mast for 
 his hogs, and protection from winds and storms. The adjacent prairies pro¬ 
 vided tillable land, abundant range for cattle, and a supply of winter forage 
 free for the gathering. As soon as settlement broke away from the timber, 
 it was necessary for the farmer on the open prairie to carry the material for 
 fuel, fencing, and buildings from the timbered land. 
 
 There was much difference of opinion regarding the relative advantages of 
 woodland and of the prairie for a new settler. Judge Hall, in his Notes on the 
 Western States (1838) wrote: 15 
 
 “ A farmer had better settle in the midst of a prairie, and haul his fuel and rails five 
 miles, than undertake to clear a farm in the forest. The farmers of Illinois are beginning 
 to be aware of this fact, and there are now many instances in which farmers, having 
 purchased a small piece of land for timber, in the woodland, make their farm at a 
 distance in the prairie.” 
 
 This seems to have been more frequently the opinion of travelers, however, 
 than of actual settlers. The open prairie furnished no protection from the 
 wind and storms. 
 
 To supply drinking-water for man and beast was another perplexing prob¬ 
 lem of the prairie farmer. At a distance from rivers or springs, he had to 
 rely mainly for water upon wells, but rock and timber were scarce and wells 
 must be driven deep, with no other implements except picks and shovels. 
 Under such conditions well-digging was indeed a difficult task. Consequently, 
 the introduction of well-drilling machinery was of great importance in later 
 stages of prairie settlement. 
 
 During the decade 1840 to 1850, farming in the prairie region had returned 
 but small profits. Although western farmers might raise 4 bushels of wheat or 
 corn or 4 pounds of beef or pork as cheaply as the eastern farmer could raise 
 1 pound, yet the 1 bushel or pound at the East brought more money than 
 the 4 in the West. During much of this time the interior farmer could not 
 sell any of the products of his farm at his home for cash at any price, and 
 the cost of transportation to a cash market was in many instances equal to their 
 entire value. Under such conditions it is not surprising that the settlers in the 
 prairie regions were reluctant to leave the vicinity of the wooded region, which 
 supplied them with the necessities—timber, water, and protection—to take up 
 land in the open prairie, with its uncertain returns. 
 
 CONDITIONS FAVORING SETTLEMENT OF PRAIRIES 
 
 AFTER 1840 . 
 
 Many causes were leading to the settlement of the prairies, however. As a 
 result of the rapidly increasing tide of immigration to the West, nearly all 
 
 14 Blois, Gazetteer of Michigan (1838), p. 27. 
 
 15 Hall, Notes on the Western States, 103. 
 
270 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 the available land surrounding the large prairies in the older settled region 
 east of the Mississippi had been taken by actual settlers, or by speculators 
 before 1850. It was now becoming necessary, in order to obtain productive 
 land, either to go still farther west in search of the favorite mixture of wood¬ 
 land and prairie, or to break away from the timber. The prices of wheat, corn, 
 beeves, and hogs in western markets had begun about 1845 to show a rising 
 tendency. (See pp. 312 et seq.) The reaper was coming into use, allowing 
 the farmer to harvest more extensive fields of grain and putting a premium 
 on the open, level, prairie-lands. The steel plow which would scour in the 
 prairie soil was taking the place of the cast-iron plow. 16 It was the building 
 of the railroads across the prairie region during the decade 1850 to i860, 
 however, that opened the prairies to profitable agricultural production. Better 
 markets were now provided, the demand for wheat and corn land increased, 
 returns were more certain. Fuel and building material might now be secured 
 from Chicago or from the timbered regions by railroad. Finally, the high 
 prices of wheat during the middle years of the decade at once overcame all 
 prejudice to any land with available markets which would produce that crop. 
 Former objections dwindled in importance and settlement spread over the 
 open prairies. 
 
 With the development of prairie agriculture, the progress of settlement in 
 the wooded regions was somewhat checked. The woodlands were now passed 
 by. There was talk of abandoned farms in the East. Emigrants from New 
 York and New England who had settled in the wooded region of eastern Ohio 
 now moved further west to take up a prairie farm in Illinois, Wisconsin, or 
 Iowa. Between 1830 and 1840 the State of Michigan had come into being and 
 the Territory of Wisconsin and Iowa had been created. The removal of the 
 Sacs and Foxes from northern Illinois and Wisconsin opened that region to 
 pioneers. Between 1850 and i860 Iowa was admitted to the Union as a State 
 and the Territories of Minnesota, Nebraska, and Kansas were organized. 
 
 PIONEERING ON THE PRAIRIES. 
 
 In contrast to pioneering in the wooded regions, the prairie farmer had no 
 brush to grub or timber to cut before planting his crops. A thick grass sward 
 covered the soil and, although it required the strength of 3, 4, or even 6 
 yoke of oxen to break the sod for the first time, within 2 or 3 years it was 
 cultivated with the same ease as other lands. Arriving in the spring, at the 
 expense of only one plowing and a thorough harrowing, the emigrant with 
 good fortune might obtain a crop of sod corn and potatoes the first year, and a 
 crop of wheat, barley, or oats the second, from as large a portion of his land 
 as his means would enable him to bring under the plow. Its freedom from 
 stumps, stones, and falling branches enabled him to avail himself of all the 
 varieties of machinery used in farming, such as planters, drills, reapers, and 
 mowers. 
 
 COST OF DEVELOPING A PRAIRIE FARM. 
 
 To the newly-arrived immigrant in the prairie region the cost of developing 
 a farm was a matter of first importance. Having generally but limited means, 
 
 16 Prairie Farmer, XI (1851), p. 10. 
 
INFLUENCE OF PRAIRIES ON PROGRESS OF AGRICULTURE 271 
 
 he was compelled to get all he could from the land with the least possible 
 outlay. Time was the important element in the development of a farm in 
 the wooded region, but when the prairies were reached and a farm could be 
 developed in one year, capital and markets were of greater importance. 
 Caird ir gives the following account of the process of settlement in the 
 prairies: 
 
 “ The first care of an American Settler on the prairie is to provide for the first winter. 
 If he starts in May he ploughs a few acres up, and very commonly plants the Indian 
 corn on it by making a slit with his axe on the tough upturned sod, into which he drops 
 
 the seed. Having thus started his ‘ sod ’ corn, he constructs his house, and 
 
 spends the rest of the summer in * breaking ’ the prairie in preparation for a wheat 
 crop, and in cutting and making some prairie hay for the winter provender of his live 
 
 stock. In the end of August he sows his wheat, and, when that is completed, 
 
 he harvests his ‘ sod ’ corn. When the crop of Indian corn is secured there is 
 
 time to begin making fences. The fences are made of posts and sawn pine 
 
 timber, .... the material being secured at either the nearest railway station or grove 
 of timber.” 
 
 Solon Robinson, 18 of Lake County, Indiana, in 1843 gave the cost of starting 
 a prairie farm as follows: 
 
 “ The first breaking up of the prairie is generally counted in the cost of preparation; 
 that is $1.50 an acre; rails, one cent each; count 16 or 18 for every rod, and calculate 
 the expense of any sized lot that you wish. A comfortable log cabin with two rooms 
 can be built for $50. A farm house 1 and stories high, 20 by 30 feet, from $250 to 
 $300. A log barn, 18 by 40, $40. Of course there are several other items of expense 
 that I cannot give exactly here, such as a well, cellar, garden fence, yards, shed, etc., 
 that cost labor and not money.” 
 
 BUILDINGS ON PRAIRIE FARMS. 
 
 Buildings were cheaply constructed. A frequent method of building is thus 
 described: 19 
 
 “ I have good, warm stabling for some forty head of cattle and sheep, that did not 
 cost ten dollars. The sides are built with rails laid up in pens about two or three feet 
 wide, supported of course, by cross pieces, and the space filled with old hay, straw, 
 turfs, or small bushes with the leaves on, until the requisite height is attained, and then 
 covered with poles, rails, and coarse hay. Any quantity of hay for covering can be had 
 in the prairie country, for a small amount of labor. A small ditch or bank on the 
 upper side, keeps the water from the bank inside, which, well covered with straw, 
 
 makes an excellent floor. And yet, how many expose their whole stock, winter 
 
 after winter, by the side of a stack on the open prairies where the Northwest wind 
 sometimes blows almost hard enough to take their hides from their backs, were it not 
 for the natural adhesiveness between ‘ skin and bone.’ ” 
 
 FENCES. 
 
 The question of fences was important to the prairie farmer. The first set¬ 
 tlers of the country who took up land in or near the forests had no difficulty 
 in securing material for wooden fences; but to the prairie farmer who had 
 no woods, fencing to protect fields from the ranging cattle and hogs was one 
 of the chief items of necessary expense. How to cheaply construct a sheep- 
 
 17 Caird, Prairie Farming in America, 67. 
 
 18 Cultivator, X (1843), p. 37 - 
 
 19 Ibid., VII (1840), p. 52. 
 
Ill 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 and hog-proof fence was a leading topic of discussion in the prairie region. 
 In the wooded regions the Virginia rail or post and board fence was common, 
 but the early settlers in the prairie region, especially in central Illinois and 
 eastern Iowa, where fence rails or stone could not be readily obtained, fre¬ 
 quently resorted to sod fences. Wire fencing was coming into use by 1850, 
 especially in Iowa, but it was much criticized on account of sagging, short life 
 and the danger of injuring stock. The early wire fences were not hog-tight. 
 The osage orange as a hedge was actively recommended and was planted by 
 many. Nurseries for the propagation of the plants were established in Illi¬ 
 nois and Iowa by speculative farmers who hoped for large returns. 
 
 SOIL EXPLOITATION. 
 
 Soil exploitation was the keynote of western agriculture. Political, religious, 
 and other reasons brought in immigrants from abroad, but it was mainly the 
 cheapness, accessibility and fertility of western lands that attracted the eastern 
 farmer. The usual practice of soil exhaustion is well illustrated by an 
 account of Missouri farming in 1849: 20 
 
 “Farming here is conducted on the regular skinning system. There seems 
 
 to be a continual struggle with each farmer to have longer strings of fence, bigger fields, 
 and more ground in corn than his neighbor. The result of which struggle, in conjunc¬ 
 tion with the ease with which land is brought into cultivation in the prairie, convenient 
 to timber, is that most of the farmers in this country scratch over a great deal of ground, 
 but cultivate none. Instead, however, of endeavoring to extricate themselves from their 
 difficulties in the most reasonable way possible, that of ceasing to enlarge their farms 
 and growing grass seed until they are reduced to a manageable size, the cry is still 
 more land, more corn. It is corn, corn, corn, nothing but corn. .... Take the state 
 over and I have no idea that one farmer out of fifty has ever hauled a load of manure 
 to his corn fields since he has been in the state. I have doubts, even, whether one in a 
 
 hundred has ever done it. Some, however, have the foresight and sagacity to 
 
 avoid all this by building their stables, barns, etc., over or contiguous to a ravine, by 
 which they are drained, so that each shower abates the nuisance, and the lucky farmer 
 is not troubled with muddy lots and rotting barns.” 
 
 Such practices were not entirely the result of ignorance. European travelers 
 in America loudly lamented and condemned the “ broad acres ” culture of 
 the West. Then, as now, soil improvement was the theme of the majority 
 of treatises on good agriculture, but it was practiced but little in the West, 
 except by the feeding of cattle and hogs on the land. A traveler through Illi¬ 
 nois in 1840 writes: 
 
 “Indeed the two greatest objections to the West, in my judgment, are that the land 
 is too cheap and too productive.” 21 
 
 THE ECONOMIC BASIS OF WESTERN PREDATORY 
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 The prevailing opinion in Illinois regarding soil improvement was expressed 
 in the Prairie Farmer in 1854: 22 
 
 “ Any one who sees the agricultural papers of the Eastern States will be struck with 
 one fact concerning them all; and that is, that their chief strength is expended on 
 
 20 Cultivator, new series, VI (1849), p. 302. 
 
 21 Western Farmer, I (1840), p. 147. 
 
 22 Prairie Farmer (1854), P- 81. 
 
INFLUENCE OF PRAIRIES ON PROGRESS OF AGRICULTURE 273 
 
 matters which relate to preparing the soil. The same fact is evident in all the English 
 Agricultural literature; every work relative to the subject, even to a book on flowers, 
 is nearly filled with directions for composing the soil, with which the beginning is to be 
 made. Manures, how made, how saved, how kept, how applied—phosphate, superphos¬ 
 phate, ‘ Improved' superphosphate, guano, composts, and the like, and related things, 
 
 fill from one-half to nine-tenths of their pages. What would they think if they 
 
 had their soil to start with, instead of being obliged to make it. They would then be 
 precisely where we are, with our soil made to our hands, ready to be stirred and receive 
 the seed. Ihroughout all the Northwest, with but few exceptions, we have the soil to 
 begin with, which these Atlantic Shore and English farmers would like to make by the 
 aid of their manures.” 
 
 “ All hail the inventor,” writes another western enthusiast, “ they do more 
 benefit to their fellow men than a thousand theorizers on guano.” The facts 
 were that the kind of farming that paid best in the West was exploitation of the 
 soil. It looked like poor farming to an easterner and to a European, but it was 
 the system most profitable to the settlers on the prairies. Land was cheap, 
 fields were large, and the best management was the application of a minimum 
 of labor per acre. This did not imply a minimum of work per man; often a 
 maximum of human exertion was expended. 
 
 There were, indeed, outside the prairies, farming regions which had exceed- 
 ingly productive soil, such as the wheat region of western New York, the 
 limestone valleys of southeastern Pennsylvania, the bluegrass region of Ken¬ 
 tucky, and the bottom lands of Ohio. But the contrast between the scant and 
 rocky soils of New England and the level, fertile lands of the prairies was 
 little less than the contrast between the opening of a farm in the forest and 
 one on the prairie. The cheapness of fertile land in the West and the ease 
 with which it could be worked made it a great attraction to the eastern farmer. 
 The rapid expansion of western agriculture by increasing the annual produc¬ 
 tion of beef, pork, cheese, and wheat made possible the development of an 
 urban population in the East. Meanwhile, the competition of western products 
 caused a readjustment in eastern farming. 
 
Chapter XXII. —Agricultural Labor and 
 
 Population. 
 
 Closely connected with the abundant supply of land, were the problems 
 arising out of the relative scarcity of farm labor. Abundance of land and 
 scarcity of labor were influential in determining the methods of culture as 
 well as the kind of crops to be grown. Scarcity of labor was in no wise 
 peculiar to this period of our agricultural history, but during the rapid expan¬ 
 sion of production in the prairies it became increasingly evident, in both East 
 
 and West. 
 
 One cause of the growing scarcity of farm laborers was the development of 
 manufacturing and the resulting new demand for labor. Throughout the East 
 the high relative wages paid to mechanics was a matter of much concern to 
 farmers who employed labor. In Rhode Island, in 1849* while farm laborers 
 were receiving from $12 to $15 a month for ordinary farm work, and $1 a 
 day for mowing, mechanics were receiving from $1 to $2 a day throughout 
 the year. 1 In Wisconsin, farm labor was quoted at $12 a month and that of 
 mechanics was $20. It seemed to be generally conceded that farmers could 
 not pay wages equivalent to those paid by manufacturers. 
 
 Emigration to the West, now increasing in volume, caused a constant drain 
 of labor from the Eastern States. A New England farmer wrote in 1841: 2 
 
 “ A great proportion of our young men, on arriving at the age of manhood, push their 
 fortunes in the West, and take their farms on the rich bottom lands of the Mississippi, 
 and its tributaries, leaving the agricultural portions of New England, with help scarcely 
 sufficient to cultivate their lands in the ordinary way.” 
 
 WAGES IN THE EAST AND IN THE WEST. 
 
 In the West, the lack of market, the low price of produce, and constant 
 arrival of new settlers were conditions which tended to keep down the level 
 of wages. 
 
 In Berkshire County, Massachusetts, in 1847, farm laborers were said to 
 command 
 
 “ ten, eleven and twelve dollars per month, through the year. In the summer months, 
 men,’ from twelve to fifteen dollars. Day laborers, at haying and harvest, from one 
 dollar to one dollar and twenty-five cents, at other farm work, from sixty-two and a half 
 to seventy-five cents. In winter, by the month, from eight to ten dollars. By the day, 
 fifty to sixty-two and a half cents.” 3 
 
 The scarcity of labor was most severely felt during harvest time in both East 
 and West, especially in the seasons of haying and of reaping 1 the small grains. 
 After the improvement of the plow a considerable area could be planted in 
 the spring, but in 1840 reaping and mowing were still done by hand and the 
 
 1 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Reports, 1849, Agriculture, p. 99- 
 
 2 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1841), p. 359. 
 
 3 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1847, p. 361. 
 
 274 
 
AGRICULTURAL LABOR AND POPULATION 
 
 275 
 
 area which one man could crop was limited largely by his ability to harvest. 
 Expert harvest hands, especially cradlers, demanded high wages. In New 
 York State, in 1852, the average mower, it was estimated, received from 
 75 cents to $1 a day, for cutting about ij acres. 4 An average cradler would 
 cut about 2 acres of wheat a day. 5 In the older and more thickly settled region 
 of the Eastern States the demand for labor was more uniform throughout the 
 year than in the West. Dairying and livestock farming were more commonly 
 followed, with a diversified field system. During the winter months, lumber¬ 
 ing, teaming, and other pursuits took up the farmers’ time. But even in the 
 East it was a difficult task to secure sufficient help for harvest. 
 
 A large portion of the farm labor was furnished by the family. The making 
 of butter and cheese involved much labor, which usually fell to the women. 
 
 Table 32.— Wages of agricultural labor.* 
 
 State. 
 
 Year. 
 
 W ages. 
 
 Value of board 
 per week. 
 
 By the year. 
 
 By the month. 
 
 By the day. 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 1847 
 1849 
 1849 
 
 1848 
 
 1849 
 
 1849 
 
 1849 
 
 1847 
 
 1849 
 
 1847 
 
 
 $12 
 
 10 to 13 
 
 9i to 13 
 
 10 ton 
 
 10 to 14 
 
 10 to 15 
 
 12 to 15 
 
 8 to 15 
 
 10 to 16 
 
 15 
 
 5 to 7 
 
 8 to 12 
 
 $1.00 to 1.50 
 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 $50 to 120 
 
 .70 to .90 
 
 $1.00 to 1.50 
 
 Do. 
 
 
 
 .1 2C 
 
 New York . 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 £ . 150 
 
 •75 to 1.25 
 .75 to 1.50 
 .1.00 
 
 .1-25 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 120 to I44 
 
 .622 to 1.25 
 
 .75 
 
 I.50 to 2.00 
 
 Delaware . 
 
 r. 
 
 
 1 . 
 
 1.00 to 1.50 
 
 1.62^ to 1.87^ 
 
 “ Compiled from U. S. Patent Office, Annual Reports, 1845, p. 1149; 1848, p. 686, and from reports 
 of State boards of agriculture and State agricultural societies. 
 
 Not infrequently women milked the cows, and in the West they usually as¬ 
 sisted in the field during the rush of harvest season. During the summer 
 season the extra demand for labor was partially supplied by utilizing more 
 fully the labor of the boys on the farm. One of the great benefits anticipated 
 from the introduction of agricultural machinery was the more complete 
 utilization of boy labor, for it was thought that the work which formerly 
 required strong men could then be done by means of machinery and boys. 
 
 SCARCITY OF LABOR ON PRAIRIE FARMS. 
 
 With the spread of farming into the prairies the severity of the problem of 
 harvesting was greatly aggravated. So long as land had to be cleared of 
 trees and underbrush before it could be cultivated, the acreage of arable land 
 was limited by the supply of men to make the clearing, but when the progress 
 of settlement reached the prairies the supply of arable land became at once 
 abundant, and in proportion the men to sow and harvest were scarce. In 
 
 4 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, XII (1852), p. 108. 
 
 5 Ibid., 115. 
 
276 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 the wheat-growing regions of the West the scarcity of labor for harvest was 
 strongly felt. Great as were the advantages of the cradle over the sickle, the 
 cradle was still entirely inadequate. A writer of southern Michigan described 
 the condition in that region in 1839: 6 7 
 
 “ Some idea may be formed of the extent of the crop, when I state that on Pigeon 
 Prairie, on one area of twelve thousand acres, eight thousand at least is in wheat. 
 On Prairie Round, with an area of twenty thousand acres, at least thirteen thousand is 
 in wheat. On the elevation of the Prairie Round, you can behold the vast plain of twelve 
 
 thousand acres, all waving in golden color, ripe for the cradle. At this moment 
 
 every man and boy, and even women are actively engaged in cradling, raking, binding 
 and shocking the golden harvest. I have seen hundreds of women near their log cabins 
 assisting in the active duties of the field. But, after all, a large portion will be left out, 
 and be destroyed. There is not help enough in the country to secure the crop.” 
 
 Many acres of grain were annually lost in the large western wheat fields 
 because of inability to harvest in time. 
 
 CAUSES OF INCREASING SCARCITY OF LABOR, 1850 to 1860 . 
 
 During the fifties the scarcity of agricultural labor came more into promi¬ 
 nence. In the West, the Mexican War had withdrawn a considerable number 
 from the ranks of agricultural laborers; in the East, manufacturing cities were 
 attracting an increased number of laborers from the rural regions. The gold 
 discoveries in California of 1849 attracted many others. Especially large was 
 the demand made by the railroads for men in the construction of the new 
 lines, which were being rapidly extended through the western region. It was 
 estimated in 1857 that the railroads, for construction and operation, had with¬ 
 drawn 400,000 able-bodied men from other employment. 7, 
 
 A Michigan farmer thus describes the condition in his community as typical 
 of much of the surrounding wheat-growing territory: 8 
 
 “Our school district embraces about three thousand acres of land; the majority of 
 farms are eighty-acre lots; four lots, only, are unsettled; there are twenty-seven 
 families in the district; three men are mechanics, who follow their professions, and 
 owning, together, ten acres of land; there are not more than six or eight boys in the 
 district who are old enough to manage a team; five men have left the district for the 
 gold diggings this season; four of them left farms to be managed as they best could be; 
 the improvements on the farms will range from twenty-five to one hundred acres of 
 arable land. There is but one man in the whole district who works at day’s work, and 
 he is accidentally here for a short time.” 
 
 The high price of wheat which prevailed from 1854 to 1857, an d the rapid 
 extension of railroads and markets into the prairies, led to a great increase in 
 the area of land under cultivation. It was comparatively easy to secure a 
 farm, when the price of a day’s labor would buy an acre of land. Many 
 eastern farm laborers, who could command the means, migrated to the 
 “ West ” to cultivate farms of their own. 
 
 6 Western Farmer, I (1840), p. 60. 
 
 7 Hunt’s Merchant’s Magazine, XXXVII, 365. 
 
 8 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Reports, 1852, Agriculture, 278 
 
AGRICULTURAL LABOR AND TOPULATION 
 
 111 
 
 WAGES IN 1857 . 
 
 The wages of farm labor in Ohio showed a significant advance between 
 1848 and 1857. In 1857 wages were commonly estimated at from $150 to 
 $200 a year. The wages of a mower ranged from $1 to $1.50 a day, of a 
 cradler from $1.50 to $2. Rakers and binders usually received a little more 
 than mowers, but a little less than cradlers. Owing to the increasing wages 
 of labor and the constant improvement of agricultural machinery, the relative 
 merits of man and horse power were popular subjects of discussion during the 
 two decades. The development of commercial agriculture and the use of 
 agricultural machinery, particularly the reaper, the mower, and the corn culti¬ 
 vator, were causing greater economy in the use of labor on the farm. 
 
 THE WESTWARD MOVEMENT OF POPULATION. 
 
 The distribution of free population in 1840, 1850 and i860 is shown in 
 figures 33, 34, and 35. In addition, there were in i860, 225,000 slaves in 
 
 Fig. 33.—Free population, 1840. Each dot represents 5000. 
 
 Kentucky; 115,000 in Missouri; 87,000 in Maryland, and 1,800 in Delaware. 
 The rapid expansion westward into the prairie region of the Northwest is 
 apparent. The business reverses during the depression which followed the 
 panic of 1837 induced many to leave the East to make their homes in the 
 West. 9 The Mexican War and the discovery of gold in California attracted 
 the attention of many to the West. During the rapid extension of railroads 
 and the high prices that characterized the middle fifties, it seemed as though 
 everyone was going, or at least looking, toward the West. “ Yankees ” were 
 
 9 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, II (1842), p. 48. 
 
278 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
AGRICULTURAL LABOR AND POPULATION 
 
 279 
 
 Table 33 .—Growth of population in the north, 1840 to i860. 
 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Division and State. 
 
 Popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Density 
 per square 
 mile. 
 
 Popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Density 
 per square 
 mile. 
 
 Popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Density 
 per square 
 mile. 
 
 
 Thousands. 
 
 No. 
 
 Thousands. 
 
 No. 
 
 Thousands. 
 
 No. 
 
 United States . 
 
 17,069 
 
 97 
 
 23,192 
 
 7-9 
 
 3 L 443 
 
 10.6 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 New England. 
 
 2,235 
 
 36.1 
 
 2,728 
 
 44.0 
 
 3435 
 
 50.6 
 
 Middle Atlantic .. 
 
 4526 
 
 45-2 
 
 5,899 
 
 59-0 
 
 7,459 
 
 74-6 
 
 East North Central 
 
 2,925 
 
 10.7 
 
 4,523 
 
 18.4 
 
 6,927 
 
 28.2 
 
 West North Central 
 
 427 
 
 1.6 
 
 880 
 
 3-1 
 
 *2,165 
 
 5-3 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 73 
 
 .2 
 
 175 
 
 •3 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 106 
 
 .2 
 
 444 
 
 1.0 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 502 
 
 16.8 
 
 583 
 
 19-5 
 
 628 
 
 21.0 
 
 New Hampshire .. 
 
 284 
 
 3 i .5 
 
 318 
 
 35-2 
 
 326 
 
 36.1 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 292 
 
 32.0 
 
 314 
 
 344 
 
 315 
 
 34-5 
 
 Massachusetts .... 
 
 738 
 
 91.7 
 
 994 
 
 123.7 
 
 1,231 
 
 I 53 -I 
 
 Rhode Island .... 
 
 109 
 
 102.0 
 
 148 
 
 138.3 
 
 175 
 
 163.7 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 310 
 
 64-3 
 
 37 i 
 
 76.9 
 
 460 
 
 95-5 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 2,429 
 
 51-0 
 
 3,097 
 
 65.0 
 
 3,88i 
 
 81.4 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 373 
 
 49-7 
 
 490 
 
 65.2 
 
 672 
 
 89.4 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 1,724 
 
 38.5 
 
 2312 
 
 51.6 
 
 2,906 
 
 64.8 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 1,520 
 
 37-3 
 
 1,980 
 
 48.6 
 
 2,340 
 
 574 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 686 
 
 19.1 
 
 988 
 
 27-5 
 
 i ,350 
 
 37-6 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 476 
 
 8.5 
 
 852 
 
 15-2 
 
 1,712 
 
 30.6 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 212 
 
 3-7 
 
 398 
 
 6.9 
 
 749 
 
 130 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 3 i 
 
 0.4 
 
 305 
 
 5-5 
 
 776 
 
 14.0 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 6 
 
 • • • • 
 
 172 
 
 2.1 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 43 
 
 0.2 
 
 192 
 
 35 
 
 675 
 
 12.1 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 384 
 
 5-6 
 
 682 
 
 9.9 
 
 1,182 
 
 17.2 
 
 North Dakota .... 
 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 
 b 
 
 • • • • 
 
 South Dakota .... 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 
 b 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 29 
 
 0.2 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 107 
 
 1-3 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 Montana . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Idaho . 
 
 
 .... 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • « • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Wyoming . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Colorado . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 34 
 
 0.3 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 62 
 
 0.3 
 
 94 
 
 0.4 
 
 Arizona . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Utah . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 11 
 
 • • • • 
 
 40 
 
 0.3 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 1 7 
 
 0.1 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 12 
 
 0.1 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 13 
 
 • • • • 
 
 52 
 
 0.5 
 
 California . 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 93 
 
 0.6 
 
 380 
 
 2.4 
 
 a Does not include Dakota Territory. 
 b Dakota Territory, 4,837. 
 
 Table 34 .—Immigration 1830-1860. 
 
 1830-40 
 
 1840-50 
 
 1850-60 
 
 599,125 
 
 1,713,250 
 
 2.598,214 
 
280 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 said to be leaving New England in “ shoals,” seeking land in the West—a 
 piece of prairie and woodland in Illinois, Wisconsin, or Iowa. It was during 
 this period that foreign immigration became an important element in the 
 settlement of the West. Economic, political, and religious disturbances in 
 western Europe were sending an increased flood of immigrants to this country, 
 many of whom went directly to the West. After 1844, immigration from 
 Germany and Norway rapidly increased, and from Ireland after the potato 
 famine in 1846. While many forces were operating to encourage a movement 
 of population, the direction of the movement and the destination of the immi¬ 
 grants was determined by the presence in the northern Mississippi Valley 
 of vast areas of cheap but fertile prairie lands made easily accessible by new 
 means of transportation. 
 
 In 1840, the States and Territories of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, 
 Missouri, Wisconsin, and Iowa had a population of 3,350,000, of which more 
 than 2,000,000 were in Ohio and Indiana alone. I11 1850, the same States, 
 with Minnesota included, had 5,400,000 people, an increase of over 60 per 
 cent in 10 years. In i860, with Kansas, Nebraska, and Dakota added, the 
 number was over 9,000,000, an increase of 68 per cent since 1850. In i860, 
 the far West had 600,000 people, two-thirds of whom lived in California. 
 (See Table 33.) 
 
Chapter XXIII. —Agricultural 
 
 Machinery. 
 
 The scarcity of labor and the expansion of agricultural production into the 
 prairie region stimulated the rapid development and introduction of improved 
 agricultural machinery. The improvement along these lines which had been 
 made before 1840 was summarized by Judge Buel, 1 who wrote: 
 
 The disparity between old and new implements of culture is great, not only in the 
 time employed, but in the manner in which they do their work, and in the power required 
 
 1 ° PCr i°/t m lt 7 hc ? d pI ° Ugh re( l uired a four-cattle team, and two hands, to manage 
 it, and the work ordinarily was but half executed. The improved plough is generally 
 prope e y tw o cattle, requires but one man to manage it, and, when properly governed, 
 performs thorough work. Harrows and other implements have undergone a like move¬ 
 ment. Besides, new implements, which greatly economize the labor of tillage, are coming 
 m - t fHH Se uM the r ° er ’ c } lltlvator ’ drill-barrow, etc., so that a farm may now be worked 
 
 be better wo'rkT wrthal» * W3S W ° nt *° be W ° rked f ° rty yearS ag0 ’ and may 
 
 Whatever the degree of development in agricultural machinery prior to 1840, 
 however, it was only a beginning when compared with the improvement and 
 
 the general adoption of new machinery which took place during the next two 
 decades. 
 
 In 1840, grain was generally reaped with the cradle, which had come into 
 use about 1820, but the sickle had not been entirely abandoned. Hussey and 
 McCormick had patented their reaping machines (see figs. 41, 42, 43), but 
 as yet their actual use was negligible. Stationary and movable ’threshing 
 machines, consisting of a simple cylinder and concave and driven by horse 
 power, had been widely adopted, although a considerable amount of grain 
 (especially in the West) was still trodden out by horses and cattle or beaten 
 out with the flail. The winnowing was done in a fan-mill turned by hand, but 
 many in the West possessed not even a fanning-mill. The grain drill was 
 scarcely known. 2 Hay was cut with the scythe; the mowing machine, 
 however, had been invented and tried. The wooden horse-rake, said to be 
 able to do the work of 6 men, had been widely introduced. The cast-iron 
 plow (fig. 36) had superseded the old wooden-moldboard plow. The Roman 
 harrow and the roller were commonly used. Corn was planted by hand and 
 cultivated with the plow or, in the East, with a crude and more or less unsatis¬ 
 factory cultivator. Clover-hullers, fodder-cutters, hand-seeders, and small 
 tools were being rapidly improved. As early as 1820, factory-made scythes 
 were selling at from $12 to $18 a dozen. In 1831, steel hoes were made in 
 Pittsburg for about $4-5° a dozen, or one-half the price of iron hoes 10 years 
 before. Shovels were made and sold at one-third their former price. 3 Farm 
 machinery was still largely the product of the farm or local blacksmith shop. 
 
 281 
 
 The Farmers’ Companion (ed. of 1839), p. 123. 
 - Cultivator, new series, VIII (1851), p. 72. 
 
 6 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. xxiv. 
 
282 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The improvement and introduction of agricultural machinery during this 
 period was not confined to America. In England many important new ma¬ 
 chines had been invented and were in use. American agricultural books and 
 periodicals of the time abounded with pictures and accounts of Englis 
 machinery and frequently advocated its use in America. But in England labor 
 was plentiful and land scarce; in America land was plentiful, and the oppor¬ 
 tunities for labor were many. As in most new countries, the cost of manual 
 labor was high in comparison with the price of land and its products; hence 
 in America the necessity for using labor-saving contrivances was greater than 
 in older countries. The large area of productive land, together with high- 
 priced labor, gave incentive and direction to the development of American 
 machinery. Cheapness, simplicity and efficiency in covering a large area were 
 the qualities sought for. Since farmers had taken little pains to remove stones 
 and stumps or to level inequalities in their meadows and gram fields for the 
 better working of machinery, it became incumbent on the inventors to produce 
 implements that would work almost anywheie. 
 
 Fig. 36—Prouty and Mear’s plow. 
 
 The factory plow, as distinguished from the plow made in the blacksmith shop, was 
 coming into use in 1840. 
 
 THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE PLOW. 
 
 A notable event in the introduction of improved agricultural machinery was 
 the substitution of the cast-iron plow for the old wooden-moldboard plow 
 which had been commonly used up to about 1825. (See fig. 3, p. 124.) I e 
 excessive friction of these old-fashioned plows had been a leading objection 
 to their use. They were constructed awkwardly enough in the first place, but 
 the form of the moldboard was especially defective. An acre was considere 
 a good day’s work. The transition from the wooden-moldboard to the cast- 
 iron plow was practically completed by 1840. It was said in 1845 that wit 
 a cast-iron plow, 
 
 “ on the same farms, the same fields, with a tougher sward, are now plowed with one 
 
 yoke of oxen, and often with only one man. An acre and a half is plowed in a 
 
 day in a manner greatly superior to the former mode. 
 
 There was a great variety in the pattern of plows in use in the East in 
 1840. Each pattern had its advocates, and each one in its turn was promoted 
 
 4 Cultivator, new series, II (1845), p. 44 - 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 283 
 
 by its admirers as the best. At the New York State Fair in 1842 “ more 
 than forty plows of different designs were offered for the inspection of the 
 committee.’’ 5 The “ Livingston County ” plow, the “ Montgomery County ” 
 plow, the “ Wyoming,” and the “ Geneva ” were popular in New York State 
 in 1840. The plow was being adapted to various conditions and uses; special 
 plows were being produced for sod-land, for stubble-land, for clay lands, and 
 for sandy lands. Aside from variations in the curvature of the moldboard the 
 merits of various types of coulters and of the addition of a wheel to the for¬ 
 ward end of the plowbeam were popular subjects for discussion in 1840. Ex¬ 
 periments were made in western New York with gang-plows with which to 
 stir the wheat-fallow, or to cover wheat or pea-seed to a greater depth than 
 possible with the cultivator. 6 In Maryland, Kentucky, and other southern 
 btates. the bar-share plow was in common use. With increased attention to 
 intensive culture, subsoil plows were coming into use in the eastern states 
 
 Plow-making had begun to leave the hands of the local blacksmith and was 
 becoming a factory industry. 
 
 THE INTRODUCTION OF STEEL PLOWS. 
 
 The cast-iron plow, which met with such good success in the Eastern 
 States, failed to give satisfaction on the prairies and bottom lands of the West. 
 They ran heavy ” because they could not be made to scour properly in the 
 prairie soils. For breaking the prairie sod, the most satisfactory plow in 1840 
 was an immense affair with wooden moldboard and iron share. (See fio-. 37 ) 
 The moldboard was usually covered with strips of iron to lessen the friction 
 as much as possible. Two small wheels, connected by a short axle and fre¬ 
 quently made from a piece of plank, supported the front end of the beam 
 and governed the depth as well as the width of the furrow. From 5 to 6 
 
 yoke of good oxen were required to operate a plow of this kind, with only a 
 single man or a boy to drive. 
 
 “ Fancy, then, a plow share weighing 125 lbs., the beam fourteen feet long, attached 
 to a pair of cart wheels, to the tongue of which are hitched from three to seven yoke 
 
 of oxen turning an unbroken sod, eighteen to twenty-six inches wide, and sometimes a 
 mile in length.” 7 
 
 The steel plow (see fig. 38) which would scour in the prairie soil was how¬ 
 ever, coming into use. John Deere had made his first steel plow from a saw 
 blade in 1837 and within a few years his plows had become celebrated in all 
 the Rock River locality and for a considerable distance up and down the 
 Mississippi. 8 Steel plows were introduced into Kentucky in 1845. 9 By 1850 
 they had been found to be a great improvement over the old cast-iron plow 
 on the bottom lands of Ohio and had become widely used in the prairie 
 regions. At the same time the rod plow (fig. 39) and other improved breaking 
 plows were rapidly supplanting the old strap plow for breaking the prairies. 
 
 During the late fifties several attempts were made to plough by steam 
 power. In 1858 the Illinois Central Railroad Comp any endeavored to promote 
 
 „ 5 Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, II (1842), p. 4. 
 
 'Ibxd III (1843), P. 62. * 
 
 7 Cultivator, VII (1840), p. 33. 
 
 0 f/T 1XI (l85l) ’ p * I3a 
 
 Ibid., VI (1846), p. 42. 
 
284 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Fig. 37.—Prairie breaking plow. 
 
 In the early days the virgin prairie sod was broken with large plows with wooden 
 moldboards plated with iron strips which turned furrows as wide as thirty inches. # It 
 was said to be one of the most picturesque sights of the West to see one of these im¬ 
 mense plows drawn by oxen moving across the prairie. “Two old and well trained 
 yokes, one to lead and the 6ther at the plow, with four or five pair of young cattle in the 
 middle ” were said to constitute the most efficient team. The self-holding arrangement 
 saved the time and expense of one man in breaking, the trucks regulating the depth as 
 well as the width of furrow. The share was frequently made separate to facilitate 
 removal for sharpening. 
 
 Fig. 38.—Steel plow. Improved clipper. 
 
 The cast-iron plows so generally in use in the eastern states proved unsatisfactory 
 on the prairies as they would not scour. The steel plows had been made and tried before 
 1840 and by 1845 they were coming rapidly into use in the prairie region, supplanting the 
 cast-iron plow. The draft of the plow was thus lessened, the quality of work much 
 improved, and the paddle which until now had been used to keep the plow clean coula 
 be dispensed with. 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 285 
 
 the cause by offering a premium of $3,000 for the first successful steam plow. 10 
 The trials of Fawkes’ steam plow (fig. 40) from 1858 to i860 caused con¬ 
 siderable excitement for a time, * 11 but the outcome proved unsatisfactory. The 
 
 construction of rotary diggers and grubbers was receiving considerable atten¬ 
 tion in i860. 
 
 Fig. 39. —Rod plow. Two-horse rod breaker. 
 
 The rod plow came into use during this period and was widely used for breaking the 
 prairies. The steel rods in place of a solid moldboard considerably lessened the friction. 
 
 Fig. 40.—Fawkes’ steam plow. 
 
 The steam plow had been invented and tried, but it was- not a practical success. 
 Fawkes’ Steam Plow was awarded the premium of $3,000 given by the Illinois Central 
 Railroad in 1859. 
 
 Plow-making was no longer the work of the local blacksmith, but had 
 become a factory industry. As early as 1838 a factory in Pittsburg was 
 manufacturing a hundred plows a day by the aid of steam power. Another 
 factory in the same city was making an average of 4,000 plows a year. “ In 
 
 10 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. xix. 
 
 11 Country Gentleman, XII (1858), p. 305; XIV (1859), P- 241. 
 
286 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Massachusetts . . . . in 1845 there were seventy-three plow manufactories 
 making 61,334 plows and other instruments annually.” In 1855 the number of 
 establishments had decreased to 22, making 152,686 plows annually. 12 By 1858 
 John Deere at Moline, Illinois, had reached an annual output of over 13,000 
 steel plows. 13 
 
 Fig. 41. —Hussey’s reaper (1837). 
 
 Invented by Obed Hussey of Cincinnati in 1833, this was the most widely known reaper 
 in 1840. The grain fell upon a platform and was raked away from it by hand. It was 
 thus necessary to remove the grain before the succeeding round of the machine. The 
 sickle was a notable feature. Hussey’s reaper remained substantially unchanged during 
 this period. 
 
 Fig. 42.—McCormick’s reaping machine (1834). 
 
 The early McCormick machine was drawn by one horse hitched in 
 shafts and walking beside the standing grain. The first machine was 
 used in 1840. 
 
 12 U. S. Commissioner of Agriculture, Annual Report (1872), p. 284. 
 
 13 Country Gentleman, X (1857), p. 129. 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 287 
 
 THE INVENTION OF THE REAPER. 
 
 Charles Newbold and Jethro Wood, improvers of the plow, were the names 
 prominently connected with the development of agricultural machinery from 
 1820 to 1840; but from 1840 to i860 the names of Hussey, McCormick, and 
 Ketchum, improvers of the reaper and mower, were in the foreground. Be¬ 
 tween 1820 and 1840 the farmer had learned to use something better than 
 the old wooden plow, and in the period from 1840 to i860 attention was turned 
 to the development of machinery to be used in other lines of farm work, with 
 the result that the reaper, the threshing machine, the mower, and other imple¬ 
 ments were invented and adopted. It is significant that whereas before 1840 
 machinery was developed principally for the improvement of culture, after 
 that date the fundamental movement was in the direction of labor-saving 
 devices and increased production through extension of the area. 
 
 The development of the reaper and the mower constituted the most note¬ 
 worthy achievement in the improvement of agricultural machinery during the 
 period 1840 to i860. Obed Hussey made his first reaper in Cincinnati and 
 patented it in 1833 (%• 40 ; the following year Cyrus H. McCormick, of 
 Rockbridge County, Virginia, patented a reaper (fig. 42). With the appear¬ 
 ance of these machines begins the history of successful reapers in the United 
 States. The first public trial of the reaper was made by Hussey in a field near 
 Cincinnati, Ohio, before the Hamilton County Agricultural Society, on July 
 2, 1833. A year later the Hussey machine was introduced into the States of 
 New York and Illinois, in 1835 into Missouri, and in 1837 into Pennsylvania. 14 
 
 COMPARISON OF HUSSEY’S AND McCORMICK’S INVENTIONS. 
 
 Both the Hussey and the McCormick machines as used in 1840, simply cut 
 the grain and left it to be bound by hand. The Hussey machine was mounted 
 on two large drive-wheels, to the right of which extended a platform with 
 the cutting apparatus on the forward edge. The knife “ consisted of a series 
 of triangular plates riveted to a flat iron bar,” one end of which was “ attached 
 to a pitman moved by a crank and receiving its motion from the main axle 
 by means of cogs.” 15 In operation, the grain was allowed to fall on the plat¬ 
 form until a sufficient amount had accumulated to make a bundle, when it 
 was raked from the rear. The machine required two horses, a boy to drive, 
 and a man to push off the grain. Since the grain was raked from the platform 
 to the ground directly in the rear of the machine, it required from 5 to 7 men, 
 according to the state of the crop, to remove the grain as fast as cut, and thus 
 to prevent it being crushed by the horses and wheels of the machine on the suc¬ 
 ceeding round. The ordinary performance of the machine was said to be from 
 12 to 15 acres per day for the light model and 15 to 20 for the heavy. 16 
 
 The original McCormick machine (fig. 42) was “ somewhat more compli¬ 
 cated than Hussey’s,” and not so substantial. “ The drive wheel was situated 
 
 14 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. xxi. 
 
 15 Miller, Evolution of Reaping Machines (U. S. Dept, of Agric., Office of Experiment 
 
 Stations, Bull. 103), p. 24. 
 
 16 Cultivator, new series, I (1844), p. 386. 
 
288 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 almost directly behind the horse, and through a series of cogs gave a recipro¬ 
 cating motion to the cutting knife.Behind this [knife] was an apron 
 
 or platform five or six feet long, made of thin plank, from which the grain 
 was raked by a man walking behind and to the right of the machine. In 
 contrast to Hussey’s reaper, the grain was raked from the side of the platform, 
 thus avoiding the necessity of removing the grain before the next round of 
 the machine. 17 
 
 Up to 1840, the reaper had hardly succeeded in establishing itself with the 
 farmer as a practical machine. Grain was still reaped with the cradle. McCor¬ 
 mick had not as yet sold a single machine. Hussey had begun the manufacture 
 of his reaper at Baltimore only two years previously. Several public trials 
 had been held, but as yet comparatively few reapers were in use, and those 
 mostly in the East. The early machines were roughly built and had a heavy 
 side draught. Often the horses had to be driven at a trot before the machine 
 would cut. Where the grain was lodged they failed to cut and many com¬ 
 plaints were also made of breaking parts. But in 1845 the Hussey and 
 McCormick machines were coming into use in the East. It was said in Vir¬ 
 ginia that probably not less than $15,000 was spent for reapers during the 
 summer of 1846. 18 From New Castle County, Delaware, during the same 
 year, it was reported that the seed sown by Sawdon & Pennock’s drill would 
 be generally reaped by Hussey’s and McCormick’s reaping-machines. 19 The 
 editor of the Cultivator writes 20 in 1848, “ They [reapers'] will, undoubtedly, 
 be still further simplified and improved, and we confidently anticipate their 
 being brought into extensive use on smooth lands, in the course of a few years.” 
 The following year it was reported that, “ labor-saving implements are be¬ 
 ginning to be used pretty generally.” Among those mentioned with high ap¬ 
 proval was Hussey’s reaper. 21 
 
 IMPROVEMENTS IN THE REAPER. 
 
 Improvements, however, were constantly being made, and new machines 
 were coming into the market. The Hussey machine was improved in 1847. 
 The McCormick patents of 1845 and i8 47 (see fig. 43 ) covered many impor¬ 
 tant improvements in that machine, including an improvement in the cutting 
 apparatus and the addition of a raker’s seat. It was after the adoption of 
 these improvements that McCormick’s reaper began to come into successful 
 use. 22 In 1844 he sold 50 machines, in the 2 years following 240 were sold. 
 It is said that McCormick then took a trip through the West, where he saw 
 the broad prairies and wheat fields of Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Missouri. 
 It was here, he decided, that the reaper was needed. In 1847 he left the East 
 and built his factory in Chicago. By 1851 he was making 1,000 machines 
 a year. 
 
 17 Miller, Evolution of Reaping Machines (U. S. Dept, of Agric., Office of Experiment 
 Stations, Bull. 103), p. 24. 
 
 18 American Farmer, new series, II (1846), p. 79. 
 
 19 Ibid., 84. 
 
 20 Cultivator, new series, V (1848), p. 330. 
 
 21 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Reports, Agriculture, 1849, p. 107. 
 
 23 Greeno, Obed Hussey, p. 97. 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 289 
 
 Fig. 43.—McCormick’s reaping machine (1848). 
 
 ^ ^5 the ., pa . te , nt f °£ 1845 t0 184 7 the McCormick reaping machine was much improved 
 and after that date it came rapidly into use. With the McCormick machine the grain 
 was raked from the side of the platform, thus avoiding the necessity of binding before 
 the succeeding round of the machine. With Hussey’s or McCormick’s reaper two men 
 could reap ten acres per day. 
 
 Fig. 44.—Manny’s reaper and mower (as a reaper). 
 
 The majority of the reapers of this period were combined machines used both as 
 reapers and as mowers. At the Geneva trial in 1852 the Manny machine in competition 
 with eleven other machines won the first premium as a mower and the second premium 
 as a reaper. 
 
 20 
 
290 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Before 1846-47 there were but few reapers in the West, but the rise in 
 price of wheat which occurred about that date, gave new incentive to obtain 
 them. Moreover, they had been much improved and were now manufactured 
 
 in the West. 
 
 USE OF REAPERS IN THE WEST, 1850 . 
 
 The rapid introduction of reapers in the West about 1850 is shown by the 
 following typical reports from wheat-growing counties in Ohio, Michigan 
 
 and Indiana: 23 
 
 “ The reaping machine has been introduced with success. 
 
 “ Reapers are in use, and much approved of. . 
 
 “ Hussey’s and McCormick’s reapers have been introduced the past season, an give 
 
 Sa ‘‘i Th^reaping machine is coming into use here, giving general satisfaction where used.” 
 “McCormick’s reaper has been used by some of our farmers during the last har- 
 
 “The drill, the horse-reaper, and mower are not yet introduced; too many stumps in 
 
 the way yet.” 
 
 In Walworth County, Wisconsin, the cradle, the reaping machine, and the 
 harvester or heading machine were reported in common use in 1851. 24 The 
 Prairie Farmer in 1852 estimated that “ probably not less than 3,500 new 
 reaping machines were put in use in the Northwest the past season- equal 
 to the labor of 17,500 men.” 25 The McCormick and Hussey machines, as 
 used in 1851, required a crew of 4 horses and 2 men, one to drive and the 
 other to rake the wheat from the platform. From 6 to 8 men were needed 
 to bind the grain after the reaper. In good grain, when well driven, these 
 
 machines were said to cut from 10 to 12 acres per day. 
 
 Many new types of reapers appeared on the market after 1850. Fifteen 
 patents for reaping machines were issued from the Patent Office in the years 
 1850 and 1851. Said the Prairie Farmer in 1850: 
 
 “ The only question now is that of obtaining the best implement. Harvesting 
 
 machines, of one sort or another, are springing up in almost every country, .... 
 
 A list was added of 16 reapers which were made and used in Illinois. 26 A 
 correspondent from Illinois in 1850 writes : 27 
 
 “I would say these machines are worked by horses, sometimes two being used, but 
 more generally four. Some of the machines require the horse to go by the side of the 
 standing grain, while the machine works on one side. The cutting apparatus of others 
 is directly in front of the horses. Some drop the grain directly behind, which must be 
 bound before the machine comes round again, while others drop it at one side, and 
 the whole field may be cut before any of it is removed. Some require a man to rake 
 the grain from them; others are constructed for self-raking, and one has been brought 
 into the field the past season that does its own binding.” 
 
 23 Ohio State Board of Agric. 3d Annual Report (1848), p. 41; 4th Annual Report 
 
 (1849), pp. 88, 131; U. S. Patent Office, Annual Reports, 1851, Agriculture, 434i 
 
 1852, p. 274. 
 
 24 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Reports, 1851, Agriculture, 460. 
 
 25 Cultivator, new series, IX (1852), p. 31. 
 
 26 Prairie Farmer, X (1850), p. 30. 
 
 27 Cultivator, new series, VIII (1851), p. 41. 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 291 
 
 HEADERS AND SELF-RAKERS. 
 
 Aside from the reapers of the Hussey and McCormick type, headers at¬ 
 tracted considerable attention in the prairie region during the latter years of 
 the forties and the early fifties. Notable among these was the machine in¬ 
 vented in 1844 by George Esterly, of Heart Prairie, Wisconsin (fig. 45). 
 But in competition with reapers, the headers failed to gain a place in the 
 prairie region, owing to their relatively high cost and to imperfect workman- 
 
 Fig. 45.—Esterly’s header. 
 
 Fig. 46. —The New York self-raking reaper. 
 
 ship of their complicated machinery. It was found, also, that the heads of 
 grain, if not dry when cut, would shrivel and mold in the stack. This was 
 probably the principal reason for the rejection of headers. They have since 
 proved successful in dry regions where the grain can be allowed to cure 
 properly before it is cut. By 1850 the self-rake reaper began to come into use, 
 and thus the work of another man in the harvesting of wheat was done by 
 machinery. (See fig. 46.) 
 
292 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 GENEVA TRIALS, 1852 , SHOW DEFECTS OF REAPERS 
 
 AND MOWERS. 
 
 It was difficult to determine which was the best machine. In addition to the 
 local trials held annually at agricultural fairs to test the relative merits of the 
 several machines, there were State, national, and even international competi¬ 
 tions. At a trial held by the New York State Agricultural Society at Geneva 
 in 1852, 9 machines competed as reapers and 7 as mowers. Only one or two 
 of the reapers did fair work. Nearly all left the stubble very uneven. Frequent 
 delays resulted from the breaking of parts or the clogging of the cutter-bar. 
 The draught in all of them was very heavy, and some of the best of them had 
 a side-draught that was destructive to the team. Yet the judges decided that, 
 in comparison with the hand cradle, they showed a saving of 88} cents per 
 acre. Of the 12 machines exhibited, only 2 had self-rake attachments. The 
 work of the mowing-machines was equally unsatisfactory. Only 2 or 3 were 
 capable of equaling the common scythe in the quality of work performed, and 
 only one completed the trial without clogging. All the machines had heavy 
 side-draught. At the completion of the trial, however, the committee reported 
 that “ the excellence discernible in the best Mowing Machines now exhibited, 
 leaves no doubt as to their utility.” 28 
 
 VICTORIES OF AMERICAN REAPER AND THRESHER AT 
 
 PARIS, 1855 . 
 
 A year before the Geneva trial, an American reaping machine had achieved 
 international fame by winning the medal in a contest at the industrial exhibi¬ 
 tion in London by cutting a strip of wheat 74 yards! in length in 70 seconds. 29 
 At the International Exposition at Paris in 1855, the American machines 
 were again brought into competition with the world. Three machines were 
 
 Table 35.“ 
 
 
 Wheat threshed in 
 one hour. 
 
 Flails . 
 
 liter's. 
 
 36 
 
 150 
 
 250 
 
 410 
 
 740 
 
 bus. 
 
 •83 
 
 3-45 
 
 5-75 
 
 9-43 
 
 17.02 
 
 French machine . 
 
 French machine . 
 
 English machine . 
 
 Pitt’s American machine. 
 
 a U. S. Commissioner of Agriculture, Annual Report (1872), p. 290. 
 (A liter equals 0.023 bus.) 
 
 entered for the first trial, one American, one English and a third from Al¬ 
 giers—all self-raking machines. The American machine completed its work 
 in 22 minutes, the English in 66, and the Algerian in 71. At a later trial on 
 the same field, three other machines were entered of American, English, and 
 French manufacture. The American machine did its work in 22 minutes, 
 while the other two failed. At the same exposition an American threshing 
 
 28 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, X (1852), p. 108. 
 
 29 Ibid., IX (1851), Appendix, 94. 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 293 
 
 machine won the victory over several competing machines. To determine the 
 comparative rapidity and economy of threshing by hand and by machine, 6 
 men were set to work with flails, with the results shown in table 35. These 
 repeated triumphs attracted wide attention to the improvements in agricul¬ 
 tural machinery in America. 
 
 During the early fifties the reaper was gradually supplanting the cradle in 
 the wheat fields of the country, but as yet the acreage in grain in the Western 
 States was largely limited to the capacity of the cradle. As shown by the 
 trial at Geneva, the reaper was still imperfect and rather uncertain. Moreover, 
 in a large part of the West there was little incentive to produce large amounts 
 of wheat on account of the lack of markets and low prices. Rising prices of 
 wheat caused a “ boom ” in agriculture from 1854 to 1857 and caused almost 
 universal demand for reapers in the wheat-growing regions. Wheat in New 
 York sold at $1.06 in October 1852, at $1.73 in October 1854, and at $1.80 
 in the same month in 1855. (See fig. 66, p. 313.) With the rapid extension 
 of railroads these increased prices were quickly reflected in the Western 
 States. When the wheat from an acre of land would sell for more than the 
 price of the land, it was considered a safe investment to sow more land in 
 wheat and buy a reaper. High prices, the California migration, and extensive 
 internal improvements were causing a pronounced shortage of labor just at 
 the time when it was most wanted in the wheat fields. Reapers were intro¬ 
 duced as fast as they could be manufactured. 
 
 SYRACUSE TRIALS, 1857 , SHOW STRIKING IMPROVEMENTS 
 
 IN REAPERS. 
 
 In 1857, five years after the Geneva trial, the United States Agricultural 
 Society instituted a national trial at Syracuse, New York. More than 40 
 mowers and reapers entered and were brought to test on the field. It was 
 soon apparent that striking improvements had been made since the meeting 
 at Geneva. The draught had been considerably lessened in all the machines 
 and the cutting apparatus had been much improved and the construction was 
 more substantial. The best machine performed as perfectly at the rate of 
 1 mile an hour as at 3 or 4 miles, the rate formerly necessary. On the whole, 
 the reaper had become a reliable machine. During the late fifties, wire-binder 
 attachments for reapers began to appear on the market, but they were generally 
 unsatisfactory and few were in use before i860. The Marsh Brothers built 
 their first harvester in 1858, but it was not until 1864 that it was successfully 
 placed on the market. 
 
 SAVING IN LABOR EFFECTED BY REAPERS. 
 
 In i860 it was said that the reaper had supplanted the cradle in the wheat¬ 
 growing regions, although the latter was still widely used. Perhaps one-half 
 of the machines in use in i860 were self-raking. The machines employing 
 the hand rake were simpler and cheaper and therefore still preferred by 
 many. In a comparison of the reaper and cradle at the Geneva trial, it was 
 asserted by the committee in charge that the cradling and binding of a field 
 of 15 acres of wheat in one day would require 14 dr more men. The reaper, 
 
294 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 on the other hand, if it did good work, would require “ two men to control it 
 and needs seven, or at most eight men to rake and bind the grain and shock 
 the whole in the same day,” a total of 9 men to do the work in one day. Fifteen 
 acres was a large area for an early reaper to cut in one day, but at that rate 
 the saving of labor in harvesting wheat by the use of the reaper would have 
 been 5 men out of 14. 30 In addition, the reapers saved grain; by enabling 
 the farmer to harvest his wheat within a short time after the grain ripened 
 much loss from shattering was prevented. 
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF MOWING MACHINES. 
 
 The early mowers and reapers were usually made interchangeable. By re¬ 
 moving the platform at the rear of the cutter-bar, the reaper could be trans¬ 
 formed into a mower. Hussey and McCormick offered their reapers as 
 mowing machines, and Ketchum, Emery, Manny, Brown, Mabie, and others 
 
 Fig. 47.—Ketchum’s mowing machine (1845). 
 
 The Ketchum mower, first patented in 1844 and again in 1846 and 1847, was the first 
 successful machine designed solely for mowing and not combined with the reaper. 
 
 had mowing machines on the market. Of the 7 machines on trial as mowers 
 at Geneva, New York, in 1852, all but 2 were also classed as reapers. Manny s 
 machine (patented in 1831) and Hussey's (patented in 1833) possessed many 
 of the essential features of the modern mower; but the first successful ma¬ 
 chine designed only as a mower was that of W. F. Ketchum, patented in 
 1844 and again in 1847 (%• 47 )- Another early mowing machine, widely 
 used after 1850, was that of Ebenezer Danford. At the Syracuse trial in 1857, 
 15 mowing machines were entered, 9 reapers, and 14 combined mowing and 
 reaping machines. 31 At a trial held under the auspices of the Ohio State 
 Board of Agriculture in the same year 12 combined reapers and mowers, 2 
 reapers, and 2 mowers were entered. 32 
 
 30 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, X (1852), p. 116. 
 
 31 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. xxi. 
 
 32 Ohio State Board of Agric'., 12th Annual Report (1857), p. 42. 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 295 
 
 DEFECTS OF EARLY MOWERS. 
 
 Aside from the many difficulties to be overcome in the early reapers, there 
 was the additional requirement in the case of the mowing machine of cutting 
 regularly and close to the ground. With the early machine with its single 
 drive-wheel and rigid cutter-bar this was almost impossible, except on a level 
 surface. Another objection to this type of mower was that the driver had 
 to leave his seat at every corner to avoid tearing up the sod. 33 The knives 
 also were apt to clog in fine grass. 
 
 At the trial of reapers and mowers held by the New York Society at 
 Geneva in 1852, “seven machines competed as mowers. Only two or three 
 
 Fig. 48.—The Wood mower (1859). 
 
 It was not until the late fifties that the modern two-wheel machine with flexible 
 cutter bar made its appearance. With its advent the problem of a mower had been 
 fairly well solved. 
 
 .... were capable of equaling the common scythe in the quality of work 
 they did,” all had heavy side-draught, and not one of them “ when brought to 
 a stand in the grass, could start again without backing to get up speed.” 
 “ None of them could turn about readily within a reasonable space,” nor 
 without danger of tearing up the sward. Only the Manning, patented in 1831, 
 and the Ketchum appeared to be capable of doing work that was at all satis¬ 
 factory. 34 The patents of Cyrenus Wheeler in 1856 marked the beginning of 
 the modern two-wheeled mower with a flexible cutter-bar, a machine entirely 
 distinct from the reaper. The transition to the two-wheeled machines was, 
 
 33 Country Gentleman, V (1855), p. 201. 
 
 34 U. S. Commissioner of Agriculture, Annual Report, 1872, p. 287. 
 
296 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 however, by no means abrupt. The single-wheeled mowers gained some of 
 the advantages of the two-wheeled type by the addition of a small wheel at 
 the inner end of the cutter bar, which allowed the operator to raise and lower 
 it at will. 35 At the Syracuse trial in 1857 was evident that marked improve¬ 
 ment had been made in mowers as well as in reapers. “ Most of the machines 
 could now cut fine and thick grass without clogging, .... but of the 
 nineteen that competed as mowers, only three could start in fine grass without 
 
 backing.” With the appearance of the Buckeye (1856) and the 
 
 Wood (1859) (fig. 48), this important farm machine attained a thoroughly 
 practical form. 36 
 
 THE SAVING OF LABOR EFFECTED BY MOWING MACHINES. 
 
 Contrasting the mowing machine with the man with the scythe, John 
 Johnson wrote to the Country Gentleman in 1858: 37 
 
 “ In the first place, in this section of the country, for several years past, no good 
 mowers could be hired for less than $1.50 per day and board, and I never saw five 
 mowers together that would average over one acre each, daily, and seldom that where the 
 acre would yield two tons of dry hay, and if cut as close and even as the machines, not 
 near that. For years before we had mowing machines, I often let my mowing by the 
 acre, and paid from $1.25 to $1.50, beside board. Now I could get any quantity I ever 
 had, or ever will have to cut, done for 62% cents per acre by horses, and they will cut 
 ten acres per day. The difference of board of ten men in place of one man and one 
 pair of horses, is no small item. But we can cut our grass at much less expense with 
 our own machines and horses, than to hire it done at 62 } cents per acre, as any smart boy, 
 or lazy farmer, or old man, can drive the horses, and that is all he has got to do; and 
 farmer’s horses would generally be idle when he is toiling at cutting down his grass.” 
 
 THE HORSE-RAKE. 
 
 For raking hay the wooden horse-rake, which had been introduced about 
 1820, 38 had come into common use and was fast superseding the old hand- 
 rake. A Connecticut writer reported in 1844 that “ the horse rake has recently 
 been introduced among us with good results, enabling one man with a horse 
 to do the work of five or six with small rakes.” 39 
 
 The “common horse rake” (fig. 24, p. 213) as constructed in 1840 was 
 a simple affair. It consisted of 15 to 18 wooden teeth projecting from both 
 sides of a head-piece. Ropes were attached to this head-piece and the horse 
 was hitched to these ropes. In the center were two handles by which the rake 
 was guided. In use, the teeth ran along flat upon the ground, passing under 
 and collecting the hay. When full, the handles were thrown forward, the 
 rake was emptied, and lifted over the winrow for another load. The “ revolv¬ 
 ing wooden horse rake ” (fig. 25, p. 214) was, however, in more general use. 
 With this the only labor in unloading each rakeful of hay was to lift the 
 handles slightly, causing the teeth to make a semi-revolution and drop the load 
 without stopping. It was said that from 2 to 3 acres of hay an hour could 
 be raked with this machine. 40 
 
 35 Country Gentleman, V (1855), p. 201. 
 
 36 U. S. Commissioner of Agriculture, Annual Report, 1872, p. 288. 
 
 37 Country Gentleman, XI (1858), p. 193. 
 
 38 American Farmer, II (1820-21), p. 312. 
 
 39 Cultivator, new series, I (1844), p. 123. 
 
 40 Cultivator, VII (1840), p. 89; Elliott, Notes Taken in Sixty Years, 45-47. 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 297 
 
 Improvements had been made in the horse-rake between 1840 and 1850, 
 by the substitution of iron or steel wire for wood in the teeth, but the wooden 
 revolving horse rake was still the most widely used. In regions where the 
 fields were rough or small, much hay was still raked by hand. The committee 
 on agricultural implements for Norfolk County, Massachusetts, reported in 
 1849 that, through strong attachment to old usage, not one farmer in ten in the 
 county used the horse rake. 41 Ten years later the sulky wire-tooth rake was 
 rapidly coming into use. (See fig. 49.) 
 
 Fig. 49.—Delano’s horse-rake 
 
 During the fifties the wheel-horse rake with independent teeth began to come into 
 use. One man could operate it. A Massachusetts farmer wrote in 1856, “ We formerly 
 used the revolver with good success, but for the last four or five years we have used 
 Delano’s independent horse rake and like it better than the revolver, as it is easier for 
 the horses, easier for the person who uses it, and rakes better on uneven land.” 
 
 OTHER HAYING MACHINES. 
 
 Clover-hullers, hay-forks, and hay-balers were rapidly coming into use in 
 i860. In regions where clover seed was grown a very profitable business was 
 carried on by persons owning clover-seed harvesters and hullers, who traveled 
 from farm to farm and gathered and cleaned the seed. Some did this on shares, 
 giving the farmer one-third to one-half the crop, but others charged a specified 
 price, usually about $1 per bushel. 42 Mowing-machines, hay-tedders, horse- 
 rakes and hay-caps greatly lightened the labor and diminished the risk of 
 curing hay. 
 
 THRESHING MACHINES. 
 
 Several methods of threshing were in use in 1840. Much of the small grain 
 was still beaten out with a flail, or trodden out by horses or cattle, according 
 
 41 Mass. State Bd. of Agric., Transactions of the Agricultural Societies 1849, P- 295. 
 
 42 Country Gentleman, XVI (i860), p. 173. 
 
298 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 to the custom or convenience of the farmer. Stationary and portable threshing 
 machines of various types were in use in the East, the most popular of which 
 was a simple device consisting of a spiked cylinder inclosed in a case and 
 mounted on a wooden frame. (See fig. 26, p. 215.) Power was usually fur¬ 
 nished by 2 or 4 horses attached to a sweep. (See fig. 50.) The whole machine 
 
 F IG . 50—Warren’s horse power and threshing machine. 
 
 This was another early machine. A Massachusetts farmer wrote describing a machine 
 in common use in Berkshire County in 1839, “It performs its work well and with des¬ 
 patch. It is moved by three horses or by two yoke of oxen. The thrasher is placed on the 
 barn floor and is connected by a belt with the moving power to which the cattle 
 attached in the yard. The whole can be put into a small wagon and easily conveyed from 
 place to place. The cost is $75-00. With proper attendance I was^ told, that 120 bushels 
 of wheat or 300 bushels of oats might be thrashed by it in a day. 
 
 Fig. 51. —Pitt’s thrasher and cleanser. 
 
 In 1834 H. A. Pitt of Winthrop, Maine, conceived the idea oi combining the common 
 “ground hog” thrasher and the fanning mill. In 1840 Pitt moved to Albany and 
 began the introduction of his machine into western New York. From 20 to 25 bushels 
 of wheat per hour was considered a fair speed for a 6 or 8 horse machine. 
 
 could be loaded in a wagon and moved from place to place. The winnowing was 
 done in a fan-mill turned by hand. In 1843 the committee on exhibits at the 
 New York State Fair reported that in their opinion a two or three horse power 
 machine that would thresh from 100 to 150 bushels of grain a day with the 
 farmer’s own team and help was generally desirable. 43 
 
 43 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, III (1843), p. 43- 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 299 
 
 After 1840, Pitt’s thrasher and cleanser (see fig. 51) came into rather gen¬ 
 eral use, and by the middle of the decade machines with which the grain was 
 threshed and separated in one operation were in common use in wheat grow¬ 
 ing sections. 44 The Pitt machine of 1840 weighed about 700 pounds, was 
 about 8 feet by 2 feet 4 inches in size and was driven by 6 or 8 horses on a 
 sweep. It threshed from 20 to 25 bushels of wheat an hour. Four hands were 
 required to tend the machine—one to forward the bundles, one to feed, one 
 to measure and put the grain into bags, and one to pitch away the straw. Since 
 it could easily be moved from place to place, it was used in the field as well 
 as under shelter. By 1843 it was reported that the stationary threshing ma¬ 
 chine had practically gone out of use in western New York. 45 
 
 After 1850 the enlarged Pitt machine run by 6 to 8 horses attached to a 
 sweep and threshing 300 bushels of wheat a day, was commonly used by 
 the large farmers and by men who made it a business to go from farm to 
 farm and thresh by the bushel. The Wheeler horse power and thresher, a 
 smaller machine driven by 2 horses in a treadmill and threshing about 150 
 bushels a day, was widely used by the smaller farmer. By i860 still further 
 improvements had been made and in all wheat-growing regions the wheat was 
 largely threshed and separated by portable machines, the newer and larger 
 types of which screened and cleaned the grain. 
 
 SEED DRILLS. 
 
 In 1840 wheat was sown broadcast by hand and harrowed in with a harrow 
 or steel-tooth cultivator, but by the middle of the decade drills were coming 
 into use, and by 1850 they were rather generally used in the wheat regions of 
 
 Fig. 52.—Henry W. Smith’s seed drill. 
 
 An improved seed drill of the fifties. The teeth of this machine could 
 be raised 12 to 16 inches and thus pass over any small obstruction. 
 
 Pennsylvania and New York. (See fig. 52.) The Pennock drill, patented by 
 Moses Pennock, of Chester County, Pennsylvania, was one of the most satis¬ 
 factory. This machine as used in 1847 sowed 7 rows 9 inches apart and about 
 3 inches deep, the outside drills being 4 feet 6 inches apart. The machine was 
 
 44 N. Y. Agric. Soc. Transactions, III (1843), p. 453; Ohio State Board of Agriculture, 
 
 1 st Annual Report (1846), p. 27. 
 
 45 N. Y. Agric. Soc. Transactions, III (1843), p. 453. 
 
300 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 drawn by two horses and planted from io to 15 acres a day. The drill, how¬ 
 ever, was not as rapidly adopted as the reaper, and until i860 a large part 
 of the small grain in the Mississippi Valley was still sown broadcast by hand. 
 West of the Mississippi the drill was but little used. 
 
 CORN PLANTERS. 
 
 There was a similar improvement in machinery for the planting and cultiva¬ 
 tion of corn. In 1840 corn was dropped by hand and covered with the hoe 
 
 Fig. 53. —Cole’s corn planter. 
 
 The corn crop of 1840 was planted with the hoe, the plow or the ax. 
 Drills of various construction, propelled by man or horse power, were 
 upon the market, but their use was confined principally to sowing turnips, 
 beets and other small seed. 
 
 Fig. 54.—Billing’s improved corn planter and fertilizer. 
 
 During the fifties many new machines, much improved, came into use, 
 some of which dropped both seed and fertilizer and covered and rolled them 
 as fast as a horse could walk. It was claimed (in 1856) that the Billings 
 machine, which had the essentials of a modern planter, was capable of plant¬ 
 ing from 6 to 10 acres per day. 
 
 or the plow. Hand planters and drills, it is true, w^ere used to some extent in 
 the East, but there was as yet no satisfactory machine for the planting of 
 corn. (Figs. 53 to 56.) During the fifties, corn planters came rapidly into 
 
\ 
 
 Fig. 55.—Randall & Jones’ corn planter. 
 
 During the fifties two-row planters which would plant in check rows appeared. Some 
 of these were hand planters, one of the most popular of which was put out by Randall 
 & Jones. With this machine the operator was said to be able to plant about as fast as 
 he could walk. 
 
 Fig. 56.—Brown’s corn-planter. 
 
 Brown’s Corn Planter was a double machine drawn by two horses, planting two rows at 
 a time. It required two men, one to drive and the other to manage the lever by means of 
 which the corn was deposited in the ground at the point desired. “ This machine,” wrote 
 one in 1861, “ will plant 12 to 20 acres in a day and do the work better than a man can 
 plant half an acre a day with a hoe.” 
 
 301 
 
302 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 use, and by i860 a large portion of the com crop of the West was planted 
 by one-row and two-row planters, hill planters, and drill planters. 
 
 CULTIVATORS. 
 
 In 1840, corn in the East was cultivated with a hoe or with an awkward 
 and ineffective one-horse cultivator (fig. 57). The teeth, usually of cast-iron, 
 were fastened to the wooden frame with a short neck, rendering operation 
 difficult on uneven land or where there were stumps and stones (fig. 58). 
 The plow for the cultivation of corn had gone out of use in the East. In the 
 
 During the forties the cultivators were greatly improved. Steel teeth 
 were substituted for iron and the neck was considerably lengthened. By the 
 late forties these implements were supplanting the old method of plowing 
 the corn in Ohio. Farther west they were as yet but little used. 
 
 West the one-horse plow or the shovel plow (fig. 59 ) were the implements 
 commonly used for corn cultivation. Later, about 1850, another shovel had 
 been added and the double-shovel plow (fig. 60) became common. 46 Three- 
 shovel plows and steel-tooth cultivators were coming into use. By i860 
 straddle-row cultivators of various types had appeared. 47 The use of steel in 
 the teeth greatly increased the efficiency of the implement. A great saving 
 in man and horse labor was effected by the improvements in corn cultivators 
 and planters in the years 1840 to i860, and in addition there was a great 
 improvement in the quality of work performed. 
 
 46 Indiana State Board of Agriculture, Annual Report, 1859, p. 64. 
 
 47 Country Gentleman, XVIII (1861), p. 141. 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 303 
 
 Fig. 58. — Wheat cultivator. 
 
 The wheel cultivator was used in the wheat regions of western New York 
 and eastern Ohio. It was considered of great utility in mellowing fallow 
 land for wheat and destroying weeds. The machine had largely gone out of 
 use by the late fifties. 
 
 Fig. 59.—The shovel plow. 
 
304 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 About 1850 the double-shovel plow came into use in the West, sup¬ 
 planting the single shovel. 
 
 During the fifties this was a popular type of harrow in New 
 York and other eastern states. It was said to possess many 
 advantages over the square harrow. The draft was less and it 
 was easily cleared of foul stuff when in operation. In Ohio, 
 where it was just coming into use in 1848, the price was $12. 
 
AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY 
 
 305 
 
 SUMMARY. 
 
 The inventions and improvements which were made in reapers and mowers 
 and in corn cultivators were probably the most significant of all the changes 
 in farm machinery. In the West the amount of wheat which a farmer raised 
 was determined by the acreage that he could effectively harvest. His com 
 crop was limited by the acreage that he could cultivate. Consequently, the 
 introduction of reapers and cultivators was largely responsible for the rapid 
 expansion of the area of production during this period. Once a new machine 
 was invented, there was always the question as to whether it was economically 
 profitable to use it. The reaper came into use in the Eastern States earlier 
 than in the West. Although better adapted to the level fields of the West, its 
 introduction was at first retarded by the low price of wheat and by the lack 
 of capital among the immigrants. But with the rising price of wheat after 
 1845, the opportunities for profitable use of machinery were greater and its 
 introduction progressed rapidly. 
 
 In i860 grain was commonly cut with the reaper, but was still bound by 
 hand. The combined thresher and separator with straw-carrier attachment, 
 driven by horse treadmill, had come into use, and steam threshing outfits also 
 had appeared. 1 he field drill and the mowing machine were widely employed. 
 The wheeled horse-rake had begun to supplant the wooden revolving horse- 
 rake. The steel plows had shown their superiority to those of cast-iron. 
 Two-row corn planters and two-horse corn cultivators were being rapidly 
 developed. The single-shovel plow had given way to the double-shovel plow. 
 Hay and root cutters had been brought to a considerable degree of perfection. 
 Small tools, a factory product, now made of steel, had been vastly improved. 
 The Ohio farmer of i860 who adopted the improved methods of production 
 then available could probably produce his crops with two-thirds the labor 
 required in 1840. 
 
 21 
 
Chapter XXIV.—Transportation and Markets. 
 
 The building of canals and railroads by extending the markets for farm 
 products played a leading part in the expansion and transformation of agri¬ 
 cultural production between 1840 and i860. The access to new markets gave a 
 great stimulus to commercial agriculture and tended to break down the tradi¬ 
 tional habits of self-sufficient farming. Of particular significance was the 
 extension of railroads. In 1840 the era of railroad building had but just begun. 
 Twenty years later the northern States east of the Mississippi River were 
 traversed by a network of railroads, affording new means of communication 
 and new markets to farmers in both East and West. 
 
 THE ERIE CANAL—CANAL BUILDING IN THE WEST 
 
 1830 TO 1850 . 
 
 The early movement for better internal communication and wider markets 
 dating from about 1820 had resulted in the construction of a large number 
 of turnpikes and a few canals. As far as northern agriculture was concerned, 
 the chief accomplishment before 1840 was the Erie Canal, which was designed 
 to give the productive western region a new outlet to the Atlantic Coast. Be¬ 
 fore the period of canal construction, the only outlet for western produce had 
 been by fiatboat or steamer down the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers or overland 
 by road to the Atlantic seaboard. The benefits of the southern market were 
 reflected in the early prosperity of the agricultural regions 1 of the West along 
 the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers and their tributaries. But for the vast terri¬ 
 tory between the Great Lakes and the Ohio River there was as yet no outlet 
 to the East and South. Long before Cleveland, Chicago, and Milwaukee had 
 developed as lake ports, Cincinnati and St. Louis were thriving western 
 shipping-points. 
 
 When the Erie Canal was completed in 1825, giving a water-route from 
 the Atlantic to the Great Lakes, freight rates dropped from $100 a ton to $15 
 or $25. The region of the Great Lakes was now open to settlement. In 1832 
 the completion of the Ohio Canal from Portsmouth on the Ohio River to 
 Cleveland opened the central part of the State and gave Ohio a short route to 
 New York. In 1834 the opening of the water and rail route through Penn¬ 
 sylvania connected Pittsburg with Philadelphia. Eleven years later the Miami 
 Canal connected Cincinnati with the East by way of Toledo and the Erie 
 Canal. The Illinois and Michigan Canal, connecting the Illinois River with 
 Lake Michigan, and the Wabash Canal, connecting the Wabash River with 
 Lake Erie, were both completed before 1851. (Fig. 62.) The Canadian gov¬ 
 ernment built the Welland Canal in 1833, and the locks at Sault St. Marie 
 were finished in 1855, thus removing the last obstacle in the way of naviga¬ 
 tion from the western end of the Great Lakes to the Atlantic seaboard. 1 By 
 
 1 Johnson, et al., Hist, of Domestic and Foreign Commerce of the U. S., I, p. 227. 
 
 306 
 
Du/ut/? 
 
 >c//SO'7 ' 
 
 "fiJbuqye 
 
 ) Cfr/fgh 
 
 \ In^vapcns 
 
 'H 4j£“* 
 
 ! . )i > \ 
 
 SJ/ofJ'S // 5 0 
 
 JopJih^ 
 
 h's 
 
 Pbr¥ 3 x rp/bb < 
 
 • •*«■ ■ «»*.■< 
 
 £,**#4 /jtt/ePoc. 
 
 [JWansa^I 
 
 8 /rminghf- 
 
 Montgomery^ 
 
 cAsooV 
 
 yAugvs 
 
 Houston 
 
 300M1LE.S 
 
 Miami 
 
 Abandoned bsfore 1615 
 In use in 181 1 
 Principal canalized rivers 
 
 /fey /o Termini of 
 Canola and Names of 
 Canalized Rivera. 
 
 1. Portland 
 
 2. Lowell 
 
 3. Boston 
 
 4. Worcester 
 
 5. Providence 
 
 6. Northampton 
 
 7. New Haven 
 
 8. Whitehall 
 
 9. Albany 
 
 10. Kingston 
 
 11. Utica 
 
 12. Lyons Falls 
 
 13. Oswego 
 
 14. Rome 
 
 15. Rochester 
 
 16. Buffalo 
 
 17. Olean 
 
 18. Watkins 
 
 19. Elmira 
 
 20. Binghamton 
 
 21. Honesdale 
 
 22. Mauch Chunk 
 
 23. Easton 
 
 24. Jersey City 
 
 25. Philadelphia 
 
 26. Columbia 
 
 27. Hollidaysburg 
 
 28. Bellefonte 
 
 29. Johnstown 
 
 30. Pittsburg 
 
 31. Erie 
 
 32. Beaver 
 
 33. Akron 
 
 34. Toledo 
 
 35. Columbus 
 
 36. Portsmouth 
 
 37. Athens 
 
 38. Cincinnati 
 
 39. Lawrenceburg 
 
 40. Cambridge City 
 
 41. Evansville 
 
 42. Chicago 
 
 43. Lockport 
 
 44. LaSalle 
 
 45. Green Bay 
 
 46. Rock Island 
 
 47. Cumberland 
 
 48. Washington 
 
 49. Richmond 
 
 50. Buchanan 
 
 51. Savannah 
 
 52. New Orleans 
 
 Canalized Rivers. 
 
 B. W., Black Warrior 
 
 G., Green 
 
 G. K., Great Kanawha 
 
 K. , Kentucky 
 
 L. K. f Little Kanawha 
 Mg., Muskingum 
 Mn., Monongahela 
 
 Fig. 62 .- CANALS IN THE UNITED STATES 
 
 (Adapted from Meyer, History of Transportation in the U. S., Plate 2.) 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
I 
 
 i 
 
 DufoZ/r 
 
 >c//Son JS 
 
 "JpJbuqye S 
 ) Cfrjosgo 
 
 1 S . £ i 
 
 fnc/ianapohs \ 
 
 , %Daf ro 
 
 ', O'ncin**** 
 
 \//Svi^ e 
 
 £55 Ej£ L 
 
 Zz>f-/Z?m/Zh ( 
 
 * -^^A 
 
 Jj'ZZZePoc, 
 
 P^ansaJ 
 
 ^ I 8irrninghf> 
 
 41 pfgcon 
 
 A BAM A V] 
 w^ 42 . 
 
 tfontgorr>eryl 
 
 Jgcks(? n i 
 
 p %9 j • 
 V/c/csburg I 
 
 , cAsonvt 
 
 -JAogvs 
 
 \rahassee 
 
 '\fslaika 
 
 300 M1LE.S 
 
 Mis' 711 
 
 y N ^ 
 
 M I 8|8 0 U B I N "> i rfff‘ u\c £" 
 
 ■ - A-yf/7 TT\--' 
 
 -D?S&> OA 
 
 
 sZon 
 
 Termini of Railroads, 
 
 1840. 
 
 1. Orono 
 
 2. Exeter 
 
 3. Nashua 
 
 4. New Bedford 
 
 5. Stonington 
 
 6. Norwich 
 
 7. Springfield 
 
 8. Hartford 
 
 9. Bridgeport 
 
 10. New Milford 
 
 11. State Line 
 
 12. Troy 
 
 13. Hudson 
 
 14. Saratoga Springs 
 
 15. Schenectady 
 
 16. Ithaca 
 
 17. Owego 
 
 18. Rochester 
 
 19. Batavia 
 
 20. Niagara Falls and 
 
 Lewiston 
 
 21. Lockport 
 
 22. Corning 
 
 23. Blossburg 
 
 24. Carbondale 
 
 25. Honesdale 
 
 26. Morristown 
 
 27. Hicksville 
 
 28. Plainfield 
 
 29. South Amboy 
 
 30. Reading 
 
 31. Ralston 
 
 32. Williamsport 
 
 33. Hagerstown 
 
 34. Winchester 
 
 35. Fredericksburg 
 
 36. Weldon 
 
 37. Orangeburg 
 
 38. Madison 
 
 39. Tennille 
 
 40. Macon 
 
 41. Barnesville 
 
 42. Franklin 
 
 43. Tuscumbia 
 
 44. Decatur 
 
 45. Port Hudson 
 
 46. Clinton 
 
 47. Frankfort 
 48 Lexington 
 
 49. Madison 
 
 50. Vernon 
 
 51. Meredosia 
 
 52. Jacksonville 
 
 53. Carey 
 
 54. Sandusky 
 
 55. Monroe 
 
 56. Adrian 
 
 57. Ann Arbor 
 
 58. Birmingham 
 
 59. Johnstown 
 
 60. Hollidaysburg 
 
 61. Gordonsville 
 
 ? ig. 63 .-RAILROADS OF THE UNITED STATES IN OPERATION IN 1840 
 
 (Adapted from Meyer, History of Transportation in the V. S., Plate 3.) 
 
Du/uhh 
 
 M/nne&pcJi 
 
 rf,/wqtjke& 
 
 Mon | j 
 
 tiJ6uqt{ e !jv 
 
 j Cfyc&go 
 
 
 xfO'nc/nne’ 
 
 )~' v ' 5 liL 5 C 
 
 % rrc>nf<for+ 
 
 ■f/otfts 
 
 fash vf/ls 
 
 \hvrtSVn/hh 
 * •**- 
 
 v^Or/eans 
 
 hfoushon 
 
 300 MILES 
 
 r amp& 
 
 ,y L Mis ' 01 
 
 JihJoseph 
 
 oefa _^ . 
 
 • |C / fahsa/sJ(ry 
 
 j, ! Jetfersc 
 
 % I MISSOURI 
 
 Jop/,\ 5 P nngf'e/d_ 
 
 lo v e _- 
 
 ! & rrn/ 2&yf i R 
 
 4-----^ IaLABA'^ \ 6 E OK^V' U 
 
 • Shheveporr\ Jacfap n • *r > $s\0 nn * f 
 
 1 - Ssj&i j 
 
 li * ri jrx-7 —"A _ s^X cAsonv,//e 
 
 x A s ; - tew \ jfoAss^' i\ W**** 
 
 'ig. 64.-RAILROADS OF THE UNITED STATES IN OPERATION IN 1850 
 
 (Adapted from Meyer, History of Transportation in the U. S., Plate-4.) 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 # 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
65 ° 
 
 Du'tutA 
 
 V fihnne<spc/{ 
 
 OsAJ<os> 
 
 S/ou+ C/Vy 
 
 Fort dpi 
 ^ 1 O W| 
 
 \ Des Ffb/~ 
 
 girmtn. 
 
 , c te° nv ' 
 
 'j-Aug aS 
 
 300 MILES 
 
 Mi&rf 1 
 
 j M 1 s's 0 U R j 
 
 jZ/’\ ^pnogf ^ 
 i_ 
 
 AN SAsi 
 
 : \b Hi M 
 
 : x as 
 
 Fig. 65.- RAILROADS OF THE UNITED STATES IN OPERATION IN 1860 
 
 (Adapted from Meyer, History of Transportation-in the U. S., Plate 5.) 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TRANSPORTATION AND MARKETS 307 
 
 1840 freight began to move east and west, as well as north and south, accord¬ 
 ing to the condition of the market. 
 
 BEGINNING OF GRAIN TRADE ON THE LAKES. 
 
 As late as 1835, Ohio was the only grain-exporting territory on the Great 
 Lakes. A year later the first shipment of grain was made from Lake Michi¬ 
 gan, “ when the brig John H. Kenzie took on board at Grand Haven, Michi¬ 
 gan, 3,000 bushels of wheat for the port of Buffalo.” The first shipment of 
 grain from the west shore of Lake Michigan consisted of 39 bags sent from 
 Chicago in 1838. In 1845, I 33 > 00 ° bushels were shipped from Chicago; in 
 1848, after the opening of the Illinois Canal, 1,066,000 bushels were shipped. 
 It was not until 1841 that the movement of grain from Wisconsin began with 
 the shipment of about 4,000 bushels of wheat from Milwaukee. 2 
 
 RAILROAD BUILDING AND ITS RESULTS. 
 
 During the forties, steamboats, turnpikes, and canals furnished transporta¬ 
 tion for western produce, but these means were entirely inadequate. (Fig. 
 63.) The railroads played the chief part in the extension of markets and the 
 development of new territory during the period from 1840 to i860. There 
 were only a little more than 2,000 miles of railroad in the United States in 
 1840, three-fourths of which lay north of Virginia and east of Ohio. By 1850 
 the mileage had increased to more than 7,000, over one-half of which was in 
 the northeastern States and less than 800 miles in the northwestern. 3 Boston 
 was connected with the Erie Canal at Albany by railroad in 1841. The first 
 railroad in Ohio, about 30 miles in length, extending from Toledo northwest¬ 
 ward into Michigan was finished in 1836. 4 The decade 1850 to i860 wit¬ 
 nessed rapid railroad extension and improvement. The situation in 1851 is 
 thus described by McMaster: 5 
 
 “ During 1851 more than twenty-one hundred miles of railroad were built and a new 
 era opened. The day of short roads joining the termini of steamboat navigation on 
 neighboring rivers, or some important nearby cities or towns was gone, and the day 
 of the trunk line was dawning.” 
 
 In 1850 the New York Central made a through connection with the Great 
 Lakes. The Pennsylvania Railroad was opened to Pittsburg in 1852; in the 
 following year the Baltimore and Ohio reached Wheeling. Chicago was con¬ 
 nected with New York by railroad in 1852, 6 and in 1854 the Mississippi was 
 reached. 7 By i860 railroads had extended beyond the Mississippi into eastern 
 Iowa and had reached the western frontier of agricultural production. 
 
 In the five states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin there 
 were in i860 approximately 9,500 miles of railroad. (Fig. 65.) The total 
 for the entire country was 30,626 miles. Of the exports from Chicago in 
 1858, $21,000,000 worth was sent by lake vessels, $1,000,000 worth by canal, 
 
 2 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. cxlvi. 
 
 3 Am. Statistical Annual (1854-55), p. 146. 
 
 4 Niles Register, LI (1836), p. 272. 
 
 5 History of the People of the United States, VIII, 89. 
 
 0 Meyer, History of Transportation in the United States, 511. 
 
 'Ibid., 512, 513. 
 
308 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 and $60,000,000 worth by railroad. 8 20 per cent of the flour, 70 per cent 
 of the packing-house products, and all of the livestock were shipped by rail, 
 while nearly all the wheat went by way of the lakes. Of the livestock received 
 at Chicago in that year all the hogs came by railroad; of the 140,000 cattle 
 received, 9 animals came by way of the lake, 21,000 were driven in, and the 
 remainder came by railroad. 9 It was estimated in 1862 that two-thirds of the 
 freight to and from the West was moved by railroads. 10 
 
 MARKETS. 
 
 The markets of this period were mainly domestic. The development of 
 trade and manufacturing in the East and the expansion of specialized agricul¬ 
 ture, cotton, sugar, and rice planting, in the South created large markets in 
 those regions for the surplus produce of the North. The California migration 
 after 1849 opened an important market for the upper Mississippi region. In 
 Maine, Michigan, and Wisconsin the lumber camps furnished a considerable 
 market, while in the West the demands of newly arrived immigrants created a 
 local market. The Eastern States were consuming western wheat, corn, pork, 
 and beef before 1840. The industrial communities provided a home market 
 also for food products of the eastern farmer. In the newly-settled West the 
 question of finding an outlet for the surplus products was uppermost in 1840. 
 There were thus far two main outlets for this surplus, one down the Mississ¬ 
 ippi River, the other through the Erie Canal to the East. 
 
 COMPETITION OF SOUTHERN AND EASTERN MARKETS 
 
 FOR WESTERN PRODUCE. 
 
 Down the Mississippi River by flatboat or steamer was the main outlet for 
 the surplus products of the early settlers. In 1840, Cincinnati, Louisville, 
 Pittsburg, and St. Louis were the important commercial centers of the West. 
 Cincinnati was widely known, both at home and abroad, as the pork-packing 
 center of America. It was not until after 1850 that the number of hogs 
 packed at Chicago exceeded the number packed at Alton, Beardstown, Peoria, 
 and other Illinois towns for the southern market. 11 
 
 While the Erie Canal carried each year an increasing volume of surplus 
 food products to the Atlantic seaboard from the West, the shipments of flour, 
 grain, and provisions down the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers also steadily 
 increased. In 1840 the products of the Ohio Valley up as far as Wheeling 
 went south. The rivalry of the eastern canals and waterways was not felt 
 at Cincinnati until 1850, when the railroads began to compete for the traffic in 
 flour and provisions. In the three years ending August 31, 1852, Cincinnati 
 shipped down the river, 1,091,000 barrels of flour, while to the North and East 
 were sent 37,600 barrels. Of the latter, only 10,400 barrels went by canal and 
 railroads. 12 In the three years ending August 31, i860, there were shipped 
 
 8 Chicago Board of Trade, Annual Report (1858), p. 6. 
 
 9 Ibid., 8, 26. 
 
 10 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. clxvi. 
 
 11 Alton (III.) Telegraph (1849), p. 2. 
 
 12 Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce, Annual Report (1852), p. 13. 
 
TRANSPORTATION AND MARKETS 
 
 309 
 
 down the river 300,000 barrels of flour, while to the North and East were sent 
 1,376,000 barrels, and of these 890,000 barrels went by canal and railway. 13 
 
 By x $55 value of the total exports from Cincinnati to the East was 
 nearly equal to the value of its exports to the South, 14 and in i860 practically 
 all the wheat shipped from Cincinnati was sent north and east. 16 The shift 
 in the pork and bacon trade of Cincinnati was similar to that in flour. In the 
 three years ending Augpst 31, 1852, there were shipped down the river in 
 barrels and hogsheads, 55*»ooo barrels of pork and bacon; for the three years 
 ending August 31, i860, these shipments amounted to only 234,000 barrels. 16 
 In 1850 St. Louis outranked Cincinnati as a southern shipping-point. An 
 increasing portion of the supplies going south came from points on the Mis¬ 
 souri River. The shipments from Cincinnati went north and east. 17 
 
 Of the products sent down the Mississippi River a considerable portion was 
 consumed on the cotton and sugar plantations. From 1830 to i860 the 
 cultivation of cotton had proven so profitable in the South that the planters 
 of the Cotton Belt were putting all their land, into cotton culture and securing 
 from the North much of the livestock, feed, and food needed on the plantation. 
 In 1845 ^ was estimated that in the preceding 20 years southern planters 
 had expended $900,000,000 in the North for horses, mules, cattle, sheep, 
 hogs, hay, and farm equipment. 18 The grain, flour, packing house products, 
 and dairy products were sent south on the river, but the trade in livestock 
 was overland. Each year large droves of horses, mules, cattle, and hogs were 
 driven south from the border States. The old “ cowpens ” of the South, 
 which had begun to fall into decay and disuse after the Revolution, acquired 
 a new lease of life. They were used as stock-stands for the accommodation 
 over night of hog-drivers from the North, who came through each season 
 with thousands of animals. It was said in 1841 that 10,000 horses and mules 
 were driven from the Middle Atlantic and Western States every year into the 
 South, to stock the plantations there. 19 
 
 WESTERN PRODUCTS EXPORTED FROM SOUTHERN PORTS. 
 
 Not all the products sent down the Mississippi River during this period, 
 however, were consigned for consumption in the Southern States; a consider¬ 
 able portion was exported to coastwise or foreign ports. During the three 
 years 1843 to 1845, 1,874,000 barrels of flour were received at New Orleans, 
 and of this number about 721,000 barrels were for southern consumption. 
 Shipments to foreign countries, Cuba included, were 505,000 barrels. The 
 remainder, 648,000 barrels, went to coastwise ports; 469,000 barrels went to 
 New York and Boston alone. During the same years 847,000 barrels of pork 
 and 58,000 casks of bacon were sent to coastwise or foreign ports from New 
 
 13 Ibid., (i860), p. 44. 
 
 Ibid., (1856), pp. 25, 29, Johnson, et al., History of Domestic and Foreign Commerce 
 of the United States, I, 245; Internal Commerce of the United States, U. S. Bureau 
 of Statistics (1882), App. 7, p. 83. 
 
 15 Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce, Annual Report (i860), p. 44. 
 
 ™ Ibid., (1852), p. 13; (i860), p. 44. 
 
 17 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. clvii. 
 
 18 Ingle, Southern Sidelights, 55 et seq. 
 
 19 Buckingham, Slave States, II, 203. 
 
310 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Orleans. 20 After 1850 the shipment of packing-house products from New 
 Orleans decreased. Flour shipments continued much as during the preceding 
 decade, the supply being drawn largely from Missouri River points. Consider¬ 
 ing the entire domestic grain trade, however, it may be said that by i860 the 
 Mississippi River as an outlet to the ocean for the trade of the West was 
 becoming relatively less important. Canals and railroads were now carrying the 
 surplus to the East. 
 
 Table 36 — Shipments from Nezv Orleans of certain farm products for the year ending 
 
 August 31, 18593 
 
 Destination. 
 
 Commodities. 
 
 Flour. 
 
 Pork. 
 
 Bacon. 
 
 Lard. 
 
 Beef. 
 
 Corn. 
 
 New York . 
 
 Boston . 
 
 bbU. 
 
 71,286 
 
 247,516 
 
 3 062 
 
 bbls. 
 
 10,231 
 
 35,435 
 
 40 
 
 casks. 
 
 1,820 
 
 2,122 
 
 kegs. 
 
 117,479 
 
 74,581 
 
 bbls. 
 
 5,713 
 
 6,357 
 
 40 
 
 sacks. 
 
 I2,8l9 
 
 7,415 
 
 rnnaaeipnia . 
 
 300 
 
 25,147 
 
 
 
 Other coast ports. 
 
 Total coastwise shipments 
 
 Great Britain . 
 
 Cuba . 
 
 Other foreign ports. 
 
 Total foreign shipments. 
 
 All shipments . 
 
 165,397 
 
 3 B 547 
 
 22,012 
 
 1,720 
 
 106,138 
 
 487,261 
 
 77,253 
 
 29,389 
 
 214,072 
 
 13,830 
 
 126,372 
 
 6,469 
 
 4,052 
 
 107,778 
 
 642 
 
 1,290 
 
 3,679 
 
 2,130 
 
 358 
 
 63.199 
 
 187,190 
 
 34,855 
 
 4,877 
 
 i ,450 
 
 1,656 
 
 1,000 
 
 7,980 
 
 40,231 
 
 118,299 
 
 5 611 
 
 2,488 
 
 285,244 
 
 7,983 
 
 49,211 
 
 605,560 
 
 82,864 
 
 31,877 
 
 499,316 
 
 1 
 
 21,813 
 
 175,583 
 
 a De Bow’s Review, XXVII ( 1859 ), p. 479 . 
 
 GROWTH OF THE GRAIN TRADE OF BUFFALO AND CHICAGO. 
 
 After 1836 the growth of the grain trade to the East via the Great Lakes 
 and the Erie Canal was rapid. The Mississippi River was no longer the 
 sole outlet for the Great Valley. Of the wheat and flour shipped from Ohio in 
 1845, 700,000 barrels were loaded at ports on Lake Erie and 220,000 barrels 
 were sent from Ohio River points. 21 Receipts at Buffalo on the western end of 
 the Erie Canal give a valuable index of the growth of the lake traffic in grain 
 and flour. In 1836, 1,239,000 bushels of grain and flour entered the city from 
 the west; in 1851 the figure was 17,741,000 bushels, and in i860, 37,053,000 
 bushels. 22 “ As early as 1838 the receipts of wheat and flour at Buffalo ex¬ 
 ceeded those at New Orleans.” 23 At first the grain received at Buffalo came 
 from Ohio, but as settlement and the railroads expanded into Michigan, 
 Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Iowa, the sources of the grain-supply moved 
 further west. Chicago shipped 78 bushels of grain in 1838, 1,831,000 bushels 
 in 1850, and 31,109,000 bushels (grain and flour equivalent) in i860. 24 In 
 
 20 De Bou/s Review, II (1846), p. 422. 
 
 21 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1845, p. 367. 
 
 22 Buffalo Board of Trade, Annual Report (1869), p. 20. 
 
 23 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, pp. cxlviii, clvi; Johnson, et al., History of Domestic 
 
 and Foreign Commerce of the United States, I, p. 231. 
 
 24 Chicago Board of Trade, Annual Report (1867), p. 35. 
 
TRANSPORTATION AND MARKETS 
 
 311 
 
 i860 the shipments of grain from all the ports on Lake Michigan amounted 
 to 43,211,000 bushels. 2 ' 1 In 1862 the Chicago hog pack passed the half million 
 mark, and from that date Chicago led Cincinnati as the western packing 
 center. 26 By 1858 the movement of flour and grain to the latter port for ship¬ 
 ment southward had become of relatively small importance. 
 
 After 1850 through traffic to the east over the railroads increased rapidly in 
 volume and another artery of trade leading from the west to the east was 
 opened. By i860 the railroads were carrying practically all of the livestock 
 and two-thirds of the flour traffic to the East, 27 but the total traffic over the 
 four trunk lines was not yet as large as that passing through the Erie Canal. 28 
 One of the advantages of the railroads over the canals as a means of market¬ 
 ing lay in their availability during all the year. Formerly, grain, butter, and 
 wool were sent east only during the season of canal navigation ; livestock could 
 not be driven east during the winter months. After the railroads began to 
 carry freight, a year-round market was available to the western farmer. 
 
 THE EASTERN MARKET FOR WESTERN PRODUCTS. 
 
 By i860 the eastern industrial States provided the leading market for 
 the surplus products of the West. The development of manufacturing and 
 commerce resulted in the growth of cities and an increase in population wholly 
 dependent upon the farmer for food. As wheat and pork became cheaper, the 
 New Englander consumed more, while the eastern farmer produced less. In 
 1840, receipts of flour at Boston amounted to 530,000 barrels and in 1850 to 
 761,000 barrels, 29 an increase of nearly 50 per cent. At the same date, railroads 
 from the West, also, were distributing large quantities of flour in the interior. 
 Somewhat later we find that over one-third of the flour shipped from Albany 
 and Troy over the Western Railroad did not reach Boston. 30 In the twenty 
 years from 1840 to i860 the deficit of New England in wheat increased from 
 8,000,000 to 13,000,000 bushels. The States along the Atlantic coast, which 
 in 1840 produced a little more than enough to supply their own needs, by 
 1859-60 had a deficit of nearly 15,000,000 bushels, an amount greater than 
 that which was exported. The New England States which were producing 
 1 bushel of wheat per capita in 1840 produced only one-third of a bushel in 
 i860. New York and Pennsylvania, which raised 6 bushels per capita in 1840, 
 were producing only 3 bushels in i860, as a result both of decreased production 
 and increase in population. The Western States, on the other hand, were rais¬ 
 ing 7.4 bushels of wheat per capita in 1840 and 13.3 bushels in i860. Of corn, 
 the Western States were producing 33 bushels per capita in 1840 and 45.7 
 bushels in i860. What was true of wheat and corn was likewise true of beef 
 and pork products. Thus there was rapidly developing that close dependence 
 between East and West, whereby the West furnished a market for the capital 
 and manufactured products of the East, while the East provided a growing 
 market for the farm products of the West. 
 
 2rj U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. cl. 
 
 26 Chicago Board of Trade, Annual Report (1862), p. 32. 
 
 27 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. clvii. 
 
 28 Johnson, et al., History of Domestic and Foreign Commerce of the U. S\, I, p. 238. 
 
 29 Boston Board of Trade, 6 th Anunal Report (i860), p. 63. 
 
 80 Ibid., 2d Annual Report (1856), p. 55. 
 
312 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 EXPORT MARKETS. 
 
 Comparatively little was exported except during the middle years of the 
 decade 1850-1860. Hog products, cheese, tallow, and corn showed consider¬ 
 able increases in the amounts exported during the decade 1840-1850. The 
 Irish famine in the late forties greatly tended to encourage the exportation 
 of grain to the United Kingdom. During the next decade, in the years 
 1854 to 1856, the exportation of nearly all foodstuffs rose to the highest 
 points yet reached, 31 owing to the high prices accompanying the Crimean 
 War. The value of the exports of hogs and hog products rose from 
 $4,368,000 in 1851 to $12,771,000 in 1856. 32 
 
 Table 37.— Exports of breadstuffs.* 
 
 Year. 
 
 Value of 
 exports of 
 breadstuff s. 
 
 Year. 
 
 I 
 
 Value of 
 exports of 
 breadstuffs. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Value of 
 exports of 
 breadstuffs. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Value of 
 exports of 
 breadstuffs. 
 
 1840 
 
 1841 
 
 1842 
 
 1843 
 
 1844 
 
 $ 13 , 535,926 
 
 10,254,377 
 
 9,878,176 
 
 5 , 249,600 
 
 8 , 93 L 396 
 
 1845 
 
 1846 
 
 1847 
 
 1848 
 
 1849 
 
 $ 7 , 445,820 
 
 16,625,407 
 
 53,262.437 
 
 22,678,602 
 
 22,895,783 
 
 1850 
 
 1851 
 
 1852 
 
 1853 
 
 1854 
 
 $13,066,509 
 
 14 , 556,236 
 
 17,256,803 
 
 21 , 875,878 
 
 48,383,107 
 
 1855 
 
 1856 
 
 1857 
 
 1858 
 
 1859 
 
 $ 21 , 557,854 
 
 56 619,986 
 55,624,832 
 33,698,490 
 24 , 893,413 
 
 a U. S. Census of i 860 , Agriculture, p. cxli. 
 
 PRICES—EXPLANATION OF WIDE GEOGRAPHIC VARIATIONS. 
 
 A most interesting characteristic of the prices of farm products was the 
 wide variation in the prices prevailing at any time throughout the country 
 (charts, pp. 313-315). In the East, nearness to market made prices rela¬ 
 tively high, while in the West lack of markets and abundance of productive 
 territory made them relatively low. Within the Eastern States themselves 
 there w r as a similar variation in prices, according to location. Northern New 
 Hampshire was relatively farther from the Boston market in 1840 than Wis¬ 
 consin is to-day. With the extension of railroads, however, the markets of the 
 industrial and export centers were made accessible to broader areas of agri¬ 
 cultural production, and the farm price of products in the interior tended to 
 approach the New York price. During the year 1843, the Cincinnati price of 
 hogs averaged $2.04 per hundred, while at New York the average price was 
 $4.33. Wheat during the two years 1847 and 1848 at New York averaged 
 $1.31 per bushel; the Chicago price was $0.70, a difference of $0.61 per bushel. 
 During the two years 1857 and 1858 the New York price averaged $1.32 per 
 bushel, the Chicago price, $0.90, a difference of $0.42 per bushel. 33 Before 
 the era of railroads wheat was frequently sold in the interior counties of 
 the West as low as 37 cents and corn at 10 cents per bushel. 34 Farther 
 
 31 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. cxli. 
 
 82 U. S. Commerce and Navigation, 1851, p. 15; (1856), pp. 16-19. For a discussion 
 
 of foreign and domestic trade of this period, see Johnson et al., History of Domestic 
 and Foreign Commerce of the United States, I, ch. XIV; II, ch. XXIV. 
 
 83 Aldrich Report U. S., 52nd Cong., 2d sess., Senate Report No. 1394 (1893), part 2, 
 
 pp. 27, 28, 60-63. 
 
 34 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. clxviii. 
 
TRANSPORTATION AND MARKETS 
 
 313 
 
 Fig. 66.—Price of wheat, 1840-1859. 
 
 During the early years the price of wheat in Chicago was fairly 
 independent of that in New York. The years 1854, 1855, and 1856, 
 brought relatively high prices to the wheat farmer in both East 
 and West. 
 
314 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 inland, grain was not worth hauling to market. In January 1845, corn was 
 quoted in New York at 48 cents per bushel, in Chicago at 35 cents, at LaFay- 
 ette, Indiana, on the Wabash Canal, with outlet to New Orleans or the Erie 
 
 The year 1845 marked the beginning of a considerable rise in the price of corn. Until 
 about 1850 the price of corn fluctuated more or less independently on the New York 
 and Cincinnati markets. 
 
 Fig. 68.—Price of hogs, 1840-1859. 
 
 The price of hogs rose in 1846 and again after 1850. As with corn, New York and 
 Cincinnati prices were more or less independent until about 1850. 
 
 Canal, as low as 20 cents per bushel. 35 In Shelby County, Indiana, 85 miles 
 from Cincinnati, without water or rail transportation, the cost of hauling by 
 wagon was said to be so heavy as to prohibit the cultivation of corn or wheat 
 beyond the necessity for home consumption or to feed to livestock. 36 With 
 
 35 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1845, P- 384- 
 
 36 Indiana State Board of Agriculture, Annual Report, 1851, p. 180. 
 
TRANSPORTATION AND MARKETS 315 
 
 the extension of railroads and other means of transportation, prices advanced 
 noticeably in regions within the reach of the new facilities. 37 
 
 Considerable fluctuation of prices occurred during the period 1840 to i860. 
 (Figs. 66, 67, 68, 69, 70.) In the early forties there was a depression in 
 prices following the panic of 1837. In the East the low prices had led to con- 
 
 Fig. 69.—Price of Beeves, 1840-1859. 
 
 Fig. 70.—Prices of butter and cheese, 1840-1859. 
 
 During the fifties the price of butter relative to cheese was higher than in the 
 previous decade. 
 
 siderable hardship, especially among wool growers, and in the West it had 
 intensified the difficulty of finding a market. In 1846-47 prices revived con¬ 
 siderably in both East and West, and agriculture entered into a period of 
 unusual prosperity. Later, during the middle years of the fifties, the unusual 
 demand for wheat for export markets brought high prices to the farmer who 
 grew wheat. A period of low prices followed the panic of 1857. 
 
 37 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. clxvii. 
 
Chapter XXV. —Diffusion of Information. 
 
 periodicals. 
 
 The establishment of the American Farmer at Baltimore by Mr. John T. 
 Skinner in 1819 marked the beginning of agricultural journalism in the United 
 States. Under the theory that “ knowledge is power,” the editor stated in 
 his first issue: 1 
 
 “ The great aim and the chief pride of the American Farmer will be to collect informa¬ 
 tion from every source, on every branch of husbandry, thus to enable the reader to 
 study the various systems which experience has proved to be the best, under given 
 circumstances.” 
 
 In 1834, after a period of 15 years, the American Farmer was discontinued. 
 During this period, several other agricultural papers had been established. 
 A notable one was the Cultivator, established in 1834 at Albany by Jesse Buel, 
 under the patronage of the New York Agricultural Society. 2 The Plough Boy 
 (Albany, 1819), The New England Farmer (Boston, 1822), The Genessee 
 Farmer (Rochester, 1831), The Farmer's Cabinet (Philadelphia, 1836), 
 The Western Farmer (Cincinnati, 1839), had all been established in the North 
 before 1840, but some of them had only a brief existence. Upon the death 
 of Jesse Buel in 1839, The Cultivator was purchased by Luther Tucker, who 
 united it with the Genessee Farmer. In 1853 Tucker established The Country 
 Gentleman as a weekly, continuing The Cultivator as a monthly until its 
 merger with The Country Gentleman in 1853. During the decade 1840 to 
 1850, several other papers were established, The Prairie Farmer, which was 
 started at Chicago in 1840, being especially worthy of mention. A number 
 of agricultural papers were established in 1850, and from that time on the 
 development of agricultural journalism was rapid. By i860 at least 40 papers 
 and magazines devoted almost exclusively to agriculture were published in 
 the country. How widely these papers were circulated and read it would be 
 difficult to determine. It was reported from Oberlin, Ohio, in 1849, that 121 
 copies of agricultural and horticultural papers were taken at that post-office. 3 
 
 Besides the periodicals, an increasing number of books treating of agricul¬ 
 ture appeared during this period. Some of these, like Ellsworth’s Valley of 
 the Upper Wabash (1837), and the various guides to the West, purposed 
 to set forth the prospects and conditions of that region. Others, like Buel’s 
 Farmer's Companion (1839), dwelt upon the advantages of the “ New System 
 of Agriculture.” It is interesting to note that up to about 1850 many of the 
 volumes treating of agriculture were largely reprints of English works, with 
 the addition, perhaps, of a few pages relating to maize and to machinery. 
 It is significant that the first two pages of the first issue of the American 
 Farmer are taken up with a discussion of the culture of the rutabaga, or 
 
 1 American Farmer, I (1819), p. 5. 
 
 2 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1841), p. 8. 
 
 3 Ohio State Board of Agriculture, 4th Annual Report (1849), p. 150. 
 
 316 
 
DIFFUSION OF INFORMATION 317 
 
 Swedish turnip. 4 * With the agricultural prosperity of the fifties an increasing 
 number of volumes relating to agriculture were published in America. 
 
 FEDERAL AID TO AGRICULTURE. 
 
 The National Government began to assist in the diffusion of agricultural 
 information during this period. In 1839 Congress appropriated $1,000 for the 
 “ collection of agricultural statistics, investigations for promoting agriculture 
 and rural economy, and the procurement of cuttings and seeds for gratuitous 
 distribution among the farmers, which appropriations were expended under the 
 direction of the Patent Office, the idea having originated with Hon. Henry L. 
 Ellsworth.” 6 * Mr. Ellsworth was Commissioner of Patents. His interest in 
 agriculture serves to explain why the Federal agricultural reports were long 
 issued from the Patent Office. In 1851 the annual appropriation was increased 
 to $5,500, in 1854 to $35,000, and in 1856, $105,000 was reached. The first 
 agricultural report printed in 1839 by the Patent Office contained 54 pages; 
 by 1845 ^ bad reached the size of 1,376 pages, the largest report issued during 
 this period. In 1855, 267,920 volumes of the report were issued. 6 It is of 
 interest, as a sign of the times, that while the early reports had been largely 
 concerned with discussions of agricultural practice, later reports had become 
 interested in such subjects as the Practicability of Tea Culture in the United 
 States, Proposed Introduction of the Yak Ox from Tartary to the Great 
 Plains of the West, The Production of the Ionian Islands and Italy . 1 The 
 first federal census of agriculture was taken in 1840. It was not until 1862 
 that the national Department of Agriculture was formed. 
 
 AGRICULTURAL SOCIETIES. 
 
 The history and services of the early agricultural societies have been dis¬ 
 cussed in a preceding chapter of this work (chap. XIV, p. 184 et seq.). 
 Many of them had become inactive or had passed out of existence before 1840. 
 A new period began with the reorganization of the New York State Agricul¬ 
 tural Society in 1841. The formation of county agricultural societies and fairs 
 in that State was fostered through an appropriation by the State Legislature 
 of $40,000. By the end of the year societies had been founded in 32 New 
 York counties, and in 1842, 42 counties had societies, 35 of which held fairs for 
 the exhibition of farm products, implements, and livestock. 8 
 
 From 1840 to 1846 the formation of agricultural societies was a slow and 
 discouraging task, but with the return of better prices in 1847 a renewed inter¬ 
 est was taken in them. In Ohio, although the Hamilton County Agricultural 
 Society had been organized before 1828, little progress was made until State 
 aid was extended in 1846. The first year thereafter societies were organized in 
 20 or more counties, 9 and in 1849 they were to be found in more than 50 
 counties. 10 The Illinois State Agricultural Society was established in 1853, 
 
 4 American Fanner, I (1819), p. 5. 
 
 8 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report (1857), Agriculture, 24. 
 
 6 Ibid., p. 25. 
 
 1 Ibid., 166; 1858, p. 239; 1859, p. 100. 
 
 8 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, II (1842), p. 294. 
 
 9 Ohio State Board of Agriculture, 1st Annual Report (1846), p. 21. 
 
 10 Ibid., 4th Annual Report (1849), P- 5 - 
 
318 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 and 33 county agricultural societies were organized the same year. 11 Between 
 the date of the reorganization of the New York Society in 1841 and 1857* State 
 agricultural societies and boards of agriculture were formed in 24 other 
 States, all but 6 of which were in the North. In 1858 a list was compiled of 
 912 “boards and societies” existing in the United States, connected wholly 
 or in part with agriculture. Only 137 of these were in the South. New York 
 led the states with 97 societies, Illinois had 94, Indiana 77, Ohio and Iowa 
 each 74. 12 
 
 The agricultural fair was a leading feature in the efforts of many of the 
 active societies, both state and national. At the fairs, livestock shows and 
 implement trials were leading attractions and sources of much benefit. At this 
 time, when so many changes were occurring, when the farm organization was 
 changing from a self-sufficing to a commercial basis, and when new territory, 
 markets, and methods were rapidly developing and succeeding one another, 
 the agricultural societies, fairs, and periodicals were important factors in 
 agricultural development. They provided a stimulus to the cause and assisted 
 in the introduction and spread of improved methods, implements, and live¬ 
 stock. In addition to these means of diffusing information, other influences 
 were at work. Local differences and customs of long standing were rapidly 
 breaking down. Orange County butter-makers and Herkimer County cheese- 
 makers were to be found in western New York, in Ohio, and in Wisconsin; ( 
 Vermont wool-growers were emigrating to Ohio and Illinois. The rapidly- 
 improving means of transportation and communication and the development of 
 commercial agriculture were opposed to particularistic methods. 
 
 * 
 
 AGRICULTURAL LEADERSHIP—JOHN JOHNSON. 
 
 The period of agricultural colleges and experiment stations had not yet 
 dawned. As stated by the editor of the American Farmer in his first issue 
 (1819), information was to be obtained by a study of the various systems 
 which experience had proved to be the best. 1 " The name of John Johnson 
 should be mentioned here. An enterprising Scotchman, he came to America 
 in 1821 and settled on a farm near Geneva, New York. 14 In 1835 he imported 
 from Scotland a pattern of drain-tile and began the drainage of his farm. 
 
 The labor and cost, however, were too great to warrant extensive use of tile. 
 
 But in 1848 John Delafield, a neighbor of Johnson, who had observed the 
 good results of drainage, imported a machine for making tile, which greatly 
 reduced the price. By 1855 Johnson had laid about 47 miles of tile. In 
 describing his early experience with tile drainage Johnson wrote: 16 
 
 “I commenced under unfavorable circumstances in different ways. First for want 
 of funds; next, the tile cost double what they do now, and digging double; and last 
 though not least, public opinion was very much against me. Some would ask me if 
 
 I was going to put crockery over all my farm. Some would tell me they thought my 
 
 farm was rather too dry if anything; and some of my own countrymen would give me 
 the hint that they had known some men drain and otherwise improve their lands so 
 that they lost them. Notwithstanding all this, I still felt confident that my drain- 
 
 II Ill. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, III (1853), pp. 1, 3. 
 
 12 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report (1858), Agriculture, 91. 
 
 13 American Farmer, I (1819) , 5. 
 
 14 Bailey, Cyclopedia of American Agriculture, I, 403. 
 
 15 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, XV (1855), p. 258. 
 
DIFFUSION OF INFORMATION 
 
 319 
 
 ing would end well if I lived, as the excess of two years’ crops after draining would 
 pay the cost, and I persevered, and the more I drained the more I was convinced I was 
 right, and I have not been disappointed at the result, as my fondest anticipations have 
 been realized.” 
 
 Johnson traveled over the State, wrote articles for the journals and agri¬ 
 cultural reports, and was visited at his farm by a large number who came 
 to observe the results of drainage and soil improvement. In 1859 he was 
 presented with a service of plate in recognition of his service to the agriculture 
 of New York by a group of prominent New York citizens. Such was mainly 
 the method of discovering new things in agriculture from 1840 to i860. As 
 Jesse Buel may serve to typify the movement for agricultural improvement in 
 the East from 1820 to 1840, so John Johnson may serve as a representative 
 of the continuation of the movement from 1840 to i860. 
 
 SCIENCE AND AGRICULTURE—AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY. 
 
 Rapid advance was being made in the sciences pertaining to agriculture, 
 especially in chemistry. Philosophers had speculated for ages regarding soil 
 fertility and as to what constitutes the food of plants, but not until the begin¬ 
 ning of the nineteenth century was the attention of chemists turned to the sub¬ 
 ject. In 1804 De Saussure published his Recherches Chemiques sur le Vegeta¬ 
 tion. Davy’s lectures on agricultural chemistry (1803) did much to extend the 
 existing knowledge of the relation of chemistry to agricultural practice. The 
 investigations of Bousingault began to develop about 1834. Three years later 
 Sir James Lawes began the experiments upon his estate at Rothamsted, Eng¬ 
 land, which have meant so much to agricultural knowledge and progress. It 
 was, however, the appearance in 1841 of the American edition of Liebig’s 
 work, Chemistry in Its Application to Agriculture and Physiology, in which 
 he traced the relation between the nutrition of plants and the composition of 
 the soil, which attracted widespread interest to the subject in the United States. 
 Now began a true understanding of the fundamental principles of manuring, 
 following a long period of more or less general speculation on the subject. 
 
 LIEBIG’S MINERAL THEORY. 
 
 Liebig’s mineral theory and its application to soil fertility at once became 
 a popular theme of discussion in the agricultural publications and on the public 
 platforms of the East. High hopes were entertained of the benefits to be 
 derived from “ chemical agriculture.” 16 It is said that “ a little learning is a 
 dangerous thing,” and so it proved in this case. With the limited knowledge 
 then possessed, too great confidence was placed in the practical value of soil 
 analysis and in mineral manures. When it was found that certain mineral 
 elements were required for the growth of plants and that these were furnished 
 by the soil, it was proposed to analyze the soil and the plant, and from their 
 chemical compositions to form the basis of treatment. If the soil lacked 
 any necessary constituent, it could be supplied by mineral manures. When in¬ 
 terest had once been aroused by the work of Liebig and other scientists, per¬ 
 sons of less note carried on the agitation for “ this new and greater application 
 of chemistry to agriculture.” Papers teemed with advertisements of “ chem- 
 
 16 Buel, Farmer's Companion (ed. 1839), 7 1 - 
 
320 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 ists ” and “ professors ” who for the moderate sum of $5 or $10 would ana¬ 
 lyze the soil and advise as to its treatment. 
 
 Increasing attention was devoted to the making and applying of compost 
 manures. To encourage their use, premiums were awarded by the agricul¬ 
 tural societies for the best prepared compost. Muck, straw, lime, seaweed, and 
 hog manure were favored constituents, the relative merits of which were dis¬ 
 cussed and rediscussed. The first premium on compost at the Maine State 
 Society Fair, in i860, was awarded to a lot “ made of 60 loads swamp muck, 
 10 loads of thatch hay, 10 cords rock-weed, to which were added 30 large 
 sturgeons and 5 hogsheads of fishbrine, and the droppings of 20 head of 
 cattle.” Another parcel consisted of “ 7 cords of muck, 10 of rock-weed and 
 5 from the pig sty.” 17 Guano and artificial fertilizers made according to formu¬ 
 lae based on the chemical composition of plants began to come into use in 
 the Atlantic States. The use of nitrates and of superphosphate of lime became 
 common. 
 
 THE INTEREST IN AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION—MICHIGAN 
 
 AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE. 
 
 But more than all else, these new discoveries helped to awaken a sense of 
 the relation of sciences to agricultural practice and to stimulate a desire for 
 information and education. No names appear more frequently in the agricul¬ 
 tural literature of the years succeeding 1840 than those of Liebig, Davy, and 
 Johnson. Few were the speeches in favor of agricultural education, which 
 did not mention these early investigators. It was in such an atmosphere that 
 the Michigan Agricultural College, the first institution of its kind in the 
 country, received its first class of students in May 1857* Thus a new phase 
 in agricultural education was begun. 
 
 The spirit in which these new discoveries were received, typical of the 
 optimistic attitude of the period, is well illustrated by the following extract 
 from President James Wadsworth’s address before the New York Agricul¬ 
 tural Society in 1842: 18 
 
 “ The application of science, the most profound which has yet been attained by the 
 far-reaching efforts of the human mind, to all the products of our industry, to the soil, 
 the crop, the animal, has been reserved for the age in which we live. It is not claiming 
 too much to say that more progress has been made in this direction within the last 
 
 twenty years than in any previous century. From the origin of our race almost 
 
 to the present time, the path of the husbandman has been clouded in darkness and 
 doubt. From the sowing of the seed to the gathering of the harvest, mystery attended 
 
 every step. The precepts of tradition, the results of a multitude of experiments, 
 
 were founded mostly in wisdom; . . . . Not so now. The scientific analysis of soils, 
 of manures, and of vegetable products, explains not only the workings of nature and 
 the practices of art, but opens an inexhaustible field of new combinations and novel 
 results.” 
 
 Much of the discussion which had previously centered around the business 
 aspects of farming was now shifted to other subjects. In the East, chemical 
 agriculture was the center of discussion; in the West, the development of 
 machinery and other means with which to exploit the soil were attracting 
 attention. Science at last began to supplement wisdom and speculation. 
 
 17 Maine Bd. of Agric., 5th Annual Report (i860), Abstract of Returns from Agric. 
 
 Societies, 56. 
 
 is N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, II (1842), p. 50. 
 
Chapter XXVI. —Wheat. 
 
 THE DECADE FROM 1840 TO 1850 . 
 
 In 1839 four States produced 61.5 per cent of the total wheat crop of the 
 country. In the order of their importance these States were Ohio, 19.5 
 per cent, Pennsylvania, 15*6 per cent, New York 14.5 per cent, and Virginia 
 11.9 per cent. The Southern States were producing 12 per cent of the total 
 wheat crop, the border States 24 per cent, and the Northern States 64 per 
 cent. In Ohio the wheat was largely produced in a strip of country comprising 
 about half of the State and extending from the east central to the southwest- 
 
 Fig. 71.—Wheat, 1839. Each dot represents 100,000 bushels. 
 
 Western New York, eastern Ohio, the vicinity of Cincinnati, and the limestone 
 valleys of Pennsylvania and Maryland were the prominent wheat growing regions 
 in 1839. Ohio produced more wheat than any other state. West of Ohio there was 
 no distinctive wheat growing region. 
 
 ern part of the State. (See fig. 71.) Western Pennsylvania was a part of the 
 same wheat region. Wheat was an important crop in the limestone regions of 
 southeastern Pennsylvania and of the valleys of Maryland and Virginia. The 
 wheat area of New York was largely in the northwestern part of the State. 
 Eastern New York and the New England States raised very little wheat. In 
 the West, wheat-raising had but just begun in the Lake Michigan region. 
 
 In 1849 the four States mentioned above still led in the production of wheat. 
 (See fig. 72.) Southern Michigan and Wisconsin, northern and west-central 
 Illinois were the regions of greatest increase. Production load extended west- 
 
 22 
 
 321 
 
322 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 ward along the Missouri River and into southeastern Iowa. There was but a 
 slight increase in total production. In the East the changes in wheat-growing 
 during the decade of the forties were largely changes in methods, shortening 
 of the period of summer fallow and increased care in culture. In the West, 
 along with the expansion of the wheat area, poor crops and low prices during 
 the years 1847 to 1853 were leading to general dissatisfaction with the wheat 
 crop, to increased sowing of spring wheat, and to diversified farming. 
 
 During the forties a wheat growing region began to develop on the borders of 
 Lake Michigan. Southern Michigan, southern Wisconsin, northern Illinois and 
 Indiana greatly extended their wheat area. In New England the production of 
 wheat was declining. 
 
 WHEAT IN NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 By 1840, wheat was no longer considered a staple crop in New England 
 agriculture. In southern New England it was grown chiefly for home use 
 and was raised in small patches of 2 or 3 acres, in rotation with other crops. 
 A common rotation was oats, corn or potatoes, wheat, and grass. Wheat sown 
 on sod-land after one plowing with an application of lime was considered one 
 of the best systems. 1 Liberal amounts of lime, ashes, and manure were usually 
 applied to the land before the crop was sown. In Maine, newly burned-over 
 land was considered the best for wheat. In northern New England, spring 
 wheat had been rather generally substituted for winter wheat. Methods 
 of seeding were the same as in eastern New York. As a preventive of smut, 
 wheat seed was soaked in brine and rolled in lime before seeding. As a 
 preventive of the wheat midge, many farmers gave the standing grain just as 
 it was coming into flower a thorough coating of newly-slaked lime, the appli¬ 
 cation being made while the grain was wet with dew or rain. 
 
 1 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1852, Agriculture, n 7, 120, 130. 
 
WHEAT 
 
 323 
 
 Table 38.— Wheat: Production in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Census, 1840, 1850, and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 Total 
 
 1,000 
 
 bu. 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 bu. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent 
 
 u. s. 
 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 1,000 
 
 bu. 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 bu. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent 
 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 United States . 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 New England 
 Middle Atlantic .. 
 East North Central 
 W. North Central. 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 New England: 
 
 Maine . 
 
 New Hampshire .. 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 Massachusetts .... 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 New York . 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 Vest North Central: 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 Dak. Territory ... 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 Utah . 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 Washington . 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 California . 
 
 84,823 
 
 2,014 
 
 26,274 
 
 26,326 
 
 1,192 
 
 5-0 
 
 848 
 
 422 
 
 496 
 
 158 
 
 3 
 
 87 
 
 12,287 
 
 774 
 
 13,213 
 
 16,572 
 4,040 
 3 336 
 2,157 
 212 
 
 155 
 
 i ,037 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 6 
 
 100.0 
 
 2 
 
 3 i 
 
 3 i 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 19 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 100 486 
 
 1,091 
 
 30,090 
 
 39,328 
 
 4,514 
 
 304 
 
 229 
 
 296 
 
 186 
 
 536 
 
 3 i 
 
 a 
 
 42 
 
 13,121 
 
 1,601 
 
 15,368 
 
 14,487 
 
 6,214 
 
 9,415 
 
 4,926 
 
 4,286 
 
 1 
 
 i, 53 i 
 
 2,982 
 
 196 
 
 108 
 
 212 
 
 17 
 
 4 - 3 
 
 0.4 
 
 5 - i 
 
 8.7 
 5 -i 
 
 4.2 
 
 2.2 
 
 •5 
 
 .6 
 
 1.7 
 
 4.2 
 
 3-3 
 
 6.6 
 
 7-3 
 
 6.3 
 11.1 
 12.4 
 14.0 
 
 .2 
 
 8.0 
 
 4.4 
 
 3-2 
 
 9-5 
 
 15.9 
 
 .2 
 
 100.0 
 
 I 
 
 29 
 
 39 
 
 13 
 1 
 
 15 
 
 14 
 6 
 9 
 4 
 4 
 
 Total 
 
 1,000 
 
 bu. 
 
 173,105 
 
 1,083 
 
 23,486 
 
 79,798 
 
 15,207 
 
 823 
 
 6,841 
 
 234 
 
 239 
 
 437 
 
 120 
 
 1 
 
 52 
 
 8681 
 
 1,763 
 
 13,042 
 
 I 5 ,H 9 
 
 16,848 
 
 23,837 
 
 8,336 
 
 15,658 
 
 2,187 
 
 8,449 
 4 228 
 1 
 
 148 
 
 194 
 
 434 
 
 385 
 
 4 
 
 86 
 
 827 
 
 5,928 
 
 i860. 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 bu. 
 
 5-5 
 
 0.3 
 
 3 - 1 
 
 11 .5 
 7.0 
 
 4 - 7 
 15.4 
 
 •4 
 
 •7 
 
 1.4 
 
 . 1 
 
 2.2 
 
 2.6 
 
 4 - 5 
 
 6 - 5 
 12.5 
 
 13.9 
 
 11.1 
 
 20.2 
 
 12.7 
 
 12.5 
 
 3 - 6 
 .2 
 
 5 - i 
 1.8 
 
 4 - 6 
 
 9.6 
 • 5 
 
 7 - 4 
 15-8 
 15-6 
 
 Per 
 cent 
 U. S 
 total. 
 
 100.0 
 
 0.6 
 
 13.6 
 
 46.1 
 
 8.8 
 
 • 5 
 4.0 
 
 .1 
 . 1 
 
 3 
 . 1 
 
 5-0 
 
 1.0 
 
 7-6 
 
 8.7 
 
 9-7 
 
 13-8 
 
 4-8 
 
 9.1 
 
 1.3 
 4.9 
 
 2.4 
 
 . 1 
 . 1 
 
 •3 
 
 .2 
 
 . 1 
 • 5 
 3.4 
 
 * Less than 500 bushels. 
 
324 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 STATE BOUNTIES. 
 
 Several attempts had been made in New England during the thirties to en¬ 
 courage wheat production. The Maine Legislature at the session of i 837 > 
 passed an act allowing $2 bounty for the first 20 bushels of wheat raised by 
 any one farmer, and 6 cents for every bushel over that amount, the object 
 being to encourage the culture of wheat. A considerable sum of money was 
 paid out to farmers under this act. 2 In 1838, the State of Massachusetts like¬ 
 wise offered a bounty upon wheat grown within the State. The object of the 
 law was said to be two-fold: First, to ascertain the capacity of the State to 
 produce wheat; second, to learn the common modes of cultivating it, in order 
 if possible thence to determine the best mode. It appeared from the records 
 of 3,600 claimants under the Massachusetts law, which were examined in 
 1839, that the crop suffered considerably from drought and severely from 
 the grain insect or wheat fly, and that there were many instances of smut. 
 It appeared also from the returns that in scarcely any instance did the use 
 of lime or plaster give any decided result. The average yield was set at 
 about 15 bushels. 3 
 
 CAUSES OF DECLINE OF WHEAT-GROWING IN 
 
 NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 Several reasons were given for the decrease in wheat acreage, chief among 
 which were competition of the West, soil exhaustion, and the repeated attacks 
 of the wheat midge, rust, and Hessian fly. Vermont reported a large decline 
 on her clay soil caused by the ravages of the midge and declining soil fertility. 4 
 Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island attributed their rapid falling 
 off in large part to the “ less and less inducement to cultivate wheat there, 
 owing to the immense crops of the West.” 5 The development of dairying and 
 sheep farming also led many farmers to give up the cultivation of grain, and 
 it appears, indeed, that the New England farmer was glad to abandon wheat¬ 
 growing when the western supply became available. 
 
 The cultivation of wheat in New England continued to decline during the 
 forties. In the three southern States the crop was nearly abandoned; in the 
 three northern States its acreage was rapidly decreasing. From Maine, in 1848, 
 came the report: 
 
 “ Twenty years since, our land produced a fine crop of spring wheat with as much 
 certainty as we looked for a crop of hay. But this has sadly changed. Numerous enemies 
 have sprung up, amongst which, mildew, and rust, and the weevil are the greatest, till 
 the raising of a field of wheat is viewed as an experiment. A majority of our farmers 
 have abandoned the trial entirely.” 6 
 
 A writer from Richmond, Massachusetts, in 1852 thus expresses the New 
 England sentiment: 7 
 
 “Less and less of it [wheat] is sown each year. When oats are worth fifty cents a 
 bushel, and corn seventy-five cents, and superfine flour can be bought for five and six 
 
 2 Maine Board of Agriculture, 5th Annual Report (i860), p. 178/ See also above, p. 193. 
 
 3 3d Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1840), pp. 16, 48, 50, 51. 
 
 ^ Cultivator, VIII (1841), p. 146. 
 
 5 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1843, p. 19. 
 
 6 Ibid., (1848), p. 342. 
 
WHEAT 325 
 
 dollars a barrel, a general opinion prevails that it is cheaper to raise the former and buy 
 the latter than to run the risk of an uncertain wheat crop.” 
 
 WHEAT AND THE CROPPING SYSTEM IN NEW YORK. 
 
 A large share of the total wheat crop of New York in 1839 was grown in 
 the western section of the State in the Genessee Valley. (See fig. 71, p. 321.) 
 Here wheat was the staple product, and wheat sown on a summer fallow 
 was the common method of production. The prevailing cropping systems 
 were: (1) to sow wheat on alternate years after peas, or (2) after a clover 
 crop which had been sown amidst the wheat the previous spring, or (3) to 
 sow wheat on a pasture sod. 
 
 Fallowing, as practiced by the New York farmer of this period, was of 
 many degrees of thoroughness, varying from a constant stirring of the soil 
 with consequent absence of crops for an entire year, to merely plowing the 
 land and leaving it idle during July and August. * 8 The earlier practice, a naked 
 fallow lasting from April to seeding time, had been largely abandoned. It was 
 usual in 1840 to begin the fallow by plowing under a crop of clover, peas, or a 
 pasture sod the last of June, then to plow again after haying in August, when 
 the sod was fairly dead and partially decomposed, and a third time about 
 the first of September, when the seed was sown and harrowed in. In addition, 
 a harrowing between each plowing and two harrowings after seeding were 
 often given. Stable manure was often applied to the sod before plowing, or at 
 the time of the last plowing, together with from to 2 bushels of gypsum per 
 acre. Many of the best farmers preferred to have the clover grazed off in the 
 spring before plowing and were increasing their flocks of sheep for that 
 purpose. 
 
 A JUSTIFICATION OF SUMMER FALLOWS. 
 
 A New York farmer in 1843 thus attempted 9 to justify the practice of sum¬ 
 mer fallowing which prevailed in the western half of the State: 
 
 “ In large parts of our country where wheat is grown, summer fallowing, or the 
 previous preparation of that crop by plowing, harrowing, etc., is indispensible to the 
 success of a crop; and as cultivation is extended and continued, the practice must more 
 widely prevail. The necessity. ... of the course is for cleaning the soil; as owing 
 to imperfect farming, and careless culture, most farms are so overrun with weeds, that 
 unless some thorough measures are taken for their destruction, the crop of grain appears 
 
 to be considered by them as an intruder. Now and then, indeed, an individual 
 
 who manages better than his neighbors; who has guarded against the introduction and 
 spread of weeds, or by skillful culture has eradicated them; who by a proper rotation 
 and manuring, has made his whole farm capable of the production of any crop; and 
 who by draining or deep plowing has given a fineness, dryness, and depth, that renders 
 summer fallowing unnecessary, dispenses with this laborious process, and putting in 
 his wheat after corn, peas, or roots, gives these the first benefit of his manures, and finds 
 
 the crop produced in the place of a fallow, a clear gain. At present it must be 
 
 conceded that in general summer fallows are necessary, and that unless every part of the 
 farm submitted to cropping is occasionally fallowed, it will soon become so foul as to 
 be unfit for the production of grain.” 
 
 While the growing of corn and root crops in rotation was increasing, the 
 difficulty of removing the corn or the roots from the land in season to sow 
 
 8 Cultivator, new series, II (1845), p. 20. 
 
 8 Cultivator, X (1843), p. 122. 
 
326 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 the wheat was a common objection. One writer of the time, 10 aftei discussing 
 the merits of rotation and the good effects upon the wheat crop of applying 
 manure to the preceding corn crop, concludes with the statement: 
 
 “ It is unhappily too true, that on a large portion of our best cultivated wheat lands, 
 the soil has become so infested with a variety of foul and noxious plants [Canada 
 thistles, oxeye daisies, white daisies, johnsworth] that a course of naked summer 
 fallow, thoroughly performed, has become necessary to counteract them, and prevent 
 
 their increase and spread. The only alternative of such fallows is hoed crops, 
 
 and these must of necessity. ... be too limited to seriously affect the propriety of 
 fallows on weedy land.” 
 
 Barn-yard manure was frequently spread on the furrow and harrowed in 
 with the seed wheat; ashes and lime were used in large amounts, but clover 
 and plaster were mainly relied upon to keep up fertility. Subsoiling was 
 being tried by a few who reported results of one-third more wheat per acre. 
 Summer fallowing, however, was still the common practice in western New 
 York. A Monroe County farmer writes in 1845: * 11 
 
 “ Of the one hundred and eighty-four acres, I calculate to have one-third or one- 
 fourth of it annually in wheat, according to the condition of the soil to produce a bounti¬ 
 ful crop, two-fifths of which is sown after summer crops, barley, oats, or peas, but 
 generally barley. The remaining three-fifths of it [is] sown on summer fallow, viz: 
 forty-five or fifty-five acres in wheat, ten or fifteen for hoe crop, the same in barley 
 and oats, forty in pasture, forty for hay and clover seed, and thirty for fallow.” 
 
 In the six largest wheat-growing counties of western New York, in 1854, 
 over 17 per cent of the improved land was reported to be in fallow, being 
 nearly equivalent to the area of winter wheat. In Rensselaer and Albany 
 Counties in eastern New York, in the same year, only 1.8 per cent of the 
 total improved land was in fallow. In Onondaga and Cortland Counties, in 
 central New York, the per cent of fallow land was I.4. 12 The method of 
 working the fallow was also changing, the cultivator now being extensively 
 used in place of the plow. 13 A good team was said to be able to go over 10 
 or 12 acres per day. 
 
 DECLINE OF WHEAT GROWING IN HUDSON AND MOHAWK 
 
 VALLEYS. 
 
 With the development of the wheat region of western New York and the 
 growth of livestock farming in the eastern part of the State, wheat-raising 
 had declined in the valleys of the Hudson and the Mohawk. In the Hudson 
 Valley soil exhaustion was apparent. In addition, the ravages of the wheat 
 midge and the Hessian fly, beginning about 1830, had become so disastrous 
 as to destroy in 1835 and 1836 almost the entire crop. Many farmers aban¬ 
 doned further attempts to cultivate this grain. 14 By 1840, however, many of 
 the farmers in this region were venturing again to raise wheat on a moderate 
 scale with good success. 15 
 
 ™ Ibid., VII (1840), p. 133. 
 
 11 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, V (1845), P- t 94 - 
 
 12 Ibid., XVI (1856), p. 204. 
 
 13 Cultivator, new series, VI (1849), p. 109. 
 
 14 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (i860), pp. 750-52. 
 
 15 Cultivator, VII (1840), p. 160. 
 
 
WHEAT 
 
 327 
 
 On the high lands of the Mohawk Valley, especially in Madison, Onondago, 
 and Cayuga Counties, winterkilling and the low yields of winter wheat on 
 all lands, except the first fallowing of pasture lands, were leading to the 
 substitution of spring wheat for winter wheat. Many farmers, finding dairy¬ 
 ing or the raising of barley and oats more certain and profitable than wheat, 
 were gradually abandoning its culture. In this region the summer fallow had 
 rather generally given way to fallow crops. 16 The U. S. Patent Office Reports 
 for 1843 an d 1844 state that the New York wheat crop had diminished very 
 sensibly during the past 10 years. 17 Much of the decrease was undoubtedly 
 the result of the abandonment of wheat-growing in the older counties of 
 eastern New York. 
 
 WHEAT IN PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 Pennsylvania ranked second in the production of wheat in 1839. Within the 
 State there were two wheat-producing regions—one in the limestone districts 
 in the southeastern part of the State, the other in the western part of the 
 State in the counties adjoining Ohio. (See fig. 71.) During the thirties 
 the condition of the wheat crops in eastern Pennsylvania had much improved. 
 Formerly the soil had been greatly exhausted through continued cropping to 
 grain. During the early thirties yields had been so low and the ravages of the 
 Hessian fly so severe that many farmers had almost despaired of further 
 cultivation of wheat. But better methods of tillage, a judicious rotation of 
 crops, care and attention in the collection and use of manure and lime, together 
 with the introduction of Mediterranean wheat, had later given a new impetus 
 to the cultivation of grain. 18 
 
 In 1840, wheat in this region was commonly produced as one crop in a 
 well-established rotation of corn, oats, winter wheat or rye, clover, pasture. 
 The oat-stubble was sometimes plowed in August, allowed to lie fallow about 
 a month, then plowed again, and seeded; or often it was plowed only once 
 before seeding. Improved methods of culture and attention to liming and 
 manuring were giving increasing yields. 19 As much as 25 to 30 cart-loads of 
 stable manure or 400 pounds of guano per acre were frequently applied before 
 seeding to wheat. 20 In central New Jersey, wheat was usually sown in a rota¬ 
 tion of corn, potatoes or other truck crops, wheat, clover and timothy. 21 In 
 Maryland and Delaware the increasing use of marl, lime, guano, and clover 
 was reported as leading to an increase in wheat production. 22 
 
 OHIO’S LEADERSHIP, 1839 AND 1849 . 
 
 Ohio produced 16,500,000 bushels of wheat in 1839 and 14,500,000 in 1849. 
 In 1839 the State ranked first in bushels of wheat produced and in 1849 second, 
 Pennsylvania having taken first place. After the opening of the Erie Canal, 
 Ohio had rapidly developed as a wheat-growing State. In 1845 the flour 
 
 16 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1841), p. 145. 
 
 17 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1843, p. 19. 
 
 18 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, II (1842), p. 105. 
 
 19 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1850, Agriculture, 156; ibid. (1851), p. 241. 
 
 20 Ibid., 1850, p. 156. 
 
 21 Ibid., 1851, p. 233. 
 
 22 Ibid., 1851, p. 263. 
 
328 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 exports of the State were reported as 450,000 barrels from Cleveland, joo,ooo 
 from Toledo, 150,000 from Sandusky, 150,000 from Cincinnati, 40,000 from 
 Marietta, and 30,000 from Portsmouth. The lake now provided the chief out¬ 
 let for Ohio wheat. 23 
 
 The wheat counties in the main comprised a region of the State located on 
 the dividing ridge that separated the waters flowing into Lake Erie from those 
 emptying into the Ohio River. Knox, Licking, Richland, Ashland, Wayne, 
 Stark, Muskingum, Fairfield, and Belmont were the leading counties. About 
 half of this region might be called hilly, while the remainder was rich valley 
 or table land. The valley land was said to range in price “ from $30 to $40 
 per acre; the moderately hilly and undulating at from $20 to $30; and the high 
 table lands at from $15 to $20 per acre.” 24 It was the opinion of the earl) 
 settlers that the quality of any soil could be ascertained fairly well from a 
 study of the timber grown upon it. The high, rolling upland, covered with 
 a thick growth of oak, was considered the best and most certain land for wheat. 
 For other crops, the land originally covered with a thick growth of sugar 
 maple, elm, black walnut, and cherry was considered best. 
 
 THE METHODS OF CULTIVATION, 1851 . 
 
 The method of wheat cultivation is thus described in the Cultivator of 
 
 1851: 25 
 
 “ The cultivation of clover as a preparative crop of wheat, is more generally prac¬ 
 tised on the oak lands, such as abound in Richland, Ashland, Wayne, and Stark Counties, 
 than in any other portion of Ohio. In these and a few adjoining counties, the system of 
 making naked summer fallows prevails very generally, and indeed but very little wheat 
 is sown in any other way, by those who make it a point to make their wheat crop their 
 main dependence. The summer fallow is usually made on a two-year old clover sod. It 
 is rarely broken up before the first of July, and after which it is allowed to remain 
 almost untouched until the first week in September, when it is again plowed, usually 
 lengthwise of the first furrow, to be sown for wheat. The seed is then covered either 
 with a harrow, cultivator, or a shovel plow, and in some rare cases with a drilling 
 machine, which completes the whole process. 
 
 “ Within the past three or four years the very rational opinion has gained ground, 
 that under a careful system of rotation of crops, the plan of making naked fallows may 
 
 be dispensed with altogether. To what extent this cheap plan of growing wheat 
 
 may be extended is difficult as yet to determine, but it is quite certain that extraordinary 
 yields are produced by this method throughout many portions of the best wheat-growing 
 counties in Ohio, and when the value of the clover crop for hay or pasturage is taken 
 into account, it brings the cost of producing wheat to a mere nominal standard when 
 compared with the expensive process of making a naked summer fallow as is usually 
 done in New York and Pennsylvania. 
 
 “ In some instances wheat is made to follow the oat crop, in which case the latter 
 succeeds a crop of corn, which if well cultivated leaves the ground in a good condition 
 
 for oats. A still worse practice than this is adopted by some. Allusion 
 
 is now made of sowing wheat after wheat, for a succession of years, by simply allowing 
 occasionally a crop of corn to intervene. The past season thousands of acres were sown 
 in this way, and at the present time (the first of June) a finer prospect for a full average 
 crop could not be desired. 
 
 “ The foregoing is the practice in the counties mentioned, as well as in favorable 
 sections for wheat in other portions of the state. In the southern, central and western 
 
 23 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1845, P- 367. 
 
 24 Cultivator, new series, VIII (1851), p. 257. 
 
 25 Ibid., p. 258. 
 
WHEAT 
 
 329 
 
 range of counties, the almost universal practice is to sow wheat after the corn crop, 
 or with it before it is harvested. Naked fallows are rarely ever made in the corn and 
 grazing regions of Ohio. On this account a much more slovenly practice of managing the 
 wheat crop prevails where corn and grass are the main dependence of the farmer, than 
 where wheat forms the principle staple. Honorable exceptions, however, are made to 
 
 this rule in every county and neighborhood of the state. But it is evident, that 
 
 so long as the fertility of the soil is such as to secure a heavy crop with a small expendi¬ 
 ture of labor, that only a few can be persuaded that it will pay cost to adopt more 
 expensive systems of culture. These influences and others of a like character, prevent 
 to a great extent, the adoption of systems of farm management, that in other counties 
 would be considered essential to success.” 
 
 WHEAT IN THE WEST, 1840 . 
 
 West of Ohio very little surplus wheat was produced in 1840. The 
 two southern tiers of counties in Michigan, the southern half of Indiana, the 
 region of the Illinois River in Illinois, and of the Missouri River in Missouri 
 
 Table 39. —Sources of wheat and flour entering the Erie Canal 
 
 at Buffalo in 1840 .* 
 
 Where produced. 
 
 Flour. 
 
 Wheat. 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 Barrels. 
 
 505,262 
 
 112,215 
 
 13,726 
 
 2,259 
 
 166 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 725,025 
 
 07 240 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 y/ >^49 
 
 *48,279 
 
 10,634 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 
 
 Total . 
 
 633628 
 
 881,187 
 
 * Cultivator, VIII (1841), p. 28. 
 
 were the leading wheat sections, although in none of them was the soil entirely 
 devoted to the crop. The exportation of grain from the Lake Michigan region 
 had but just begun to attract attention. Illinois and Indiana produced two- 
 thirds of the wheat crop raised west of Ohio and north of the Ohio River. 
 
 INCREASE IN WHEAT PRODUCTION, 1840 TO 1850 . 
 
 During the forties there was a large increase in wheat production in the 
 West. By 1850, over 15,000,000 bushels of grain were arriving at the port of 
 Buffalo annually from the West, 26 the larger part of which was produced on 
 the newly cultivated prairie farms. The increase in wheat production was 
 greatest in southern Michigan and Wisconsin, northern Illinois, and in the 
 region between the Illinois and Mississippi Rivers. The railroad from Pontiac, 
 Michigan, to Detroit, 26 miles in length, was said to have carried 40,000 barrels 
 of flour in the year 1844. 27 In Iowa and Missouri the increase was compara¬ 
 tively small. (See figs. 71 and 72.) 
 
 Before 1847 the wheat crops in the Lake Michigan region had been gener¬ 
 ally good, and glowing reports spread over the country regarding the possi- 
 
 26 Buffalo Board of Trade, Annual Report (1869), p. 20. 
 
 27 Cultivator, new series, I (1844), p. 177. 
 
330 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 bilities of wheat production in this region. But from 1847 to 1853 there was a 
 general failure of the winter-wheat crop, especially on the prairie lands, caus¬ 
 ing uncertainty and general dissatisfaction among the wheat producers. Many 
 farmers were led to give up the exclusive raising of wheat and took up more 
 general lines of farming. Others substituted spring wheat for winter wheat 
 in an attempt to continue the cropping. Many were said to have left for 
 California in their discouragement at having lost two or three crops of wheat. 
 
 The situation was thus described by a writer in The Cultivator : 28 
 
 “Contrary to the expectations of the first settlers of the Great West, the wheat¬ 
 growing business is subject to more casualties than is experienced in timbered countries; 
 and in many cases the business has been abandoned, under the prevailing notion that a 
 prairie soil, when subjected to a severe course of cropping, is unadapted to the growth 
 of wheat. This opinion ebbs and flows, according to the result of the harvests; and 
 seasons like the present, when the crop is almost universally a good one, it would 
 find but few advocates; whereas, last year the almost entire failure of the crop so far 
 discouraged the wheat growers, that it was difficult to convince those engaged in the 
 business, that the country was admirably adapted for the production of wheat.' 
 
 SPECIALIZATION IN WISCONSIN AND NORTHERN 
 
 ILLINOIS. 
 
 In Wisconsin and northern Illinois the early settlers turned their attention 
 almost exclusively to wheat. In Wisconsin the production increased from 
 212,000 bushels in 1839 to 4,286,000 bushels in 1849. Population during the 
 same period increased from 31,000 to 305,000. Sheep, cattle, and hogs were 
 indeed kept, and corn, oats, barley, and other crops were raised; but these 
 enterprises were considered of minor importance by the farmer located west 
 of Lake Michigan. Wheat was the great staple, the crop from which a money 
 income was expected. Rotation received little attention, fertilizing practically 
 none, and summer fallowing was rarely practiced. 
 
 The reasons advanced for devoting attention so exclusively to wheat were 
 many. In the first place, the soil was considered well adapted to the crop and 
 in the early years large yields were obtained. The cost of transporting wheat 
 to market was less in proportion to its weight and value than that of corn and 
 oats, and where the produce must be carried in a wagon 70 to 100 miles to 
 market, this was an item of importance. The extent of the specialization in 
 wheat may be shown by the following comparison; In i860 the approximate 
 ratio of bushels of wheat to bushels of corn produced was as follows: in 
 New York, 1 to 4; in Ohio, Illinois, and Iowa, 1 to 5; in Michigan, 1 to 1.5; 
 in Wisconsin, 2 to 1. 
 
 CAUSES OF CROP FAILURES ON PRAIRIE FARMS. 
 
 In Wisconsin it appears that the failure was especially severe on the prairie 
 lands. A Fond du Lac County correspondent in 1853 wrote thus: 29 
 
 “The timbered sections of our country uniformly produce good crops of winter 
 wheat, the average yield being, probably, not less than twenty-five bushels to the acre. 
 The 1 oak openings ’ also produce this amount in favorable seasons; but the crop on this 
 description of land is much more precarious, the cold winds of winter and early spring 
 
 28 Cultivator, new series, IX (1852), p. 346. 
 
 20 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1853, Agriculture, 152. 
 
WHEAT 
 
 331 
 
 frequently destroying the entire crop; and, finally, repeated failures have caused its entire 
 abandonment by the farmers of the prairie. And yet, I have known some good yields 
 of winter grain on prairie soil; such generally followed the first breaking up of the 
 land.” 
 
 Another wrote from Racine County in 1849 as follows: 30 
 
 “ Wheat has been our staple product. But for three or four years past it has 
 
 been a precarious crop, especially on old lands, owing doubtless to the common fault of 
 almost every farmer of bringing more land under cultivation while it is fresh and 
 clean, than they can afterwards manure and cultivate well.” 
 
 A third 31 reported that “ wheat in this vicinity is mostly raised on the 
 prairies, but the timber lands are better adapted to its culture.” The report 
 from Rock County 32 in 1851 was: 
 
 “ The causes are obvious, the excuse reasonable.To surround a quarter section 
 
 of land with a sod fence .... break and sow it to wheat—harvest the same and stack 
 it—plough the stubble once, and sow it again with wheat—thrash the previous crop 
 and haul it to the Lake, was considered good farming in Rock County [Wisconsin], 
 continued from year to year; and hundreds confidently expected to win, by going it 
 blind, in this very unscientific manner. And for a few years it succeeded; but a short 
 crop or two, with a depressed market, has brought them up all standing. The cry is now 
 heard, what shall we do to be saved ? ” 
 
 A Dane County correspondent says: 33 
 
 “ Men have come here to settle on farms because land was cheap—have little or no 
 capital—poor houses and no barns—a small supply of stock—some land under the 
 plough and fenced—embarrassed with the payment of interest, taxes, and store debts— 
 and depending on the next crop of wheat for relief, which, when gathered and taken 
 to market, affords no profit on the cost of production.” 
 
 It was the general opinion that on the whole no money had been made in 
 the production of wheat. 34 The farmers began to turn to dairying, to the 
 rearing of horses, cattle, sheep, and swine, and to the growing of flax and 
 barley. To some, California seemed the only resource, and to that gilded 
 region many fled as to a city of refuge. 35 Others continued in the same path 
 with the firm expectation that better times must come. With the high prices 
 that prevailed from 1854 to 1857, faith was restored in wheat. All thoughts of 
 turning to general farming were abandoned, and specialization began again. 
 Yields, it is true, remained low, but high prices, nevertheless, made farmers 
 hopeful. Although high prices lasted only 2 or 3 years, their effect was suffi¬ 
 cient to perpetuate until i860 the one-crop system of farming. 
 
 SYSTEMS OF WHEAT CROPPING ON THE PRAIRIES. 
 
 Three systems of wheat cropping were common on the prairies. To break 
 prairie land in the month of June and sow in September was considered the 
 best and most certain method. 36 Frequently the land was cross-ploughed be¬ 
 fore seeding, but most farmers ploughed but once. A second method was 
 
 30 Ibid., 1849, p. 205. 
 
 31 Loc. cit. 
 
 32 Wis. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, 1851, p. 211. 
 
 33 Ibid., 133, 161. 
 
 34 Prairie Farmer, X (1850), p. 349. 
 
 35 Wis. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, 1851, p. 229. 
 
 36 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1848, p. 542. 
 
332 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 sowing after small grain by turning under an oat or wheat stubble, plowing 
 again before seeding, and finally sowing the seed and running over the field 
 two or three times with the harrow. Where old land was seeded, it was con¬ 
 sidered best to plow in narrow lands, making the open or center furrow deep, 
 so that it could readily carry off the water. By the third method wheat seed 
 was sown in the midst of the corn in September or October. 
 
 Some farmers varied the practice by cutting up and shocking the corn in 
 parallel rows across the field, leaving the strips to be sown with a spring crop. 
 In the corn-producing regions of southern Indiana and central Illinois, wheat 
 sown among com was the common method. In Missouri, wheat was generally 
 sown on corn land after the corn had been cut. But as wheat culture extended, 
 some farmers were adopting the plan of sowing on fallow land. On farms 
 
 Fig. 73. —Wheat, 1859. Each dot represents 100,000 bushels. 
 
 Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin now led the states in wheat production. The 
 Lake Michigan region had become the leading wheat growing area of the country. 
 
 In California and Oregon production of wheat had rapidly increased since 1850, 
 while in New York and Pennsylvania there had been a decline. 
 
 raising tobacco, the wheat was generally sown on the tobacco land after taking 
 off the crop. 
 
 ENEMIES OF THE WHEAT CROP. 
 
 Winterkilling, rust, blight, and the chinch bug were common enemies of 
 the wheat crop in the West. The first two affected principally winter wheat, 
 but after 1849 there were many complaints of the attacks of blight on spring 
 wheat. While the first crop on a prairie sod was usually exempt from these 
 enemies, in later years wheat on prairie land seemed to be more susceptible 
 than when grown on the openings or wooded lands. 37 In the East, winter- 
 killing, the Hessian fly, the weevil, and the rust were common enemies of the 
 
 37 Wis. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1851), p. 232. 
 
WHEAT 
 
 333 
 
 wheat crop. Of the many remedies advocated, and sometimes practiced, the 
 most successful were the improvement of the soil, late sowing to avoid the 
 Hessian fly, early sowing to avoid rust and winter killing, the grazing of 
 the wheat in the fall and early spring to check the Hessian fly, and planting 
 in drills to check the rust. 
 
 WHEAT PRODUCTION, 1850 TO 1860 . 
 
 During the io years 1850 to i860 the center of wheat production was 
 pushed farther west than in any previous decade in the history of the country. 
 (Fig. 73.) By i860 the States of Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin had far 
 surpassed Pennsylvania and New York in the amount of wheat produced. 
 The last two States showed a decrease since 1849. Southern Michigan and the 
 prairie country, Illinois, Wisconsin, eastern Iowa, and southeastern Minnesota, 
 was the region of greatest increase. Illinois in i860 led the States in wheat 
 production, Indiana ranked second, Wisconsin third, and Ohio fourth. 
 
 RAVAGES OF THE MIDGE IN NEW YORK AND 
 
 NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 To New York wheat growers the decade was one of general hardship, while 
 to the western farmer it was one of rejoicing over good crops and high prices, 
 especially during the middle years of the fifties. The New York farmer was 
 suffering from the partial failure of his wheat crop, while the western farmers 
 were rapidly expanding the wheat area. There was a growing disposition to 
 reduce the wheat acreage in New York and to devote the land to some other 
 crop. 
 
 Census figures show the New York wheat crop of 1859 to have been nearly 
 4,500,000 bushels below that of 1849. A comparison of these figures with 
 those of New York State census in 1855 indicate a decline of over 4,000,000 
 bushels from 1849 t0 1854, an d a further decline of nearly a half million 
 bushels from that date to 1859. Two great causes of the decline were the 
 ravages of the midge and soil depletion. 
 
 Since 1830, the destruction of wheat crops by the midge had attracted much 
 attention in eastern New York and New England. This pest was first seen 
 in western Vermont in the year 1820, though not until 1828 and 1829 did it 
 become so numerous and destructive as to attract public attention. In 1850 
 the ravages of the midge attracted much attention in New York State west 
 of Lake Cayuga, and in 1854 injury was general in the wheat-growing region. 
 James Wadsworth gives the following account of the appearance of the 
 midge in Monroe and Livingston Counties: 38 
 
 “The midge was seen here a little in 1854; it came from the East; more were seen 
 in 1855, doing no material damage in Livingston, but considerable in Monroe. But in 
 1856 the midge took from one-half to two-thirds of the crop in Livingston on the 
 uplands and nearly all on the flats. At least two thousand acres, on flats which would 
 have yielded thirty bushels per acre, were not harvested. It was still worse in 1857, taking 
 over two-thirds of the crop. And in 1858, of the white wheats there was very little 
 
 to harvest.Very little white wheat was now sown in western New York and 
 
 the midge had reduced the value of all the wheat lands at least forty per cent. Lands 
 which sold here readily for seventy dollars can now be bought for forty dollars per acre." 
 
 88 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, XX (i860), pp. 750-756; ibid. (1858), p. 300. 
 
334 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 OTHER CAUSES OF DECLINE IN WHEAT CROPS IN 
 
 THE EAST. 
 
 The failure of the wheat crop, however, was not attributed to the ravages 
 of the midge alone; winterkilling and crop failure had been frequent for many 
 years before the occurrence of the midge. From Ontario County, in 1855, 
 a great falling off in the wheat crop was reported, the reasons assigned being 
 winterkilling in unfavorable seasons. 39 A writer to the Country Gentleman 
 in 1859, took the following view as to causes: 40 
 
 “ In the wheat midge we have the alleged cause of the failure of the wheat crop, and 
 its ravages have been truly disheartening. But many serious failures occurred before 
 this injury became general—failures from poverty of soil, caused by sowing wheat 
 after wheat or other exhausting crops—from want of drainage, and consequent winter- 
 killing, or rust—from late sowing on imperfectly prepared ground, also inducing light 
 and rust, and from poor management generally. All these causes prepare the wheat 
 plant for the attacks of the midge.” 
 
 It would seem that the wheat soils of western New York had become gen 
 erally depleted through continued cropping with the use of lime and gypsum 
 as had been the case in the Mohawk Valley some 20 years before. Soil deple- 
 tion resulted in frequent winterkilling with crop failures, the impoverished 
 condition of the soil making the wheat plant very susceptible to the attacks of 
 the midge, and thus reducing the already small yield. The New York Agricul¬ 
 tural Society, after an extensive investigation of the wheat midge, reported 
 in 1859 “ that where lands have been thoroughly underdrained, thus receiving 
 an earlier sowing as well as ripening of the wheat, far less damage has been 
 sustained from the ravages of the insect.” 41 
 
 PROGRESS RESULTING FROM CROP FAILURES.—LAND 
 DRAINAGE AND SOIL IMPROVEMENT. 
 
 The frequent winterkilling and the failure of the wheat crop were leading 
 to a wide interest in land drainage and improvement. The search for infor¬ 
 mation brought John Johnson to the front with his years of experience in land 
 drainage and soil improvement. In 1855 he reported : 42 
 
 “ A few years ago when the midge destroyed the most of the wheat, I had six 
 neighbors joining farms with me, and I don’t know of any of them that had over seven 
 bushels per acre, and some not so much as that, and my farm raised between twenty- 
 eight and twenty-nine bushels per acre, and the land being drained was the main 
 cause. Since that time all of my neighbors have drained more or less and some very 
 extensively.” 
 
 In 1858 he wrote to the New York Agricultural Society: 43 “ My crop 
 [of wheat] has not been under twenty-five bushels per acre, with the excep* 
 tion of last year.” Then the failure was owing to drought and cold. “ But 
 drainage won’t do all,” he maintained; “ the next thing needful is manure, 
 made by domestic animals—and it really does appear as if the farmers around 
 
 39 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1855, Agriculture, 195. 
 
 40 Country Gentleman, XIII (1859), P- 89. 
 
 41 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, XIX (1859), p. 6. 
 
 42 Ibid., XV (1855), p. 257. 
 
 43 Ibid., XVIII (1858), p. 294. 
 
WHEAT 
 
 335 
 
 here would never take heed to this one other thing so needful to successful 
 farming/’ 44 
 
 The failure of the wheat crop brought the New York farmer squarely up 
 against the fact of soil depletion. Following the lead of John Johnson, there 
 was a movement towards land drainage, crop rotation, and grazing. The 
 wheat was sown at an earlier date to avoid the midge. More care was given 
 to the selection, the preparation, and the care of wheat lands. Increasing atten¬ 
 tion to drainage and deep cultivation were reported in 1855 as among the most 
 cheering indications of the advancement of agriculture in New York. 45 The 
 New York wheat crops of 1858, 1859, and i860 were generally reported as 
 good. The midge was less troublesome than in previous years. By 1859 
 wheat production was again on the increase. The crop of that year was 
 reported as the best for many years. 
 
 In other Eastern States the attacks of the midge were not as severe as in 
 New York. In New England about as much wheat was grown in 1859 as 10 
 years earlier. The high prices of the decade, the temporary cessation of severe 
 attacks of the insects, and the reintroduction of winter wheat had put the 
 New England farmer into a more hopeful mood regarding his wheat. Maine 
 and Vermont showed a slight decrease in the amount produced, while the other 
 New England States showed slight increase. In Maine excellent yields of 
 wheat were still obtained in the newly cleared sections of Aroostook, Franklin, 
 Somerset, and other counties. 46 Wheat succeeded best on the hilly lands. It 
 was thought that on the hilly lands “ where the wind blows ” the insects both¬ 
 ered less. 47 “If you would succeed in wheat, raise it where the wind blows ” 
 had become an axiom with the New Hampshire wheat-grower. In eastern 
 Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Delaware, where the attacks of the midge had 
 not been as severe as in New York, the high prices of grain, together with 
 the introduction of guano and improvements in culture, were said to have 
 induced farmers to grow more wheat than formerly. 48 
 
 DECLINING WHEAT YIELD IN OHIO. 
 
 In eastern Ohio the declining wheat yield, attributed to soil depletion with 
 winterkilling and, after 1854, to the attacks of the midge, had become a 
 matter of great concern. For some time the evils of constantly cropping the 
 land with the return of little manure had been apparent, until in 1854, with 
 the first severe attack of the wheat midge, the average yield of wheat in the 
 State was reported at 8 bushels per acre. In 1858 it was 10.3 bushels, in 1859 
 7.01 bushels, in i860 about 13 bushels. 
 
 It was the opinion of John H. Klippart, secretary of the Ohio State Board 
 of Agriculture in 1859, that Ohio had reached her maximum of wheat produc¬ 
 tion and if not retrograding was at least stationary. 49 “ Turn your attention 
 to renovating your lands,” he advises, “ instead of dreaming of the fertile 
 
 44 Ibid., XX (i860), p. 337 . 
 
 45 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, XV, (1855), p. 3. 
 
 46 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1862, Agriculture, 51. 
 
 47 N. H. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1850-51-52), p. 74. 
 
 48 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1855, Agriculture, 192. 
 
 49 The Wheat Plant, 307, 322. 
 
336 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 West, and make Ohio what she was intended to be, the granary of the 
 Union.” 60 Many small Ohio wheat farmers, discouraged with their small 
 yields and attracted by the prairie lands of the West, sold their farms to 
 cattle graziers and moved west to begin wheat-growing again in Illinois, Iowa, 
 and Wisconsin. The Ohio wheat yield of 1859, owing to a severe frost in 
 June, was much below the average, especially in the eastern section of the 
 State. Wayne County, which reported an average yield of 13 bushels in 1858 
 and 16 bushels in i860, reported an average of only 3 bushels per acre in 
 1859. In Erie County, where the yield was said to be about the average, a 
 large portion of the crop was sent south to sections of the State which had 
 usually exported large quantities of wheat, thus reversing the usual course 
 of trade. 51 
 
 THE PREEMINENCE OF THE WEST, 1850 TO 1860 . 
 
 The census of i860 shows Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin, in the order 
 named, leading in the production of wheat. In 1849, f° ur eastern States, 
 Virginia, Ohio, New York, and Pennsylvania, produced twice as much wheat 
 as the three western States named above; in 1859 the three western States 
 produced 50 per cent more than the four eastern States. Minnesota produced 
 over 2,000,000 bushels, Iowa nearly 8,500,000. The increase in transportation 
 facilities, together with the high prices and good crops during the years 1854, 
 1855, and 1856, led to a rapid increase of the wheat acreage during the middle 
 years of the decade. 62 Large areas of prairie land were broken for the first 
 time and put into wheat. The improvement of the reaper enabled more acres 
 of grain to be raised per man. By 1855, California could report: 53 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 “ There is no longer any need of shipping breadstuffs from the Atlantic to the Pacific 
 Coast. We have an abundance of our own to spare. Flour and grain are cheaper here 
 than in New York.” 
 
 Systems of cropping were much the same as in the previous decade. In 
 the northern region of Illinois, spring wheat was now grown almost exclusive- i 
 ly, in central Illinois spring and winter wheat, and in the southern part winter 
 wheat alone was sown. In Iowa, winter wheat was reported to have been an 
 uncertain crop for several years and spring wheat had taken the precedence 
 on prairie lands, although winter wheat was still usually raised on a prairie sod 
 and frequently upon second sod, or the second year after breaking. On the S 
 timber soil winter wheat was principally grown. 54 The wheat crops of 1857, 
 1858, and 1859 in the prairie region were generally poor. The chinch bug 
 severely injured the Illinois wheat crop of 1858; 65 the Hessian fly, the midge, 
 the smut, and the rust were all serious enemies. Prices were low; the western 
 farmer was for the second time becoming uneasy regarding wheat-growing 
 on the prairies, when the “ luxuriant crop ” of i860 again revived his faith. 66 
 
 50 Klippart, The Wheat Plant, 322. 
 
 51 Ohio State Board of Agriculture, 14th Annual Report (1859), P- 152. 
 
 52 Country Gentleman, X (1857), p. 90. 
 
 **Ibid.,V (1855), p. 233. 
 
 64 Iowa State Agric. Soc. Transactions, 1857, p. 256. 
 
 55 Ill. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, i860, p. 335. 
 
 50 Ibid., 336. 
 
WHEAT 
 
 337 
 
 USE OF MACHINERY IN SEEDING AND CULTIVATING. 
 
 In 1840, wheat was sown broadcast by hand. The common practice in Ohio 
 was to sow the seed on the plowed surface and harrow it in with a harrow 
 or steel-tooth cultivator. Some farmers, however, plowed the seed in with a 
 shovel-plow, and followed the plow with the harrow. A few, following the 
 advice of Jethro Tull, were beginning by 1844 to drill their wheat with the 
 hope of securing freedom from rust, mildew, and winterkilling. 67 It is inter¬ 
 esting to note that the work of Jethro Tull, printed more than 100 years 
 before (1733), was much quoted during this period. One writer of the time, 
 after discussing the methods of Tull, concludes with the statement: 68 
 
 “ This plan—though not adapted to American farming, for the reasons that, generally, 
 we wish grass to follow our wheat crop—was yet deemed sufficiently plausible to deter¬ 
 mine us to give a fair trial to the drilling, in comparison with the broadcast plan.” 
 
 By 1850, seed drills were generally used in the wheat region of Pennsylvania 
 and New York; in Ohio only a few had as yet been tried, but many farmers 
 were said to be already convinced of their utility. 59 In New England, where 
 the fields were small, wheat was sown broadcast by hand and covered with a 
 light plow, cultivator, or common harrow. In the prairie region of the West, 
 the wheat when sown in the midst of corn, was worked into the soil with the 
 shovel-plow, the cultivator, or with a small ordinary plow. When seeded upon 
 newly broken sod, it was commonly sown broadcast and harrowed in. On 
 old land the harrow, the plow, the cultivator, or the bush were used to work 
 the seed into the ground. The roller was frequently run over the land at the 
 time of seeding. By i860 the drill was rapidly coming into use. Much of the 
 wheat in the Mississippi Valley was now sown by machine. West of the 
 Mississippi the drill was yet but little used. 
 
 REAPERS AND THRESHERS. 
 
 The wheat crop of the early forties was reaped with a cradle. (See figs. 
 15, 16 and 17, p. 207.) The reaping machine had been invented and tried and 
 some few were already in use in the regions of Maryland and Virginia, but 
 as yet they were in the experimental stage and their influence on the wheat 
 industry was in the future. After 1846 the use of the reaper rapidly increased. 
 The era of high prices in the middle years of the decade caused an almost 
 universal demand for reapers. When the wheat on an acre of prairie sold 
 for several times the price of the land it seemed a sure investment to seed more 
 wheat and buy a reaper. In 1855 so many were in use at different points that 
 they had ceased to be a curiosity, and from that time on they were adopted 
 about as rapidly as they could be manufactured. Railroads made it possible 
 to transport grain economically from far inland, while the reaper made it now 
 possible to harvest larger areas than formerly. 60 
 
 In 1840, threshing was commonly done by machine, although a considerable 
 amount was still “ tramped out ” by horses and cattle or beaten out with a 
 
 67 Cultivator, new series, I (1844), P- 44- 
 
 88 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1844, p. 180. 
 
 59 Ohio State Board of Agric., 3d Annual Report (1848), p. 174. 
 
 60 U. S. Census of 1880, III, Agriculture, 521. 
 
 23 
 
338 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 flail. The latter methods were chiefly used in the newly settled parts of the 
 West, and in eastern regions where but little grain was grown. 61 Ten years 
 later in the wheat-growing regions much of the wheat was threshed by port¬ 
 able machines. Many farmers owned their own machines and threshed from 
 the shock, while others stacked their wheat and had it threshed at a later date 
 by traveling outfits. In many of the more remote and newly settled regions, 
 where markets were poor and the settlers of small means, the threshing ma¬ 
 chine had not yet been introduced. In all wheat-growing regions, by i860, the 
 wheat was threshed and separated by machine, the newer and larger machines 
 screening and cleaning the grain as well. 62 An Illinois writer thus describes 
 the method of threshing on the prairie in 1853: 63 
 
 “At first farmers owned their own threshers, but now they mostly belong to jobbers, 
 who go about threshing and cleaning grain at a certain price per bushel, thus saving the 
 farmer the cost of a fanning mill and the labor of recleaning and screening as was the 
 case until within the last few years. As the great mass of farmers on the prairie have 
 no barns this system of threshing has great advantages and the farmer is at no outlay of 
 capital for machines. Farmers who have large barns generally own a different style of 
 machine, these are called horse-power and are adapted to one, two or three horses. Some 
 of these have only separators attached so as to separate the straw from the chaff and 
 grain. In this case the threshing progresses according to the demands of the stock for 
 
 straw and chaff.Steam threshers were introduced here and there before the close 
 
 of the period, but they can hardly be said to have come into common use.” 
 
 61 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, II (1842), p. 160. 
 
 62 U. S. Census of 1880, III, Agriculture, 520. 
 
 63 Loc. cit. 
 
Chapter XXVII. —Corn. 
 
 In 1840 corn was grown in every State east of the Mississippi River and 
 in the States west of the river from Iowa south to Louisiana. Of the total 
 corn crop of 1839, 46 per cent was produced in the South, 23 per cent in 
 the border States and 31 per cent in the northern States. Tennessee and 
 Kentucky were the two leading corn-growing States. The region of the Ohio 
 River had become a prominent corn-producing center. (See fig. 74.) West 
 
 Fig. 74.—Corn, 1839. Each dot represents 300,000 bushels. 
 
 ^ The limestone region of Kentucky and the bottom lands of the Miami, the 
 Scioto, the Wabash, the Illinois and the Missouri rivers were prominent corn 
 growing regions in 1840. In the eastern states corn production was generally in¬ 
 creasing. In Maryland it was a leading crop. 
 
 of the Mississippi its cultivation was extending up the Des Moines River into 
 central Iowa and along the Missouri River and its tributaries into western 
 Missouri. In the territory west of central Ohio corn rather than wheat was 
 the leading crop. 
 
 BETTER TILLAGE AND FERTILIZATION INCREASES CORN 
 
 CROP IN THE EAST. 
 
 Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and southeastern Pennsylvania were the 
 leading corn regions of the East in 1840. In New York, the wheat-growing 
 section in the western part of the State and the valley of the Hudson in the 
 east were the outstanding corn areas. During the forties the production of 
 
 339 
 
340 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 corn considerably increased in all eastern States as a result of three causes. 
 
 (i) a larger amount was planted in substitution for fallow ; (2) more manure 
 was applied and in greater variety; (3) more care was taken in tillage. 
 
 In central and western New York corn and roots were being substituted 
 in place of the fallow in the rotation, as the low average yield of wheat made 
 it no longer profitable to have that crop follow a summer fallow. In the 
 northeastern States corn had its place in a more or less definite system of crop 
 rotation with the application of large amounts of labor and manure. Manure 
 was used on the corn land in large quantities and with peculiar care. 10 to 
 20 tons of farm manure to the acre was a usual amount. In Wayne County 1 
 it was reported that “ corn success appears to be chiefly dependent on a heavy 
 
 supply of manure, well mixed with the soil.” Lime, gypsum, and 
 
 ashes were extensively used. It was common practice to put a fork-full of 
 well-rotted manure or compost into each hill, and usually, also, a little lime or 
 plaster, at the time of planting, and again at the time of the first hoeing. As 
 one farmer 2 described it: “ I use some lime, ashes and plaster on corn ground, 
 equal parts put in the hill when planting, about a gill in each hill, and again 
 at the second hoeing put on about the same quantity.” 
 
 Subsequent culture included two hand hoeings. The process was thus de¬ 
 scribed by a writer from Steuben County in 1852: 3 
 
 “ As soon as the corn is of sufficient size, start the cultivator, and have a boy follow 
 to see that there is none covered. Immediately after, put half a handful of unleached ( 
 ashes on each hill. In about a week go through with the cultivator again, each way; 
 follow with the hoe, and thin out the stalks to four in each hill. Cultivate and hoe 
 again before tasselling.” 
 
 Often the corn was harrowed as soon as up, a boy following to uncover and ; 
 set up any fallen corn. For the second and third cultivation the plow was 
 used, or occasionally the shovel plow, but both these implements were being 
 gradually replaced by the cultivator. From Monroe County it was reported 
 in 1853: 4 
 
 “ Of late, some farmers have adopted the plan of using the two-horse wheel cultivator 
 
 to run through the rows.The middle teeth are taken out, and two rows of corn 
 
 are cultivated at once, . . . .” 
 
 . 
 
 INCREASING CORN PRODUCTION IN NEW ENGLAND, 
 
 1840 TO 1850 . 
 
 : 
 
 In New England the production of corn was increasing. The general fail¬ 
 ure of the crop during the years 1836 and 1837, the “ cold years,” had, how- , 
 ever, caused some uncertainty as to the adaptability of corn to the New Eng¬ 
 land climate. Western Massachusetts reported a decline in the raising of corn 
 and wheat, because the high prices paid for wool had induced farmers to 
 abandon entirely the growing of grain and to devote their attention to sheep¬ 
 raising. 5 In Maine, where the lumbering and ship-building industries fur¬ 
 nished a good market, corn production was increasing. But climatic conditions 
 
 1 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, III (1843), p. 450. 
 
 2 Ibid., II (1842), p. 140. 
 
 3 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1852, Agriculture, 195. 
 
 4 Ibid., (1853), p. 115. 
 
 5 2d Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1838), p. 135. 
 
CORN 
 
 341 
 
 would not allow the Maine farmer to rely upon corn as his principal source of 
 income. In eastern Massachusetts much corn was grown as fodder for cattle 
 in the late summer and fall when the pastures were low. The part of the 
 
 Table 40. — Corn: Production in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1840, 1850, and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division 
 and State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Jnited States . 
 
 377,532 
 
 22.1 
 
 100.0 
 
 592,071 
 
 25.5 
 
 100.0 
 
 838,793 
 
 26.7 
 
 100.0 
 
 Jeographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 6,993 
 
 3-1 
 
 1.9 
 
 10,176 
 
 3-7 
 
 1-7 
 
 9,165 
 
 2.9 
 
 1.1 
 
 Middle Atlantic ... 
 
 29,574 
 
 6.5 
 
 7-8 
 
 46,453 
 
 7.9 
 
 7-8 
 
 57,981 
 
 7-8 
 
 6.9 
 
 East North Central. 
 
 87,115 
 
 29.8 
 
 23.1 
 
 177,320 
 
 39-2 
 
 29.9 
 
 280,269 
 
 40.5 
 
 33-4 
 
 West North Central 
 
 18,739 
 
 43-9 
 
 5.0 
 
 44 888 
 
 5 i-o 
 
 7.6 
 
 125,898 
 
 58.0 
 
 150 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 
 
 
 7 . 7 K 
 
 5 .1 
 
 . 1 
 
 800 
 
 A 6 
 
 T 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 
 
 
 O/ J 
 
 15 
 
 . I 
 
 
 592 
 
 I 'X 
 
 T 
 
 Mew England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 951 
 
 1.9 
 
 •3 
 
 1,750 
 
 3-0 
 
 •3 
 
 1,546 
 
 2.5 
 
 .2 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 1,163 
 
 4.1 
 
 •3 
 
 1,574 
 
 4.9 
 
 •3 
 
 1,415 
 
 4-3 
 
 .2 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 1,120 
 
 3-8 
 
 •3 
 
 2,032 
 
 6-5 
 
 •3 
 
 1,525 
 
 4.8 
 
 .2 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 1,809 
 
 2-5 
 
 •5 
 
 2,346 
 
 2.4 
 
 • 4 
 
 2,157 
 
 1.8 
 
 • 3 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 450 
 
 4.1 
 
 . I 
 
 
 3.7 
 
 . 1 
 
 462 
 
 2.6 
 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 1,500 
 
 4 • 8 
 
 •4 
 
 i ,935 
 
 5-2 
 
 • 3 
 
 2,060 
 
 4-5 
 
 .2 
 
 diddle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 10,972 
 
 4-5 
 
 2.9 
 
 17,858 
 
 5.8 
 
 3-0 
 
 20,o6l 
 
 5-2 
 
 2.4 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 4,362 
 
 11.7 
 
 1.1 
 
 8,760 
 
 17.9 
 
 1.5 
 
 9,723 
 
 14.5 
 
 I. I 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 14 240 
 
 8-3 
 
 3-8 
 
 19,835 
 
 8.6 
 
 3-3 
 
 28,197 
 
 9-7 
 
 3-4 
 
 last North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 33,668 
 
 22.2 
 
 8.9 
 
 59,079 
 
 29.8 
 
 10.0 
 
 73,543 
 
 31.4 
 
 8.8 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 28,156 
 
 41.1 
 
 7-5 
 
 52,964 
 
 53-6 
 
 8.9 
 
 7 L 589 
 
 53-0 
 
 8.5 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 22,634 
 
 47-5 
 
 6.0 
 
 57,647 
 
 67.7 
 
 9-7 
 
 H 5 ,i 75 
 
 67-3 
 
 13.7 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 2,277 
 
 10.7 
 
 .6 
 
 5,641 
 
 14.2 
 
 1.0 
 
 12,445 
 
 16.6 
 
 i -5 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 380 
 
 12.3 
 
 . 1 
 
 1,989 
 
 6.5 
 
 • 3 
 
 7 , 5 U 
 
 9-7 
 
 •9 
 
 Vest North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 2 8 
 
 
 2 0/12 
 
 17 1 
 
 A 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 1,406 
 
 32.6 
 
 •4 
 
 8,657 
 
 45 -o 
 
 1-5 
 
 42,411 
 
 1 / . 1 
 
 62.8 
 
 •4 
 
 5-0 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 17,333 
 
 45-2 
 
 4.6 
 
 36,214 
 
 53-1 
 
 6.1 
 
 72,892 
 
 61.7 
 
 8.7 
 
 Dakota Territory .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 A 2 
 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1482 
 
 ct A 
 
 ct 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 6,151 
 
 cj A 
 
 7 
 
 dountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 0/ • H 
 
 • / 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 
 
 
 365 
 
 5 Q 
 
 x 
 
 700 
 
 7 6 
 
 T 
 
 Utah . 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 d • y 
 
 . 0 
 
 
 / u y 
 
 OT 
 
 / • w 
 2 2 
 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 y L 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 D acific : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 e 
 
 A 
 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 
 
 
 .2 
 
 
 D 
 
 76 
 
 • H 
 
 I K 
 
 
 California . 
 
 
 
 
 0 
 
 12 
 
 . 1 
 
 
 5 n 
 
 1 • k) 
 
 T 'X 
 
 T 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 • 0 
 
 
 4 Less than 500 bushels. 
 
 corn-stalks above the ear, “ when early cut and properly cured/’ was considered 
 equal in feeding value to timothy and other hay. 6 The New England corn crop 
 of 1849, as reported by the census of 1850, showed a substantial increase 
 over that of 1839, and was in fact the largest ever produced by that group of 
 
 6 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 223. 
 
342 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 States on any census year. In Maine it was said that the failui e of the wheat 
 and potato crop had led to increased planting of corn. 7 In Connecticut the 
 increased use of lime and guano was said to have stimulated corn production. 
 
 MANAGEMENT AND HARVESTING OF CORN IN THE EAST. 
 
 A common rotation consisted of oats or potatoes, corn or oats, wheat or rye, 
 grass until “ bound out,” but in general there was little uniformity in cropping. 
 Stable manure at the rate of 20 to 40 cart loads to the acre was commonly 
 applied. It was a disputed question whether it was best to follow the old 
 method of manuring in the hill or to spread broadcast. Both methods were 
 in common use, but the latter was said to be increasing in favor. For the 
 former method a compost of muck and manure was commonly regarded as 
 the best. On farms near the seashore, fish and seaweeds were used. In Con¬ 
 necticut, guano had come into use, and in this State even more care was given 
 to the cultivation of the corn than in New York. Three cultivations and two 
 or three hand hoeings were commonly given. A handful of ashes, lime, or 
 plaster was added to each hill at the time of the first hoeing. Hilling at the last 
 hoeing was the common practice. 
 
 Various methods of harvesting the crop were practiced in the East. In 
 New York and Pennsylvania the common method was to cut up at the roots 
 and shock in the fields until ready for husking. In New England, however, 
 it was usual to top the corn, cutting off the stalks a few inches above the ear 
 after the grain had reached a certain stage of ripeness. When wilted, the tops 
 were bound into small bundles and placed in shocks to cure. The corn was 
 left to ripen on the butt stalk, and when sufficiently dry was harvested, either 
 by breaking off the ears with the husk or by cutting the stalk close to the 
 ground. Little corn was sold, but the object was to raise enough for consump¬ 
 tion on the farm. 
 
 CORN IN KENTUCKY. 
 
 The limestone area of Kentucky, which had long been an important agri¬ 
 cultural center of the West, was noted for com and livestock. Corn, alone, 
 was worth more than all other crops in 1840. The crop rotation was more or 
 less irregular. Some farmers in this part of Kentucky grew corn in rotation 
 with wheat, which was sown among the standing corn in the autumn. Seed¬ 
 ing down to clover was practiced by some of the better farmers, but the culti¬ 
 vating of corn on the same land, year after year, was all too common. The 
 succession of corn crop was sometimes broken by seeding to bluegrass and 
 leaving in pasture for several years. The prevailing custom of feeding corn 
 and fodder to cattle grazing upon pasture, much of which was woodland, 
 led to the exhaustion of the soil which was under cultivation, while the 
 woodland received the manure. 8 
 
 PLANTING AND TILLAGE METHODS. 
 
 The usual method of planting corn in Kentucky was to lay off the land 
 into squares by running a light plow across the field both ways. The corn 
 
 7 Ibid., 1851, p. 135- 
 
 8 Beatty, Essays on 
 
 Practical Agriculture, XX, 64, 67. 
 
CORN 
 
 343 
 
 was then dropped and covered with a hoe. When the corn was 4 or 5 inches 
 high it was the common practice to run over the field with a large square 
 harrow from which a few teeth had been removed. Subsequent cultivation 
 included from two to six cultivations with the shovel-plow. 9 One hand-hoeing 
 usually followed the first cultivation. A considerable quantity of the corn 
 raised in the bluegrass region was fed to cattle and hogs, though a large 
 amount was also sold in the Cincinnati market 10 whence it was largely shipped 
 south to supply the plantation trade. Distilleries consumed a considerable 
 quantity. * 11 
 
 IN THE MIAMI AND SCIOTO VALLEYS IN OHIO. 
 
 Ohio, which stood fourth among the States in the production of corn in 
 1839, was first in 1849. The State was renowned for the great extent of its 
 
 Fig. 75.—'Corn, 1849. Each dot represents 300,000 bushels. 
 
 During the forties the production of corn considerably increased throughout the 
 northern states. In the West corn production was extending north, into the wheat grow¬ 
 ing states of Michigan and Wisconsin, and west along the Des Moines river into Iowa. 
 
 rich alluvial land. The valleys of the Miami and the Scioto ■were regarded as 
 among the most productive corn-growing regions of the country. As wheat 
 was considered the staple by farmers on the hilly lands of eastern Ohio, so 
 corn was the chief crop with the farmers who cultivated the alluvial soils. 
 A few farmers were producing corn in rotation, but it was the common prac¬ 
 tice in this section for corn to follow corn on the same ground year after 
 
 9 Ibid., 88, 90. 
 
 10 Beddall, Blue Grass Region of Kentucky, 98-100. 
 
 11 Ohio State Board of Agriculture, 1 st Annual Report (1846), p. 28. 
 
344 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 year. It was said in 1841 that some of the bottom lands on the Scioto had 
 been cultivated for 40 years in corn without rotation or rest, and that they 
 still continued to produce from 50 to 70 bushels to the acre. The region was 
 thus described in 1851: 12 
 
 “ As far as the eye can stretch in the distance, nothing but corn and wheat fields are 
 to be seen; and on some points in the Scioto valley as high as a thousand acres of^ corn 
 may be seen in adjoining fields, belonging to some eight or ten different proprietors.” 
 
 From 100 to 200 acres of corn were reported to be frequently grown by 
 rich landed proprietors. One Ross County farmer was said to have 1,800 
 acres exclusively in corn. 13 The relatively large yield, the small amount of 
 labor expended, and the comparative freedom from risk all combined to make 
 the corn crop a favorite among those possessing alluvial soils. 
 
 GROWING CORN ON WHEAT FARMS IN EASTERN OHIO. 
 
 On the hill farms of eastern Ohio, where wheat was the staple crop, the 
 yield of corn was reported to be much less than on the bottom lands and the 
 cost of production was much greater. 14 Here it was the usual practice among 
 wheat farmers to grow corn or oats on a clover sod, to be succeeded by wheat, 
 although some followed the corn crop with a summer fallow before seeding 
 the wheat. On the valley lands the subsequent culture of corn consisted of 
 two or three cultivations with the shovel plow or corn plow, for the hoe was 
 seldom used. Where wheat was to be grown in the midst of the corn, the 
 latter was given an extra cultivation with the cultivator or shovel plow. As in 
 Kentucky, occasionally the harrow was used for the first cultivation. 15 Among 
 the wheat farmers of eastern Ohio, on the other hand, it was usual to cultivate 
 from four to six times, running two or three times through the row at each 
 cultivation, and to hand-hoe once. “ We have no regular system of rotation 
 in crops/’ wrote a farmer from this region. “ On our bottom lands, corn 
 succeeds corn forever, or wheat and corn alternately forever, without any 
 sensible diminution in the yield.” 16 Another keen observer of Ohio agricul¬ 
 ture wrote: 17 
 
 “There are many things to admire and a still greater number to deplore in the 
 methods of cultivation adopted by the corn-growing farmers of Ohio. They have well 
 learned the secret of extracting from the soil, its fertilizing properties. This they do 
 by deep plowing and by frequently working the corn with the one horse plow, or shovel 
 plow. But when we have said this on the favorable side, but little more can be added, 
 unless an expose be made of the wretched, barbarous systems that very generally 
 prevail.” 
 
 Much of the corn raised in the southern part of Ohio found its way down 
 the Miami and Scioto Rivers to Cincinnati, which was the corn market for 
 the region comprising southwestern Ohio, southeastern Indiana, and north- 
 central Kentucky. In eastern Ohio, where more of the land was given over 
 to wheat-growing and grazing, the corn was largely fed to cattle and hogs. 
 
 12 Cultivator, new series, VIII (1851), p. 290. 
 is Ibid., VII (1850), p. 185. 
 
 14 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, p. 179. . 
 
 15 Cultivator, new seizes, VI (1849), p. 90. 
 
 is U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1852, Agriculture, 252. 
 
 1 7 Cultivator, new series, VIII (1851), p. 291. 
 
CORN 
 
 345 
 
 CORN AS A FIRST CROP ON PRAIRIE FARMS. 
 
 West of Indiana, up to 1840, the open prairies of Illinois, Iowa, and Mis¬ 
 souri, which were later to become the most productive corn-producing sections 
 of the country, had been generally avoided. The valleys of the Wabash, the 
 Illinois and the Missouri Rivers were still the centers of corn production in the 
 West. (See fig. 74.) During the forties the corn area in the West rapidly 
 expanded, pushing northward into the prairies of northern Illinois and Indi¬ 
 ana. In 1850 with the exception of Michigan, which was essentially a wheat¬ 
 growing section, and of Wisconsin, where farmers were raising little else 
 but wheat, corn was the great staple in the States west of Ohio. 
 
 Corn could be grown with success on a newly-broken prairie-sod where the 
 wheat crop was rarely successful, and so in the West the prairie land was usu¬ 
 ally planted to corn the first year. The immigrant who arrived in the spring 
 was thus able with but little care or expense to obtain a crop of corn the first 
 year. It was usual to turn the sod the latter part of May or early part of June 
 to the depth of 2 or 3 inches. The furrow-slice was laid as smoothly as pos¬ 
 sible to prevent the grass from growing up through the seams, and in every 
 third or fourth furrow corn was dropped to be covered by the succeeding 
 furrow slice. Another method was to pass along the furrow-slice with an 
 axe, a pointed stick, or similar instrument, making holes at intervals in the sod, 
 into which were dropped 3 or 4 grains of corn. The holes were then covered 
 with a brush of the foot. 
 
 It was not unusual to see from 4 to 6 teams, with 5 yoke of cattle and a boy 
 to help drive at each plow, breaking up the sod. Two boys followed after the 
 teams, dropping the corn, which was covered by the sod. Between and 2 
 acres of corn a day would be planted in this way by a man with 4 or 5 yoke 
 of oxen. The first crop was expected to pay the expense of breaking. Yields 
 ranged 15 to 45 bushels an acre, but most of the reports were near the lower 
 figure. 18 One writer of the time thus described the method of planting: 19 
 
 " In every third or fourth furrow corn is dropped at the outer side of the fur¬ 
 row. This is buried up by the succeeding furrow, and the corn springs up 
 
 through the partial crevice. The land thus ploughed is remarkably free from 
 
 weeds, and the corn in ordinary seasons grows rapidly. No hoeing is needed, and 
 nothing is done to the crop until the time of gathering arrives, when often from thirty 
 to sixty bushels of good corn are obtained. The cost of dropping the corn is ten per 
 
 cents per acre; one small boy attends three ploughs. If the sod crop is put in 
 
 early, it can be cut off in the fall in sufficient time to harrow in the crop of wheat; this 
 is done without any further plowing and gives generally the largest and best wheat 
 crop raised on the land.” 
 
 “No manuring, no hoeing, or but very slight,” wrote another, 20 “ no har¬ 
 vesting in many cases, that being attended to by the hogs.” 
 
 METHODS OF PLANTING AND CULTIVATING. 
 
 On stubble ground it was a common practice to list the land for corn. A 
 plow passing along the field threw up a furrow and returning threw up an- 
 
 18 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1852, Agriculture, 201. 
 
 19 Ibid., (1845), p. 383. 
 
 20 Cultivator, X (1843), p. 81. 
 
346 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 other against the first. The corn was then planted on the top of the ridge. 
 After planting, the intervening spaces were broken up. On the bottom lands 
 it was common to turn two furrows together and leave them until ready to 
 plant, when two other furrows were added, forming alternate ridges and 
 valleys. In this case the corn was planted in the valleys. 21 Remarks one: 22 
 
 “The advantage of listing is that it enables a man to put in more corn than in the 
 ordinary way; and as most men can tend more corn than they can put in, this is con¬ 
 sidered a gain. Those who advocate the listing practice are generally energetic 
 
 men, having new ground. In the hands of a slow man, the plan is likely to succeed 
 
 poorly.” 
 
 The corn was dropped by hand. Although many corn-planting machines 
 and attachments were being tried, no satisfactory machine had yet been de¬ 
 vised which would plant corn in hills, and planting in drills was not considered 
 satisfactory. According to the common method of planting, the field was 
 furrowed both ways with a small plow, and the corn, having been dropped at 
 the intersections, was covered either by hand or with a harrow, or by running 
 a bull-tongue plow along the edge of the furrow, thus turning the earth back 
 over the seed. Ingenious farmers had their own contrivances for marking 
 the field and covering the seed. 
 
 Corn was commonly cultivated two or three times, usually with a shovel- 
 plow, often with the one-horse plow, and in a few cases with a steel-tooth 
 cultivator. In Sangamon County, Illinois, one of the largest corn-producing 
 counties, the common method of culture was thus described: 23 
 
 “When the corn is three or four inches high, it is ploughed with a small plough, 
 throwing dirt from it. In eight or ten days it is cross-ploughed, with three furrows 
 in a row; and in ten or fifteen days repeat the operation the other way, and so make 
 the crop.” 
 
 A farmer from Macoupin County reported that it was his practice to run 
 a light 2-horse harrow, from which the front tooth had been removed, straddle 
 of the row as soon as the corn was 2 or 3 inches high. The cultivator then 
 followed twice in a row, then the bull-tongue plow, and finally the cultivator 
 again, once or twice. 24 
 
 A large land owner of Indiana, H. L. Ellsworth, reported in 1855: 25 
 
 “I have been able to hire land, tilled with a crop of corn, at $2.50 to $3-00 per acre; 
 the average yield being 50 bushels. The cost per bushel, standing in the field, is about 
 5 to 6 cents only, exclusive of the rent of the land.” 
 
 An occasional farmer applied manure to his land, but it was by no means a 
 common practice. A correspondent writes: 26 
 
 “ But little attention is paid to saving or applying manure; we are aware of its 
 utility; we haul it to our fields if we have time; the low price of lands and the high 
 price of labor will not warrant the operation in all cases.” 
 
 21 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1852, Agriculture, 291. 
 
 22 Ibid., 292. 
 
 23 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1850, Agriculture, 20. 
 
 24 Prairie Farmer, XI (1851), p. 222. 
 
 25 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, p. 385. 
 
 26 Ibid., 1852, Agriculture, 278. 
 
 
CORN 
 
 347 
 
 DIFFICULTIES OF GROWING CORN ON THE PRAIRIES. 
 
 Some of the many difficulties encountered by the corn-grower on the 
 prairies were described as follows by a writer from Cook County, Illinois, in 
 1851: 27 
 
 The general complaint is that it often fails to come up when planted, and should 
 it happen to come up the black birds, crows, cranes, and squirrels, or some other 
 depredators, come to claim their share; and in a dry season it will dry up, and in a wet 
 season it is drowned out,’ and, should there be by chance any left to grow the frost 
 often comes in the fall before it is ripe and destroys it, so they are only sure of a 
 small crop; and the consequence is, the country is condemned as not being fit for raising 
 corn, when in most cases the fault is in the cultivator, and not in the climate or soil.” 
 
 The gophers in Wisconsin 28 and the black birds and squirrels in Illinois 
 were constant menaces. Many northern farmers, following the advice of 
 southern correspondents in the agricultural journals, planted their corn shal¬ 
 low. Then, losing their first crop by frost, which penetrated to the kernel and 
 killed the crop, they declared that book farming got them into trouble. 29 
 
 HARVESTING PRACTICES. 
 
 The method of harvesting varied. In Kentucky, the corn was cut and put 
 in shocks containing 144 hills. In the wheat region of Ohio, after the corn 
 had been cut by hand and set in shocks ready for husking, the ground was 
 plowed and seeded to wheat. A few farmers followed the New England cus¬ 
 tom of topping the corn. 30 In the “ corn belt ” of the West the ears were 
 pulled from the stalks and comparatively little corn was cut. In livestock 
 sections the farmers generally fed the corn on the ground, and thus avoided 
 the labor of cutting up, husking, and cribbing. 
 
 THE DECADE 1850 TO 1860 . 
 
 The corn crop of 1859 was 40 per cent greater than that of 1849. (See 
 %• 76, p. 348.) The New England States, with the exception of Con¬ 
 necticut, showed a decrease in production, New York showed a small in¬ 
 crease. From Pennsylvania westward to Indiana the increase had been 
 general. Farther west the gain in production had been more rapid, particu¬ 
 larly in Illinois, Iowa, and Missouri. In Kansas and Nebraska, considerable 
 corn was produced in 1859 along the Mississippi and Kansas Rivers. In 
 Wisconsin corn production was slowly increasing. In 1840 the leading corn- 
 producing States of the Union had been Tennessee, Kentucky, and Virginia, 
 in the order named. By i860 the leading states were Illinois, Ohio, and Mis¬ 
 souri. Thus was the center of corn production moving westward. In 1839 
 the northern States, exclusive of the border States, had produced 31 per cent 
 of the total corn crop; in 1859 they produced 47 per cent of the total. 
 
 In New England, the census report shows a decline in corn production dur¬ 
 ing the fifties. While the New England farmer estimated his cost of corn 
 
 27 Prairie Farmer, XI (1851), p. 183. 
 
 28 Ibid., IV (1844), P- 67. 
 
 20 Ibid., VIII (1848), p. 152. 
 
 80 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1851, Agriculture, 375. 
 
348 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 production at from 40 to 50 cents a bushel, the Illinois fanner generally esti¬ 
 mated his cost at from 12 to 16 cents; a difference in cost which was begin¬ 
 ning to be felt by the former. A Massachusetts writer in 1849 reported: 31 
 
 “ Some are of the opinion that, with the present high cost of labor and manure, we 
 cannot compete with western farmers in raising corn; that, with the increased 
 facilities for transportation, we shall soon be run off the track; that we had better buy 
 
 our corn, than raise it.Taking the average price of corn, for the last six years, 
 
 we may safely estimate that a bushel of corn is worth forty cents. I am aware that it 
 usually costs nearly this sum to raise corn; but then it is one of the best preparatory 
 crops for all others, and the fodder is of much value. The corn crop possesses some 
 
 advantages over most other crops. The main object of most farmers, in 
 
 cultivating their land is to prepare it to produce more grass.” 
 
 Fig. 76.—Corn, 1859. Each dot represents 300,000 bushels. 
 
 During the fifties the area of corn production was pushed rapidly westward. 
 
 Its production was rapidly increasing on the prairies. In New England corn grow¬ 
 ing was declining. 
 
 There was a tendency to seed more acres in oats and less in corn. Important 
 changes in methods of cultivation were the increasing use of machinery and 
 manure. The New England farmer was exerting every means to increase his 
 supply of manure. In addition, muck, guano, lime, superphosphate of lime, and 
 ashes were widely used on corn land. Com planters had not yet come into 
 general use, but the horse-hoe, or cultivator, was used upon most farms. 32 
 From Rhode Island it was reported that the introduction of the planter and 
 cultivator was leading to a closer planting of corn. Whereas formerly it was 
 planted 3^ feet each way, it was now planted in rows 3 feet apart and from 
 2 to 2 .\ feet apart in the rows. 33 In Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and 
 eastern Pennsylvania the use of guano, lime, and superphospha te was rapidly 
 
 31 Massachusetts, Returns of the Agricultural Societies (1849), P- II ^- 
 
 32 Maine Board of Agriculture, 5th Annual Report (i860), p. 176. 
 
 33 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1855, Agriculture, 180. 
 
CORN 
 
 349 
 
 increasing. In Kentucky the cropping system, which was well established 
 prior to 1840, remained unchanged; corn production had increased but little 
 since i860. 
 
 In the prairie region, the corn area increased with the expansion of settle¬ 
 ment into what is now known as the Corn Belt of the United States. Com¬ 
 paratively little corn was sold; it was marketed mostly in the form of cattle 
 and hogs. It is for this reason that, although Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, 
 Iowa, and Missouri were producing from 5 to 18 bushels of corn to every 
 bushel of wheat, the marketing of wheat attracted more attention than that of 
 corn. In the Western States, with the exception of Wisconsin and Michigan, 
 corn was the great staple during the period from 1840 to i860. The spring- 
 wheat region of the Northwest had not yet been settled. As in the East, the 
 principal changes in methods of production during the decade were the adop¬ 
 tion of improved planting and cultivating machinery. 
 
Chapter XXVIII. —The Minor Cereals. 
 
 OATS. 
 
 Production of oats was rather generally distributed over the agricultural 
 area of the North in 1840. In New York, Pennsylvania, and New England 
 more oats were raised than corn. In the general farming regions of eastern 
 Ohio, oats were a leading crop in the field system; west of Ohio oats were a 
 relatively unimportant crop. New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, in the 
 order named, raised the largest crops of oats in 1839, when they produced 
 over 45 per cent of the United States total. (See fig. 77.) Oats were largely 
 raised for farm consumption rather than for sale. 
 
 • . !t 
 
 Fig. 77.—Oats, 1839. Each dot represents 200,000 bushels. 
 
 Oats were quite generally grown throughout the agricultural area of 
 the North. They were largely fed on the farm. 
 
 IN NEW ENGLAND AND NEW YORK. 
 
 t 
 
 
 The New England crop rotation usually included one or two crops of oats. 
 They were sometimes sown as the first crop in the rotation, sometimes after 
 corn or potatoes. Often oats was the last crop, before the land was laid down 
 to grass, the seed having been sown among the oats. 1 In the three northern 
 New England States oats were regarded with more favor than in the three 
 southern States, where corn could be grown to better advantage. In New 
 York the production of oats was general. They were usually grown in rota¬ 
 tion with other crops, frequently as a second crop in the rotation. 2 It was 
 reported in 1849: 
 
 “ In most parts of western New York oats are a secondary crop in importance, and 
 are merely grown for home consumption. But in some counties where wheat is not 
 
 1 2d Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1838), p. 17. 
 
 2 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 288. 
 
 350 
 
THE MINOR CEREALS 
 
 351 
 
 raised oats are a prominent crop.The yield under good culture and on rich land 
 
 varies from sixty to one hundred bushels. They are generally grown on poor 
 
 lands and in a slovenly manner and in such cases produce about thirty bushels.” 
 
 Table 41.— Oats: Production in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. censuses, 1840, 1850, and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 j Total 
 (1,000 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cap¬ 
 
 ita 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cap¬ 
 
 ita 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Inited States. 
 
 ieographic Division: 
 
 New England . 
 
 Middle Atlantic ... 
 East North Central. 
 West North Central 
 Mountain . 
 
 123,0/1 
 
 7,540 
 
 44,401 
 
 27,883 
 
 2,451 
 
 7-2 
 
 3-4 
 
 9-8 
 
 9-5 
 
 5-7 
 
 100.0 
 
 6.0 
 
 36.1 
 
 22.7 
 
 2.0 
 
 146,584 
 
 8,101 
 
 51,469 
 
 35,496 
 
 6833 
 
 11 
 
 61 
 
 2,181 
 
 973 
 
 2,308 
 
 1,165 
 
 215 
 
 1,259 
 
 26,553 
 
 3,378 
 
 21,538 
 
 13,473 
 
 5,655 
 
 10,087 
 
 2,866 
 
 3,415 
 
 3 i 
 
 1,524 
 
 5278 
 
 6 - 3 
 
 3-0 
 
 8.7 
 
 7.8 
 
 7 - 8 
 
 1.0 
 
 3-7 
 
 3 -o 
 
 7-3 
 
 1.1 
 i -5 
 3-4 
 
 8.6 
 
 6.9 
 9-3 
 
 6.8 
 
 5-7 
 11.8 
 
 7.2 
 11.2 
 
 5-0 
 
 7-9 
 
 7-7 
 
 100.0 
 
 5-5 
 
 35-1 
 
 24.2 
 
 4-7 
 
 • «•••• 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 
 
 
 few England: 
 
 Maine . 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 [iddle Atlantic: 
 
 New York. 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 ast North Central : 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 Zest North Central: 
 Minnesota . 
 
 1,076 
 
 1,296 
 
 2,223 
 
 1,320 
 
 172 
 1453 
 
 20,676 
 
 3,083 
 
 20,642 
 
 14,393 
 
 5,982 
 
 4,988 
 
 2,114 
 
 406 
 
 2.1 
 4-6 
 
 7.6 
 1.8 
 
 1.6 
 4-7 
 
 8-5 
 
 8 - 3 
 12.0 
 
 9 - 4 
 
 8.7 
 10.5 
 
 10.0 
 13-i 
 
 •9 
 
 1.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 1.1 
 
 . 1 
 
 1.2 
 
 16.8 
 
 2.5 
 
 16.8 
 
 11.7 
 
 4.9 
 4.1 
 i .7 
 
 • 3 
 
 1-5 
 •7 
 1.6 
 .8 
 . 1 
 .8 
 
 18.1 
 
 2.3 
 
 14.7 
 
 9.2 
 
 3-9 
 
 6.9 
 
 1.9 
 
 2.3 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 Dakota Territory .. 
 
 216 
 
 2,235 
 
 5-0 
 
 5-8 
 
 .2 
 
 1.8 
 
 1.1 
 3-6 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 fountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Utah . 
 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 1.0 
 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 
 
 
 
 acific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 
 
 61 
 
 A 6 
 
 
 California . 
 
 
 
 
 4 • ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 | 
 
 
 
 i860 . 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cap¬ 
 
 ita 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 172,643 
 
 5-5 
 
 10,895 
 
 3-5 
 
 67,101 
 
 9.0 
 
 5 T 043 
 
 7-4 
 
 11,910 
 
 5-5 
 
 72 
 
 • • • • 
 
 2,063 
 
 4-6 
 
 2,989 
 
 4-8 
 
 1,329 
 
 4.0 
 
 3,630 
 
 11 .5 
 
 1,180 
 
 1.0 
 
 245 
 
 1.4 
 
 1,522 
 
 3-3 
 
 35 T 75 
 
 9 .i 
 
 4,539 
 
 6.8 
 
 27,387 
 
 9-4 
 
 15,409 
 
 6.6 
 
 5 , 3 i 8 
 
 39 
 
 15,220 
 
 8.9 
 
 4,037 
 
 5-4 
 
 n ,059 
 
 14.2 
 
 2,176 
 
 12.6 
 
 5,888 
 
 8.7 
 
 3,681 
 
 31 
 
 3 
 
 1.0 
 
 74 
 
 2.6 
 
 88 
 
 1.0 
 
 8 
 
 
 63 
 
 1.6 
 
 1 
 
 % • • • • 
 
 134 
 
 11.6 
 
 886 
 
 16.9 
 
 1,043 
 
 2.7 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total 1 . 
 
 100.0 
 
 6.3 
 38.9 
 29.6 
 6.9 
 • • • • • 
 1.2 
 
 1-7 
 
 .8 
 
 2.1 
 
 • 7 
 . 1 
 
 • 9 
 
 20.4 
 
 2.6 
 
 15-9 
 
 8.9 
 
 3-1 
 
 8.8 
 
 2.4 
 
 6.4 
 
 1-3 
 
 3-4 
 
 2.1 
 
 . 1 
 
 . 1 
 
 •5 
 
 .6 
 
 In Erie County oats were often the main crop on farms having shale land. 
 Many farmers were said to have “cleared and paid for their farms, built 
 good houses and barns and surrounded themselves with the reasonable com¬ 
 forts of life by means of the oat crop.” 3 In the Hudson Valley in eastern 
 
 3 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1843), p. 440. 
 
352 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 New York, where a rotation having but little wheat was commonly practiced, 
 oats were the leading grain crop. In Dutchess County, the leading oat- 
 producing county in the state, a rotation of corn, roots, oats, and grass was 
 reported. 4 In Orange County, the best crop of oats offered for premium to 
 the agricultural society in 1844 yielded 108 bushels to the acre; the second 
 best 74 bushels. 5 In New Jersey farmers were said to be sowing more oats 
 and buckwheat and having less corn and fallow. 6 
 
 The census of 1850 showed a relatively small increase in oat production— 
 from 123,000,000 bushels in 1839 to 146,000,000 bushels. Maine and New 
 York were the States of greatest increase in the East, and Illinois, Wisconsin, 
 Iowa, and Missouri in the West. (See figs. 77 and 78.) 
 
 In Maine, the production of oats was said to have become decidedly greater 
 because of the failure of potatoes and wheat. 7 A correspondent reported in 
 
 Fig. 78.—Oats, 1849. Each dot represents 200,000 bushels. 
 
 On prairie farms oats were a usual crop, but they did not occupy such 
 a prominent place as wheat or corn. 
 
 1844: 8 “This grain is extensively cultivated. Large quantities are used in 
 the logging swamps, on stage routes, in stables, and a great amount is shipped.” 
 Another correspondent from Somerset County reported 9 in 1851 that “A 
 mixed crop of oats and peas is raised here in large quantities; and used for 
 making pork, beef and provender for teams lumbering.” In New York and 
 Pennsylvania it was said in 1850 that oats were taking the place formerly 
 occupied by the summer fallow. 10 
 
 4 Cultivator, new series, I (1844), p. 107. 
 
 5 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Reports 1844, p. 50; 1849, p. 288. 
 
 6 Cultivator, X (1843), P- XI 3 - 
 
 7 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Reports 1848, Agriculture, 55*1 1844, P* 49 J 1848, p. 3431 
 
 1851, p. 135 . 
 
 8 Ibid., 1844, p. 49. 
 
 9 Ibid., 1851, p. 135 * 
 
 10 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. lxvii. 
 
THE MINOR CEREALS 
 
 353 
 
 In Maryland and Delaware the census of 1850 reported a considerable de¬ 
 cline in oat production during the previous decade. Oats had thrived on the 
 depleted soils, but with increased attention to rotation and fertilization many 
 farmers were endeavoring to substitute wheat, corn, or potatoes for oats, in 
 the hope of thereby securing greater profits. 11 In Ohio, the culture of the 
 oat crop was said to be growing unpopular among the best farmers, who 
 believed that oats impoverished the land more than corn. 12 In the corn region 
 of the West oats were regarded with little favor. One great difficulty with 
 the crop was the tendency to lodge when planted on rich prairie soils or on 
 the fertile bottomlands. 13 In the wheat region poor crops from 1847 to 1853 
 
 were leading to increased attention to a rotation in which oats had an important 
 place. 
 
 Fig. 79.—Oats, 1859. Each dot represents 200,000 bushels. 
 
 In the West the wheat farms of Wisconsin and Illinois also grew many 
 oats. There was no large area in which the production of oats was 
 concentrated. 
 
 Oats were harvested and threshed in much the same way as wheat. Inas¬ 
 much as they were commonly grown in small quantities, they were more 
 frequently cut with the cradle and threshed with the flail. 
 
 RYE. 
 
 In 1840, eastern Pennsylvania, eastern New York, and New Jersey com¬ 
 prised the leading rye-producing sections of the country. Pennsylvania alone 
 produced one-third of the total rye crop of the country, and with New York 
 over one-half of the total. New Jersey ranked third, Virginia fourth, Ken¬ 
 tucky fifth, and Ohio sixth. West of Ohio very little rye was grown. In the 
 southern New England States rye was more commonly grown than wheat. 14 
 (See figs. 80 and 81.) 
 
 11 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1852, Agriculture, p. 176; 1849, p. 115. 
 
 12 Ibid., 1852, p. 258. 
 
 13 Ibid., 1852, p. 343; 1849, p. 181. 
 
 14 Ibid., 1847, p. 124. 
 
 24 
 
354 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 In 1849 it was apparent that the national production of rye had declined. 
 For that year all of the northern States as far west as Indiana, with the 
 exception of New York, reported a lower total production than for 1839. Es¬ 
 pecially noticeable was the decline of eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and 
 Maryland, where rye production had formerly been concentrated. 15 In this 
 section rye was usually grown in small fields on the poorer soils, and was fre 
 quently substituted for wheat after that crop ceased to thrive. But with the 
 introduction of new varieties of wheat, and with the improvement of eastern 
 soils, wheat recovered some of its popularity and the culture of rye declined. 
 
 In New England, rye was said to be cultivated by only few farmers and 
 chiefly on wornout pasture land or on newly cleared land. 17 From Vermont it 
 
 was reported: 18 
 
 Rye was extensively grown in the North Atlantic states where 
 wheat had been yielding poor crops. Eastern Pennsylvania, New. Jersey 
 and the Hudson valley region of New York constituted the principal rye 
 producing region. 
 
 “ Ry e has considerably diminished within the last twenty years, as it is not now con¬ 
 sidered so important an article for family consumption since western flour has become 
 cheaper and a common article of consumption and a necessity in most families; and the 
 praiseworthy and philanthropic spirit of the age having banished the spirits former y 
 extracted from this grain, it is no longer cultivated as a source of profit. 
 
 But Rensselaer County, New York, one of the leading rye-growing coun- 
 ties, reported in 1833: 19 “ Large quantities of rye are cultivated in this 
 county, for the Baltimore market, where it is mostly distilled. It is one of the 
 most profitable crops we raise.” 
 
 In eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Maryland the decline in rye 
 production was ascribed by many to frequent attacks of rust, the improvement 
 
 15 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. lx. 
 
 16 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 123. 
 
 17 Ibid., 1850, Agriculture, p. 270; 1852, p. 126. 
 
 18 Ibid., 1849, pp. 86, 91. 
 
 19 Ibid., (1853, Agriculture), p. 155 - 
 
 
THE MINOR CEREALS 
 
 355 
 
 of farming methods, the introduction of Mediterranean wheat, and the conse¬ 
 quent increase in the wheat yield. 20 In Harford County, Maryland, the rye 
 crop was said to have been abandoned, because of failure for the past few 
 
 Table 42.— Rye: Production in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. censuses of 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 1,000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 ( 1,000 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 1,000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1.000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 1,000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 lited States . 
 
 18,646 
 
 1,092 
 
 100.0 
 
 14,189 
 
 6l2 
 
 100.0 
 
 21,101 
 
 671 
 
 :ographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 1,985 
 
 888 
 
 10.6 
 
 1,571 
 
 576 
 
 II.I 
 
 1,426 
 
 455 
 
 Middle Atlantic ... 
 
 H ,259 
 
 2,487 
 
 60.4 
 
 10,209 
 
 1,731 
 
 72.0 
 
 II .701 
 
 1,569 
 
 East North Central. 
 
 1,068 
 
 365 
 
 5-7 
 
 775 
 
 171 
 
 5-5 
 
 3,501 
 
 505 
 
 West North Central 
 
 72 
 
 170 
 
 • 4 
 
 63 
 
 72 
 
 •4 
 
 605 
 
 279 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 -a 
 
 
 
 T 9 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 O 
 
 I 
 
 
 55 
 
 1Z 
 
 TO A 
 
 iw England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 138 
 
 275 
 
 • 7 
 
 103 
 
 176 
 
 • 7 
 
 124 
 
 196 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 308 
 
 1,083 
 
 1-7 
 
 183 
 
 576 
 
 i -3 
 
 128 
 
 393 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 231 
 
 791 
 
 1.2 
 
 176 
 
 561 
 
 i -3 
 
 139 
 
 442 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 536 
 
 727 
 
 2.9 
 
 481 
 
 484 
 
 3.4 
 
 388 
 
 3 i 5 
 
 .^hode Island . 
 
 35 
 
 3 i 7 
 
 .2 
 
 27 
 
 179 
 
 .2 
 
 28 
 
 162 
 
 Tonnecticut . 
 
 737 
 
 2,379 
 
 3-9 
 
 601 
 
 1,621 
 
 4.2 
 
 619 
 
 L 345 
 
 ddle Atlantic : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 2,979 
 
 1,227 
 
 16.0 
 
 4,148 
 
 i 339 
 
 29.2 
 
 4,787 
 
 1,234 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 1,666 
 
 4,462 
 
 8.9 
 
 1,256 
 
 2,565 
 
 8.9 
 
 L 439 
 
 2,142 
 
 3 ennsylvania . 
 
 6,614 
 
 3,836 
 
 35-5 
 
 4,805 
 
 2,079 
 
 33-9 
 
 5 475 
 
 1,884 
 
 st North Central : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 )hio . 
 
 814 
 
 536 
 
 4-3 
 
 426 
 
 215 
 
 3-0 
 
 684 
 
 292 
 
 ndiana . 
 
 130 
 
 189 
 
 • 7 
 
 79 
 
 80 
 
 .6 
 
 463 
 
 343 
 
 llinois . 
 
 88 
 
 185 
 
 •5 
 
 83 
 
 98 
 
 .6 
 
 95 i 
 
 556 
 
 lichigan . 
 
 34 
 
 161 
 
 .2 
 
 106 
 
 266 
 
 .7 
 
 5 i 4 
 
 686 
 
 Visconsin . 
 
 2 
 
 63 
 
 
 81 
 
 266 
 
 .6 
 
 889 
 
 i,i 45 
 
 ist North Central : 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 21 
 
 
 TOT 
 
 •7 r\f\ 
 
 owa . 
 
 4. 
 
 88 
 
 
 IQ 
 
 q8 
 
 T 
 
 T8a 
 
 OO T 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 68 
 
 179 
 
 • 4 
 
 44 
 
 65 
 
 •3 
 
 10 0 
 293 
 
 z 7 1 
 248 
 
 )akota Territory .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 T 
 
 T AC 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■a 
 
 1 4 o 
 
 87 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 A 
 
 °/ 
 
 36 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 •untain : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *ew Mexico . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 T 
 
 T A 
 
 Jtah . 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 18 
 
 
 T 
 
 A 4 
 
 19 
 
 T A 
 
 levada . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 :ific : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A 4 
 
 Vashington . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 TO 
 
 'regon . 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 8 
 
 
 0 
 
 52 
 
 137 
 
 alifornia . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 0 
 
 52 
 
 Less than 500 bushels 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 100.0 
 
 6.8 
 
 55-5 
 
 16.6 
 
 2.9 
 
 •3 
 
 I 
 
 2. 
 
 22. 
 
 6. 
 
 26. 
 
 3 - 
 
 2. 
 
 4 . 
 
 2. 
 
 4 - 
 
 1. 
 
 •3 
 
 years. 21 From Burlington, New Jersey, it was reported 22 that the rye crop 
 had “ disappeared rapidly from the fields since the introduction of Mediter- 
 
 20 Ibid., 1849, p. 123. 
 n Ibid., 1851, Agriculture, p. 267. 
 22 Ibid., 1850, p. 202. 
 
 4* O ON O 00 vj vo h\qvj on On 
 
356 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 ranean wheat, which succeeds admirably on light sandy soils, yielding fifty 
 per cent more in quantity than rye, and commanding thirty-three per cent 
 
 more in price.” 
 
 In the West, rye was largely used as a fall or spring pasture for livestock. 
 It was frequently sown in the midst of corn at the last cultivation and “ hog¬ 
 ged down to the ground,” in the fall. 23 In Ross County, Ohio, in 1848, its 
 cultivation was reported to have been almost abandoned by the farmers in 
 consequence of repeated failures since 1840, the cause of which was reported 
 to be as much a mystery as the potato rot. 24 In Wisconsin its culture was 
 reported to be chiefly confined to the German settlers. 25 
 
 By 1859, the production of rye showed considerable increase. In New 
 England there had been a small decrease, which was more than offset by the 
 
 Fig. 81.—Rye, 1859. Each dot represents 25,000 bushels. 
 
 The area in rye increased but little from 1840 to i860. The increase 
 was mainly in the West where rye was only an occasional crop. 
 
 general increase in the West. West of Ohio the increase had been large, 
 especially in Illinois and Wisconsin, each of which was reported to have 
 raised about 900,000 bushels in i 859 * 26 (See fig. 81.) 
 
 BARLEY. 
 
 The relative importance of barley and oats in the United States in i 839 > 
 expressed in bushels, was as 1 is to 30. Barley was the least important of the 
 cereals. More than half of the crop was produced in New York. The barley 
 crop increased fourfold during the 20 years from 1840 to i860, or from 
 4 161 too bushels to 15,826,000 bushels. The States contributing most to the 
 increase were California, Ohio, Illinois, and Wisconsin. Important increases 
 
 23 Ibid., 1852, Agriculture, pp. 262, 295. 
 
 24 Ohio State Board of Agric. 3d Annual Report (1848), p. 103. 
 
 25 Prairie Farmer, VIII (1848), p. 35. 
 
 26 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, pp. lx, lxii. 
 
THE MINOR CEREALS 
 
 357 
 
 occurred also in New York, Maine, and Pennsylvania. A large part of the 
 increase came from new territory; nevertheless, owing to difficulties in wheat¬ 
 growing in the East, barley gained in most of the eastern States. 27 In western 
 
 STATE BUS. 
 N.Y. 2.320.066 
 Me. 353.161 
 Ohio H 2.4*0 
 Pa. 209.693 
 Plan. / 6 5.3! 9 
 Mich. 127.602 
 
 STATC BUS. 
 N.H. 121699 
 Va. 67.430 
 
 III. 62.251 
 
 Ft. /. 66.4 90 
 
 Other 212.751 
 
 U S. 4,161.504 
 
 Fig. 82.—Barley, 1839. Each dot represents 100,000 bushels. 
 
 Over one-half the total barley crop of the country was grown in New 
 York. In the Mohawk Valley barley was taking the place of wheat. 
 
 Fig. 83.—Barley, 1859. Each dot represents 100,000 bushels. 
 
 During the fifties California developed as a leading barley growing 
 center. It was not a prominent crop in the Mississippi Valley except in 
 the vicinity of Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 
 New York barley was often substituted for wheat after the advent of the 
 wheat-midge. 28 
 
 27 Maine Board of Agric. 5th Annual Report (i860), Secretary’s Report, 180. 
 
 28 Country Gentleman (1859), XIII, 41. 
 
358 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The increased immigration from Europe during the fifties was thought to 
 have stimulated barley production in America. To quote from the census 
 report for i860: 29 
 
 “ Barley is now used in this country principally for beer-making purposes. With the 
 rapid increase in our foreign population there is yearly an increased demand for barley, 
 and the price has advanced much more than that of any other of our ordinary grain 
 crops. Weight for weight, barley of late years has brought a much higher price than 
 wheat, and, where the soil and climate are well suited to its production, there are few 
 crops more profitable.” 
 
 Table 43. — Barley: Production in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. censuses of 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division 
 and State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 
 i860. 
 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 1,000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 1,000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 1,000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 United States . 
 
 4,162 
 
 244 
 
 100.0 
 
 5,167 
 
 223 
 
 100.0 
 
 15,826 
 
 503 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England. 
 
 797 
 
 357 
 
 19.2 
 
 414 
 
 152 
 
 8.0 
 
 1,199 
 
 382 
 
 7.6 
 
 Middle Atlantic ... 
 
 2,742 
 
 606 
 
 65.9 
 
 3,757 
 
 637 
 
 72.7 
 
 4,742 
 
 636 
 
 30.0 
 
 East North Central.. 
 
 462 
 
 158 
 
 II. I 
 
 796 
 
 176 
 
 15-4 
 
 4,098 
 
 592 
 
 25.9 
 
 West North Central 
 
 II 
 
 25 
 
 .3 
 
 36 
 
 41 
 
 • 7 
 
 8ll 
 
 374 
 
 5-i 
 
 TMVmntain 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 25 
 
 
 18 
 
 IOI 
 
 .1 
 
 Pacific .. 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 92 
 
 .2 
 
 4446 
 
 10,013 
 
 28.1 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 355 
 
 708 
 
 8.6 
 
 152 
 
 260 
 
 2.9 
 
 802 
 
 1,277 
 
 5-i 
 
 New Hampshire .. . 
 
 122 
 
 428 
 
 2.9 
 
 70 
 
 221 
 
 i-3 
 
 121 
 
 371 
 
 .8 
 
 V ermont . 
 
 55 
 
 188 
 
 1-3 
 
 42 
 
 134 
 
 .8 
 
 79 
 
 251 
 
 .5 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 165 
 
 224 
 
 4.0 
 
 112 
 
 113 
 
 2.2 
 
 135 
 
 no 
 
 .8 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 66 
 
 611 
 
 1.6 
 
 19 
 
 128 
 
 • 4 
 
 4i 
 
 235 
 
 •3 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 34 
 
 109 
 
 .8 
 
 19 
 
 52 
 
 • 4 
 
 21 
 
 45 
 
 .1 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 2,520 
 
 1,038 
 
 60.6 
 
 3,585 
 
 1,157 
 
 69.4 
 
 4,186 
 
 1,079 
 
 26.5 
 
 New Jersey. 
 
 12 
 
 33 
 
 • 3 
 
 6 
 
 13 
 
 . 1 
 
 25 
 
 37 
 
 . 2 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 210 
 
 122 
 
 5-o 
 
 166 
 
 72 
 
 3-2 
 
 53i 
 
 183 
 
 3-3 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 213 
 
 140 
 
 5-i 
 
 354 
 
 179 
 
 6.9 
 
 1,664 
 
 711 
 
 10.' 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 28 
 
 4i 
 
 • 7 
 
 46 
 
 46 
 
 • 9 
 
 382 
 
 283 
 
 2.4 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 82 
 
 173 
 
 2.0 
 
 hi 
 
 130 
 
 2.1 
 
 1,037 
 
 605 
 
 6 .( 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 128 
 
 602 
 
 3-1 
 
 75 
 
 189 
 
 1.4 
 
 308 
 
 411 
 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 11 
 
 357 
 
 .2 
 
 210 
 
 687 
 
 4.1 
 
 707 
 
 912 
 
 4-5 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "MinnpQnta 
 
 
 
 
 r 
 
 200 
 
 
 no 
 
 638 
 
 b 
 
 ./ 
 
 Town . 
 
 1 
 
 17 
 
 
 25 
 
 131 
 
 .5 
 
 467 
 
 692 
 
 3-C 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 10 
 
 26 
 
 • 3 
 
 10 
 
 14 
 
 .2 
 
 228 
 
 193 
 
 1.4 
 
 "NIpKra ctr a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 38 
 
 
 TCnnsa <; 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 44 
 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Npw A/fp'X’irn 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 65 
 
 
 Utah 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 158 
 
 
 10 
 
 248 
 
 .] 
 
 Npvp A n 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 233 
 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 W n <; Vi i n ctnri 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 399 
 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 26 
 
 500 
 
 • 2 
 
 California . 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 105 
 
 .2 
 
 4,4i5 
 
 11,620 
 
 27.9 
 
 29 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. lxviii. 
 
Chapter XXIX. —Flax and Hemp. 
 
 FLAX GROWN FOR SEED RATHER THAN FOR OIL. 
 
 While the census of 1840 gives no satisfactory statistics regarding the 
 production of flax, considerable quantities of the fiber were grown in Kentucky, 
 Virginia, and New York. Indiana and Ohio flax was said to be grown chiefly 
 for seed and for use in making home-made linen. 1 Outside these five States 
 very little flax was grown. 
 
 While the growing of flax for seed was said to be increasingly profitable 
 as the demand for linseed oil increased, 2 the growing of flax fiber was gener¬ 
 ally regarded as an uncertain and unprofitable business during the forties. 
 Judge Van Wyck, at a meeting of the New York Farmers Club, in 1845, 
 stated the situation as follows : 3 
 
 “ I fear the culture of flax will not repay the farmer if it is conducted as it has hitherto 
 been done for fifty years past. Too much labor, too much cost in getting it prepared 
 and sent to a proper market. The price of seven and a half cents to twelve and a half 
 
 cents a pound will not remunerate the producer. Grain crops cost us nothing 
 
 like the labor and expense of flax.It will never do in the northern States, unless 
 
 some revolution is effected in the culture, dressing, etc. If, by machinery, the difficulties 
 can be overcome, than it may answer.” 
 
 Cheap cotton appeared to be the accepted reason for the low price of flax. 
 The census of 1850 showed that the leading States in the production of flax 
 fiber were Kentucky, 1,050 tons ; Virginia, 500 tons; and New York, 470 tons. 
 Ohio produced 189,000 bushels of flaxseed, or over one-third of all the 
 flaxseed reported. In the New England States and also in the territory west 
 of Indiana comparatively little flax was grown. (See figs. 84 and 85.) 
 In Ohio, flax was largely cultivated for the seed alone; in the Miami Valley 
 particularly this branch of agriculture was carried on extensively. 4 Preble 
 County, Ohio, was said to be the greatest flax-growing county in the United 
 States. 5 Dayton and Cincinnati were large markets for flaxseed. In the 
 former city 150,000 bushels of seed were said to be pressed for oil annually. 
 The oil was shipped to New York and the oil-cake to England. 6 
 
 1 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1844, p. 97. 
 
 2 Ibid., 100. 
 
 8 Ibid., (1845), p. 726. 
 
 4 Cultivator, new series, VII (1850), p. 129. 
 
 6 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1847, p. 164. 
 
 c Cultivator, new series, VII (1850), p. 129. 
 
 359 
 
360 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Fig. 84.—Flaxseed, 1849. Each dot represents 25,000 bushels. 
 
 Fig. 85.—Flaxseed, 1859. Each dot represents 10,000 bushels. 
 
 By i860 the Cincinnati region had still further developed. One-half the total flax¬ 
 seed crop was grown in this vicinity. 
 
FLAX AND HEMP 
 
 361 
 
 Table 44.— Flaxseed: Production in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. censuses of 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division 
 and State. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 United States . 
 
 562,312 
 
 100.0 
 
 566,867 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England. 
 
 2483 
 
 0.4 
 
 896 
 
 0.2 
 
 Middle Atlantic. 
 
 Il 6 , 2 l 6 
 
 20.7 
 
 84,430 
 
 15-0 
 
 East North Central ... 
 
 238,265 
 
 42.4 
 
 375,107 
 
 66.2 
 
 West North Central .. 
 
 15,655 
 
 2.8 
 
 10,708 
 
 1.9 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 
 
 OO 
 
 36 
 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 580 
 
 . I 
 
 419 
 
 .1 
 
 New Hampshire . 
 
 189 
 
 
 "to 
 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 939 
 
 .2 
 
 33 i 
 
 . 1 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 72 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 
 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 703 
 
 . I 
 
 109 
 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 New York. 
 
 57,963 
 
 10.3 
 
 56,991 
 
 10.1 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 16,525 
 
 3-0 
 
 3,241 
 
 .6 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 41,728 
 
 7.4 
 
 24,198 
 
 4-3 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 188,880 
 
 33-6 
 
 242,420 
 
 42.8 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 36,888 
 
 6.6 
 
 119,420 
 
 21.1 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 10,787 
 
 1.9 
 
 8,670 
 
 1-5 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 519 
 
 . 1 
 
 34 i 
 
 .1 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 1,191 
 
 .2 
 
 4,256 
 
 .7 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 
 
 118 
 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 1,959 
 
 •4 
 
 5 , 92 i 
 
 1.1 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 13,696 
 
 2.4 
 
 4,656 
 
 .8 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 Utah . 
 
 5 
 
 
 33 
 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 
 'to 
 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 California . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 LOCAL MARKETS FOR SEED AND FIBER. 
 
 Oil mills and fiber mills were constantly springing up, and offering induce¬ 
 ments to farmers to grow flax. The following report is from Miami County, 
 Ohio, in 1846: 7 
 
 “ The production of flax for the seed has been very considerable the past season. 
 Persons desirous of purchasing large quantities furnished the seed to farmers during 
 the preceding winter, at the same time, taking written contracts for the delivery of the 
 
 crop to them at the price of eighty cents per bushel, or the market price. By 
 
 means of these stimulants large quantities were produced.” 
 
 7 Ohio State Board of Agriculture, 1st Annual Report (1846), p. 55. 
 
362 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Another report from St. Joseph County, Indiana, reads as follows: 8 
 
 “ The customary rate of exchange at Oil Mills is a gallon of oil for a bushel of 
 
 see( [. No investment pays better than a few acres in flaxseed bartered for oil 
 
 and spread upon our buildings, farming utensils and gates.” 
 
 Table 45. —Flax fiber: Production in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1850 and i860.] 
 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1,000 
 
 ibs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total'. 
 
 TTnJfprl .States . 
 
 7 7m 
 
 100.0 
 
 4,720 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 New England. 
 
 Middle Atlantic. 
 
 East North Central... 
 West North Central.. 
 
 Mnnnfain . 
 
 65 
 
 1,653 
 
 1,267 
 
 590 
 
 I 
 
 .8 
 
 21.5 
 
 16.4 
 
 7.6 
 
 13 
 
 1,879 
 
 1,054 
 
 143 
 
 4 
 
 .3 
 
 39-8 
 
 22.3 
 
 3 -o 
 
 .1 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 New England: 
 
 A/faine . 
 
 17 
 
 .2 
 
 3 
 
 . 1 
 
 New Hampshire . 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 8 
 
 21 
 
 T 
 
 2 
 
 
 • 3 
 
 7 
 
 .2 
 
 
 1 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 icnoae isianu . 
 
 18 
 
 .2 
 
 1 
 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 New York .. 
 
 940 
 
 183 
 
 530 
 
 447 
 
 12.2 
 
 1,518 
 
 32.2 
 
 New Tersev . 
 
 2.4 
 
 49 
 
 1.0 
 
 Ppnn Avivan ia . . 
 
 6.9 
 
 312 
 
 6.6 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 5.8 
 
 883 
 
 18.7 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 585 
 
 7.6 
 
 97 
 
 2.0 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 160 
 
 2.0 
 
 48 
 
 1.0 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 7 
 
 . 1 
 
 4 
 
 .1 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 68 
 
 •9 
 
 22 
 
 • 5 
 
 West North Central 
 
 A/f innpsr>ta . 
 
 2 
 
 . 1 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 63 
 
 .8 
 
 30 
 
 .6 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 527 
 
 6.8 
 
 no 
 
 2.3 
 
 TC ansa s 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Mountain : 
 
 Utah . 
 
 1 
 
 
 4 
 
 .1 
 
 Pacific : 
 
 Orecrnn 
 
 1 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a Less than 500 pounds 
 
 More or less flax was still grown in the family “ flax patch.” In Gallia 
 County, Ohio, in 1849, it was said: 9 
 
 “ The operations in flax culture are very limited, many of the old matrons (notwith¬ 
 standing the cheapness of cotton fabric), annually have a ‘ flax patch from which they 
 are enabled to make sewing thread, table linen and towels. The seed from which, above 
 a stock of seed for the next season, is taken to market, and not more than 950 barrels 
 has found its way to all points of trade in the county, since June last.” 
 
 8 Prairie Farmer, XII (1852), p. 199. 
 
 9 Ohio State Board of Agriculture, 4th Annual Report (1849), p. 97 - 
 
FLAX AND HEMP 
 
 363 
 
 In regions of the West where flax was grown for seed the straw was com¬ 
 monly not utilized, a fact which was greatly lamented by many of the older 
 flax growers. 10 When threshed by machine, the straw was left in a “ rough and 
 tangled ” condition; yet mills were established, and many attempts made to 
 utilize the straw in the manufacture of paper. * 11 At Beloit, Wisconsin, in 1854, 
 flax-straw was reported to be worth from $4 to $7 a ton at the paper mill; 12 
 in Winnebago County, Illinois, $5 a ton. 13 In Seneca County, New York, 
 in 1853, flax straw was worth $5 a ton for manufacturing into lint. Flax grown 
 for fiber was pulled by hand or cut with the cradle. When grown for seed it 
 was cut with the cradle and sometimes threshed with a machine, but a more 
 common way was to tramp it out with horses. 14 Flax fiber was largely dew- 
 retted instead of water-retted, 15 as in the old-fashioned system. 
 
 DECREASE IN FIBER AND INCREASE IN SEED, 1850 TO 1860 . 
 
 The census of i860 showed that the production of flax fiber had decreased 
 from 7,700,000 pounds in 1849 4,700,000 pounds in 1859, a falling off 
 
 of nearly one-half during the decade. Meanwhile, the production of flax for 
 seed had increased but slightly (less than 4,500 pounds). (See figs. 84 and 
 85.) New York, which reported a considerable increase since 1850, now 
 led in the production of flax fiber. Ohio, Kentucky, Virginia, Pennsylvania, 
 and North Carolina followed in the order named. New York and Ohio were 
 the only States showing a considerable increase in flax production. In the pro¬ 
 duction of seed, Ohio and Indiana led the States, with New York, Virginia, 
 and Kentucky next in order. These five States produced 84 per cent of the 
 total crop of flaxseed in 1859. The production of flaxseed and fiber in the 
 family flax patch was decreasing and flax had not yet become a distinctive 
 pioneer crop in the West. 
 
 HEMP PRODUCTION IN 1840 . 
 
 The census of 1840, which reported hemp and flax together, showed that 
 Virginia led all the States in the production of these crops, but the figures 
 given were rather generally criticized as inaccurate. Charles Cist, writing in 
 1845, asserted: “ Kentucky and Missouri produce more hemp than all the 
 rest of the United States, and ten times as much as either Ohio, Indiana or 
 Virginia.” A Kentucky correspondent wrote: 
 
 “There are probably not 100 tons of hemp produced in Virginia. It is grown to a 
 limited extent in the ^counties of Virginia bordering on the Ohio River. The product in 
 Kentucky is about 15,000 tons; of Missouri 6,000 to 8,000 tons; Indiana and Illinois 
 500 tons; Ohio 500 to 1,000 tons.” 
 
 Hon. Adam Beatty, in 1844, estimated the amount of hemp grown in Ken¬ 
 tucky for the past 2 years as about 12,000 tons per annum. 16 Kentucky and 
 
 10 Prairie Farmer, XII (1852), p. 198. 
 
 11 Ibid., XIV (1854), p. 283; Cultivator, new series, VII (1850), p. 308. 
 
 12 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1854, Agriculture, p. 186. 
 
 13 Prairie Farmer, XIV (1854), p. 283. 
 
 14 Ibid., XII (1852), p. 199. 
 
 15 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, pp. 726, 732. 
 
 16 Ibid., 1844, p. 96. 
 
364 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Missouri were generally considered as the leading States in hemp production 
 in 1840. 
 
 In Missouri, hemp was grown mainly in Lafayette County and in other 
 counties bordering on the Missouri River. In Kentucky, hemp production was 
 concentrated in the heart of the limestone district. Mason, Bourbon, Mont¬ 
 gomery, Clarke, Fayette, Woodford, and Scott Counties in 1844 were re¬ 
 garded as best adapted for hemp, and in them the crop was extensively 
 grown. 17 
 
 METHODS OF CULTIVATION AND HARVESTING. 
 
 In Kentucky, the growing of successive crops of hemp for 9 or 10 years 
 on the same land was frequent. “ Good hemp land, in Mason County,” it was 
 said, 18 “ will upon an average, in ordinary seasons, yield a ton (2,240 lbs.) 
 for every three acres.” The methods of sowing and culture were similar to 
 those employed with corn. Adam Beatty reported 19 in 1844: 
 
 “ Pulling is still practiced by some. With hemp hooks, tolerable hands will cut, on an 
 average, half an acre each; with cradling scythes, an acre may be cut with ease, by 
 
 good hands, in hemp not exceeding six or seven feet high.First rate hands on the 
 
 common break will clean two hundred pounds per day, upon an average. Two of my 
 best hands, during the past season, for every day they broke, favorable and unfavorable, 
 averaged 186 pounds. Two others, who are young men, and not full hands, average 
 144 pounds. The ordinary task for hands is 100 pounds. Many efforts have been made 
 to clean hemp by machinery, but hitherto without success. At least no method has yet 
 been discovered, that answers as well as the common hand breake.” 20 
 
 Nearly all the hemp grown in Kentucky and Missouri was dew-retted and 
 manufactured into rope and bagging for use in the cotton trade of the south. 
 A considerable quantity, however, was shipped to eastern cities for use in 
 making rope for ship-rigging and into cable. 21 Adam Beatty reported that in 
 1844 there was received at Maysville, Kentucky, a leading market, 2,669 tons 
 of dew-retted hemp and 81 tons of water-retted hemp. 22 
 
 ATTEMPTS TO PRODUCE WATER-RETTED HEMP. 
 
 In consequence of the increasing production and the limited demand of the 
 cotton trade for bagging and rope, a considerable surplus of dew-retted hemp 
 accumulated in the hands of the hemp growers in the early forties. 23 The 
 Kentucky hemp-grower was anxious to improve the quality of his hemp by 
 some cheap method, thus producing a good grade of clean hemp which could 
 be sold on the market for naval and merchant service in competition with 
 that which was imported. 24 
 
 "The great difficulty [reported one] is a process of water-retting and a break- 
 such as would enable the farmer properly to prepare for the market much of the hemp, 
 which is now converted into bagging or wasted.” 25 
 
 17 Beatty, Essays on Practical Agriculture, 112. 
 is Ibid., 113. 
 
 19 Ibid., 107, 108. 
 
 20 Ibid., 112. 
 
 21 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, p. 701. 
 
 22 Ibid., 1844, p. 95. 
 
 23 Ibid., 96. 
 
 24 Ibid., 1844, p. 276. The principal source of foreign supply was Russia. 
 23 Ibid., 98. 
 
FLAX AND HEMP 
 
 365 
 
 The Federal Government in 1841 authorized a bounty, which allowed for the 
 payment of not more than $280 per ton for American water-retted hemp, pro¬ 
 vided it was suitable for naval cordage. 26 Many of the planters prepared 
 large pools and water-retted the hemp they produced. But the work was so 
 hard on negroes that the practice was abandoned. Many negroes died of 
 pneumonia contracted from working in the hemp-pools in the winter, and 
 mortality became so great among the hemp hands that the increase in value 
 of the hemp did not equal the loss in negroes. Besides, the difficulty of 
 finding a market for the water-retted hemp at a higher price than the dew- 
 retted hemp, discouraged many from further attempts at water-retting. 27 
 Shipments of dew-retted hemp were made to Europe, but apparently without 
 much success. One shipment sent to Europe was reported to have returned 
 but $40 per ton. 28 
 
 In 1850 the production of hemp was generally reported to be on the increase. 
 The census of that year credited Kentucky with 18,000 tons and Missouri 
 with 16,000 tons. A total of 1,057 tons was produced in all other States. 
 From Clarke County, Kentucky, it was reported in 1851 that cutting had 
 almost entirely superseded the old method of pulling. 29 In 1859 the Kentucky 
 production was reported to have more than doubled, and was now estimated 
 at 39,000 tons. 30 The crop in Missouri showed but little increase, amounting 
 to only 19,000 tons. Indiana produced 4,000 tons, North Carolina 3,000, and 
 Tennessee 2,250 tons. 22 other states produced a total of 7,200 tons. North 
 of the Ohio River many attempts were being made to grow hemp but with 
 little success. Many counties in central Illinois experienced a hemp fever of 
 short duration in 1843. 31 
 
 26 Ibid., 275. 
 
 27 Beatty, Essays in Practical Agriculture, hi. 
 
 28 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, p. 700. 
 
 29 Ibid., 1851, Agriculture, 360. 
 
 30 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, 65. 
 
 31 Prairie Farmer, VIII, 1847, p. 305; U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1844, P- 97 > 
 
 ibid., 1843, p. 69. 
 
Chapter XXX. —Hay. 
 
 The hay-producing area of the United States in 1840 was mainly in the 
 northeastern States. In New England and in New York, Pennsylvania, and 
 New Jersey, with the exception of the wheat region of western New York 
 and western Pennsylvania, hay was regarded as the staple crop. In Ohio, 
 hay was a substantial crop, but farther west the sparse population and vast 
 prairies and marshes rendered the cultivation of English grasses and clover 
 an object of little importance. There but little hay was harvested, and that 
 largely from native grasses. (See fig. 86.) 
 
 Fig. 86.—Hay, 1839. Each dot represent 5,000 tons. 
 
 In the northeastern states the feeding of livestock through long 
 winters required large amounts of hay. In the Mississippi Valley the 
 unoccupied prairie furnished abundant pasture during the summer and 
 some feeding the winter. But little attention was given to seeding the 
 cultivated grasses. The short winters and abundant corn crop of Ken¬ 
 tucky made hay less necessary there. 
 
 IMPORTANCE OF THE HAY CROP IN THE EAST. 
 
 The census reports show tons of hay harvested, but no statistics are given 
 for pasture lands, hence the figures do not indicate the relative importance of 
 the grass-crop in the different regions. In New England and New York, 
 where the long winters and the mixed system of farming made a large supply 
 of fodder necessary, a considerable portion of the grass was harvested as 
 hay. In the bluegrass region of Kentucky and in much of the West, on the 
 other hand, where cattle-raising was a leading industry, less hay was har¬ 
 vested than in the East, since the livestock was pastured during much of the 
 year. 
 
 366 
 
HAY 
 
 367 
 
 The culture of hay in the older settled region of the East had undergone 
 rapid and important changes since the beginning of the century. Before the 
 introduction of the practice of sowing clover and timothy, an event which in 
 
 Table 46. — Hay and forage: Production in the United States. 
 [Source: U. S. censuses of 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division 
 and State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 tons). 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 tons). 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 tons). 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 United States . 
 
 10,248 
 
 100.0 
 
 I 3-839 
 
 100.0 
 
 19,084 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 3084 
 
 30.1 
 
 3,464 
 
 25.0 
 
 3,869 
 
 20.3 
 
 Middle Atlantic . 
 
 4,774 
 
 4 6.6 
 
 6,008 
 
 43-4 
 
 6,319 
 
 33.1 
 
 East North Central.... 
 
 1,527 
 
 14.9 
 
 3,129 
 
 22.6 
 
 5,585 
 
 293 
 
 West North Central... 
 
 67 
 
 •7 
 
 208 
 
 1-5 
 
 i ,475 
 
 7-7 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 
 
 g 
 
 
 2^ 
 
 .1 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 338 
 
 1 8 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 691 
 
 6.7 
 
 756 
 
 5-5 
 
 976 
 
 5 -i 
 
 New Hampshire . 
 
 496 
 
 4-8 
 
 599 
 
 4-3 
 
 643 
 
 3-4 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 837 
 
 8.2 
 
 866 
 
 6-3 
 
 940 
 
 4.9 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 569 
 
 5-6 
 
 652 
 
 4-7 
 
 665 
 
 3-5 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 64 
 
 .6 
 
 75 
 
 •5 
 
 83 
 
 •5 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 427 
 
 4.2 
 
 516 
 
 37 
 
 562 
 
 2.9 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 3,127 
 
 30.5 
 
 3,729 
 
 26.9 
 
 3,565 
 
 18.7 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 335 
 
 3-3 
 
 436 
 
 3-2 
 
 509 
 
 2.6 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 1,312 
 
 12.8 
 
 1,843 
 
 13-3 
 
 2,245 
 
 11.8 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 1.022 
 
 10.0 
 
 1,443 
 
 10.4 
 
 1,565 
 
 8.2 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 178 
 
 1-7 
 
 403 
 
 2.9 
 
 622 
 
 3-3 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 165 
 
 1.6 
 
 602 
 
 4.4 
 
 i ,775 
 
 9-3 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 131 
 
 1.3 
 
 405 
 
 2.9 
 
 768 
 
 4.0 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 3 i 
 
 •3 
 
 276 
 
 2.0 
 
 855 
 
 4-5 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 180 
 
 o 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 18 
 
 .2 
 
 89 
 
 .6 
 
 813 
 
 •V 
 
 4-3 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 49 
 
 •5 
 
 117 
 
 •9 
 
 401 
 
 2.1 
 
 Dakota Territory . 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 d 
 
 x 
 
 Kansas ..*. 
 
 
 
 
 
 56 
 
 •3 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 Utah . 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 20 
 
 .1 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 
 
 
 d 
 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 28 
 
 2 
 
 California . 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 306 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * Less than 500 tons. 
 
 1840 was still within the recollection of the older farmers, the supply of hay 
 was limited to that procured from natural meadows, watered by the overflow 
 of streams or by irrigation. 1 The increased use of clover, gypsum, lime, and 
 manure, and improved methods of tillage, had brought about marked changes 
 
 1 See above, p. 103. 
 
368 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 by 1840. The uplands were now commonly considered as productive in grass 
 as the lowlands. Clover and gypsum were regarded as the basis of the new 
 system of agriculture. 
 
 New York, with over 3,000,000 tons, led the States in the production of 
 hay in 1839. With the decrease of wheat production and the development of 
 dairying and grazing, hay had become the chief crop in the central part of 
 the State—in Oneida, Madison, Chenango, Herkimer, Otsego, and Montgom¬ 
 ery counties. In the wheat-growing region of the western part of the State 
 it had been found that the growing of clover and the grazing of cattle and 
 sheep on depleted wheat lands would greatly increase their yields. For the 
 surplus hay produced in the region of the Hudson River and Long Island, 
 New York City furnished a large market. 
 
 IN NEW YORK—HAY ON UPLANDS AND MEADOWS. 
 
 In central and eastern New York, as in New England, it was the aim of the 
 farmer to produce as much grass as possible. The usual cropping system on the 
 uplands included one cultivated crop and one grain crop. The grass and 
 clover seed was sown by hand among the grain and the land was then allowed 
 to lie in grass for hay or pasture from 2 to 6 years. 
 
 Farm manure was commonly applied to the land at the time of seeding. It 
 was the universal custom to sow from 1 to 2 bushels of gypsum per acre, and 
 often the land was given a top-dressing of gypsum each succeeding spring. It 
 was claimed, however, that gypsum no longer had its former beneficial effect, 
 especially on old lands. 2 On the wheat lands of western New York the clover 
 crop was considered essential. “ Clover, plaster and wheat ” were said to be 
 regarded as “ the three indispensables for any well-regulated wheat farm.” 
 It was usual, after from one to three crops of wheat, to sow clover among the 
 wheat, and then to leave the ground in meadow or pasture for 2 or 3 years, 
 when it was again turned under for wheat. 3 
 
 Meadows and pasture lands were not suffered to lie as long as formerly 
 without plowing. 4 The “ old meadow system,” of having lowlands in perma¬ 
 nent meadow which was seldom top-dressed and never ploughed, was being 
 gradually abandoned. Meadows were now more frequently top-dressed, or 
 ploughed up and reseeded. There were several ways of doing this. One way 
 was to sow the grass seed over the deteriorated turf and then to harrow it in 
 by repeatedly passing over it a heavy, sharp-toothed harrow. Another method 
 was to turn over the defective meadow or pasture in the fall, to give it a 
 dressing of manure in the spring, and then to seed to spring wheat, oats, 
 barley, or corn. Grass-seed was sown in the grain in the spring or in the com 
 in the fall. 5 In the wheat region of the western part of New York, the system 
 of meadows on the low-lying lands and creek-flats commonly prevailed, but 
 these were more frequently top-dressed than formerly. 
 
 2 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1850, Agriculture, 469. 
 
 3 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, II (1842), p. 53. 
 
 *Ibid., 158. 
 
 5 Ibid., 115. 
 
HAY 
 
 369 
 
 IN NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 In New England, the cropping system was usually planned to produce the 
 maximum amount of hay. A common rotation was corn, potatoes, oats; the 
 land was then seeded and remained in grass from 3 to 6 years, or, in general, 
 as long as it continued to yield a ton of hay to an acre. Compost, manure, 
 and gypsum were commonly applied at the time of sowing. General livestock 
 farming, lumbering in the North, and the presence of New York City, Boston, 
 and other towns, both inland and seaboard, furnished ready markets for the 
 farmer’s surplus crop of hay. Some was shipped to the Southern States. In 
 the vicinity of the ocean, marsh hay was used in large quantities for feeding 
 cattle. 6 
 
 IN EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 In eastern Pennsylvania, hay was largely produced in the established rota¬ 
 tion of corn, oats, wheat, and grass, with the grass-land cut or grazed for 2 
 to 4 years. It was reported from Dauphin County that, before lime came into 
 use, a crop of clover was generally ploughed under before seeding to wheat, 
 but that since then the crop was generally taken off before the sod was turned. 7 
 Philadelphia and the National Road furnished markets for the surplus crop. 
 
 IN KENTUCKY. 
 
 In Kentucky, where the bluegrass pastures furnished available feed for the 
 entire year, but little hay was harvested. In parts of the State, where the 
 grazing of cattle was extensively practiced, farmers were in the habit of sow¬ 
 ing down in bluegrass the land which had been most exhausted by repeated 
 cultivation of corn and wheat. Others followed the practice of clearing up 
 and thinning out the woodland, and seeding down to bluegrass for pastures. 8 
 Clover was extensively grown for a pasture crop, but the use of hay was so 
 limited that little attention was paid to meadows. Corn-fodder and oats were 
 generally substituted for hay. 
 
 LACK OF SUCCESS WITH CULTIVATED GRASSES ON THE 
 
 PRAIRIES. 
 
 West of Ohio, the small amounts of hay which were harvested consisted 
 chiefly of wild prairie and marsh grass. The natural prairies and meadows 
 of Michigan, Illinois, and Iowa, and the prairies interspersed with marsh land 
 in Wisconsin and Indiana, produced an abundant supply of hay, indeed, far 
 beyond the wants of the country at the time. To the early farmers who settled 
 on the higher land the prairies and marshes were of inestimable value, provid¬ 
 ing them with milk, butter, and cheese, as well as with forage for fattening 
 swine and cattle, until farms could be properly opened. 
 
 As the result of many failures, the opinion was current that cultivated 
 grasses would not thrive on prairie lands. But as the prairies afforded suffi- 
 
 6 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 291. 
 
 7 Ibid., 1851, p. 254. 
 
 8 Beatty, Essays in Practical Agriculture, 64, 66, 67. 
 
 25 
 
370 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 cient wild grass for hay, the need of tame hay was not urgent and but few 
 persistent attempts were made to grow it, nor was much attention given to 
 the curing of hay. A correspondent 9 wrote : 
 
 “ it j s quite common to begin Monday and to continue to mow till Saturday, when 
 with hand rakes and horse rakes, all turn in, take it up and stack it; and this is done too, 
 without much regard to the state of the weather at the time it is raked, or to what it 
 may have been after it was cut. The appearance of the animals which are fed on hay 
 thus managed, is evidence enough of its worthlessness. 
 
 Fig. 87.—Hay, 1849. Each dot represents 5,000 tons. 
 
 With the settlement of the Mississippi Valley the harvesting of hay increased. 
 
 HAY MORE OF A CASH CROP IN THE EAST AFTER 1850 . 
 
 The census of 1850 showed that there had been a general increase in the 
 production of hay, and that although its cultivation was still confined princi¬ 
 pally to the eastern States, the production in the West was increasing. The 
 Western Reserve in Ohio, Michigan, southern Wisconsin, and northern Illi¬ 
 nois were the localities of greatest increase. (See fig. 87.) New York, Ohio, 
 Pennsylvania, and New Jersey led in the production of hay and clover seed. 
 
 In New York the counties on the Hudson reported a growing demand for 
 hay from the New York market. 10 In Philadelphia County it was said that 
 dairying was not so extensively carried on as formerly, since most farmers 
 found it more profitable to sell hay. * 11 In the vicinity of Rochester hay was 
 said to be a very profitable crop. 12 Nearness to market or water transportation 
 
 9 Cultivator, new series, I (1844), p. 173. 
 
 i° U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 101, 106; 1853, P- 2I 9 - 
 
 11 Ibid., 1851, p. 239. 
 
 12 Ibid., 1853, p. 219. 
 
HAY 
 
 371 
 
 was necessary for profitable hay sale. Railroads were few, and their freight 
 rates were high. As late as 1855 the cost of transporting hay from Allegheny 
 County in western New York to New York City was said to be $12 a ton. 13 
 
 INCREASED ATTENTION TO CULTIVATED GRASSES 
 
 IN THE WEST. 
 
 Farther West, in Ohio, the grass crop was becoming more important, as the 
 profits of grazing for several years had been greater than those derived from 
 the growing of grain. In the grain-growing regions of Indiana clover was be¬ 
 coming more common. From Wayne County, in 1851, it was reported; 14 
 " Clover is beginning to be much cultivated for the purpose of resting and 
 enriching the soil. It is principally pastured by hogs and cattle; seldom being 
 cut for hay/’ Many allowed the last crop to grow and harvested the seed. 
 
 On the prairies of northern Illinois, Wisconsin, and eastern Iowa, more 
 attention was now given to the cultivation of clover and grasses. The increased 
 interest in general farming and livestock, together with the inclosing of the 
 open prairies during the poor wheat crops 15 succeeding 1847, resulted in 
 increased attention to the cultivation of the improved grasses. 16 The native 
 prairie grasses were not adapted to livestock farming and pasturage, since 
 they appeared late in the spring and failed early in the fall. 17 ' 
 
 HAY PROVES A SUCCESSFUL CROP ON PRAIRIE FARMS. 
 
 The increased care given to the cultivation of grasses because of the greater 
 demand for hay was disproving the theory that grasses could not be grown on 
 the open prairies and oak openings. Regarding the origin of this belief in 
 Illinois, a correspondent wrote as follows : 18 
 
 How has Illinois obtained the name of not being’ a grass country? Perhaps in this 
 wise: The emigrant leaves.New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Kentucky, 
 or Ohio, and reaches Illinois, and expects to make a stock and grass farm in three or 
 four years. The spring after his arrival he breaks up one hundred acres of prairie, 
 and raises two crops, it may be by a very imperfect system of tillage. The second year 
 he sows a portion of the one hundred acres in Blue Grass, timothy or clover, forgetting 
 or not knowing that it is all important that land intended for permanent pasture should 
 be cultivated a sufficient length of time in corn and other grain to effectually destroy the 
 wild properties of the soil, the wild grass and weeds.” 
 
 It was the general opinion among those who succeeded in the cultivation 
 of grass that the failure of others was owing largely to insufficient preparation 
 of the soil. 
 
 MARKETING OF WESTERN HAY. 
 
 Hay was baled and shipped from a few localities by way of the Mississippi 
 River and its branches to the southern market. In the lake region, small 
 amounts of hay were commonly sold to vessels bound for the lower lakes or 
 
 18 Ibid., 1855, p. 253. 
 
 14 Ibid., 1851, p. 430. 
 
 15 Wis. State Agric. Soc. Transactions 1853, p. 216. 
 
 16 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1853, P- 213. 
 
 17 Wis. State Agric. Soc. Transactions 1851, p. 227. 
 
 18 Ill. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1853-54), P- 431. 
 
372 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 for the lumber regions along Lake Michigan. 19 W. G. Edmundson in 1852 
 described a prairie hay-farm of 600 acres in the upper part of Lee County, 
 Iowa, about 15 miles from the river, which shipped in that year 700 tons of 
 timothy hay packed in bales of 250 or 300 pounds. 
 
 MORE INTENSIVE METHODS IN THE EAST. 
 
 The census of i860 reported a relatively small general increase in the pro¬ 
 duction of hay in the States east of Ohio. The New York production was 
 slightly less than in 1849. The territory west of Ohio, southern Michigan, 
 northern Illinois, southern Wisconsin, eastern Iowa, southeastern Minnesota, 
 and northwestern Missouri was the region of greatest increase. (See fig. 88.) 
 In the East, greater care was being given to the preparation and manuring of 
 
 Fig. 88.—Hay, 1859. Each dot represents 5,000 tons. 
 
 With the disappearance of much of the free public land and the sub¬ 
 duing of the soil in the Great Lakes region the culture and harvesting 
 of hay increased. 
 
 the soil. In New England, farmers were ditching and draining low-lands 
 suitable for hay production, and clearing the fields of rocks. “ As mowing 
 machines are coming into use,” reports one correspondent, the stone digger 
 must prepare the way for them.” In the West, the growth of the cattle 
 industry, together with the inclosing of the prairies, was leading to an in¬ 
 creased acreage of cultivated grasses. 
 
 Throughout the United States in 1840 hay was cut with the scythe. Mow¬ 
 ing-machines had been invented, but their work as yet was unsatisfactory, 
 and only a few were in use. 20 By i860, in some sections, the greater part of 
 the hay was cut by machines, in others the appearance of a mower was yet a 
 matter of comment. For raking the hay the “ common horse-rake,” or the 
 “ revolving wooden horse-rake,” was in general use, except in the rougher 
 sections of the East, where the hay was still raked by hand. 
 
 19 Prairie Farmer, XIV (1854)* P- 33&. 
 
 20 Hid., IX (1849), P- 320; VIII (1848), p. 181. 
 
Chapter XXXI.—Potatoes and Roots. 
 
 In 1839 the New England States, New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey 
 were the leading potato-growing states. They produced over 70 per cent of 
 the total potato crop of the country. New York alone raised 30,000,000 
 bushels, Ohio 5,800,000 bushels, and Michigan 2,100,000 bushels. Farther 
 West potatoes were generally grown only for home and local consumption, 
 except by a few farmers living in the vicinity of the rivers and lakes, who 
 sold potatoes for the southern market or to supply the lumber trade of the 
 lake region. (See fig. 89.) 
 
 Fig. 89.—Potatoes, 1839. Each dot represents 100,000 bushels. 
 
 Potatoes were a leading farm crop throughout the northeastern states in 1840. They 
 were extensively used for stock feeding. 
 
 In New England and New York the potato was regarded as one of the 
 most successful crops, and was cultivated extensively in southwestern Maine, 
 Vermont, and central New York. The State of Maine was already celebrated 
 for its fine potatoes; 1 those grown in the neighborhood of Eastport, Maine, 
 were regarded as of superior quality and were sold as “ Eastport potatoes.” 2 
 More than 12,000 bushels of potatoes were brought into Hallowed, Maine, in 
 
 1 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1847, p. 134. 
 
 2 Ibid., 1845, p. 200. 
 
 373 
 
374 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 one week in 1843 and sold for shipment. 3 Long Island and Oneida County, 
 New York, were other sections noted for the exceptional quality of their 
 potatoes. 4 
 
 Potatoes were commonly grown in either the first or second year of the 
 rotation, upon sod-land or land which had been in corn the previous year. 
 
 In Maine they were frequently planted on burned-over land without ploughing. 
 Farmers with a large acreage planted and harvested the crop with the aid of 
 the plow. Others planted and dug the crop by hand. Some, after ploughing 
 out the potatoes, picked up what could be easily found and then turned the 
 store hogs into the field to gather the remainder. The land was commonly 
 well manured in the drill before planting, and frequently plastered at the rate 
 of about 2 bushels to the acre as soon as the potatoes were up. 5 The relative 
 merits of hilling up the plants and of manuring in the hill, as compared with 
 level culture and broadcast manuring, were popular subjects of discussion. 
 Yields of 400, 500, and even 700 bushels an acre were frequently reported. 6 
 
 MARKETS FOR NEW ENGLAND POTATOES. 
 
 1 
 
 After supplying the local markets, large quantities of potatoes were annu¬ 
 ally hauled or shipped to seaport towns and sold for the southern market. 
 They were also regarded as an excellent food for livestock, and their cost of 
 production was so low that they were widely used for that purpose. In New 
 England, about 1840, potatoes were used as raw material for the “home 
 manufacture ” of starch. Hopes were entertained of enhancing the value of 
 the crop still further by the conversion of the starch first into sirup and then 
 into sugar. 7 Between 1840 and 1845 many starch mills were established in 
 the potato-growing regions of Maine and Vermont. In Somerset County, 
 Maine, 10 were reported under process of erection in 1845, and in Franklin 
 County, 20. A starch mill in Mercer, Maine, was said to have manufactured 
 140,000 pounds of starch of an excellent quality. 8 A correspondent wrote: 9 
 
 “ So readily may potatoes be produced by the mellow rich soil of the nothern counties 
 of Vermont that the price of 12$ and 18 cents a bushel, delivered at the starch mill, 
 makes that one of the most profitable crops. In many towns starch mills have been 
 in operation, and it has become common for an ordinary farmer to raise his one, two, and 
 three thousand bushels of potatoes in a season.” ( 
 
 THE APPEARANCE OF THE POTATO DISEASE—ITS 
 
 RAVAGES. 1 
 
 The flourishing potato industry of the East received a severe check in 1843, 
 and following years, by the appearance of a new disease, called “ the rot ” 
 or the “ potato disease/’ now recognized as the late blight of the potato. 
 The first distinct appearance of the disease that excited attention was in 1843. 10 
 In that year the potato crop of New England was estimated at about 20 per 
 
 3 Ibid., 1843, p. 57. 
 
 4 Ibid., 1844, p. 203. 
 
 5 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, III (1843), p. 94. 
 
 G Ibid., I (1841), p. 102. 
 
 7 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1844, p. 77. 
 
 3 Ibid., 1843, P- 64. 
 
 9 Ibid., 1844, p. 71. 
 
 10 Ibid., 78. 
 
POTATOES AND ROOTS 
 
 375 
 
 cent less than in 1842, largely because of “ the rot.” In New York and Penn¬ 
 sylvania the loss was estimated at 30 per cent. 11 
 
 Table 47. — Potatoes’. Production in the United States. 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cap¬ 
 
 ita 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cap¬ 
 
 ita 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cap¬ 
 
 ita 
 
 (bu.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 United States . 
 
 108,298 
 
 6-3 
 
 100.0 
 
 65,798 
 
 2.8 
 
 100.0 
 
 111,149 
 
 3-5 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 35,180 
 
 15-7 
 
 32.5 
 
 19,618 
 
 7.2 
 
 29.8 
 
 21,344 
 
 6.8 
 
 19.2 
 
 Middle Atlantic .... 
 
 4 L 73 I 
 
 9.2 
 
 38.5 
 
 24,586 
 
 4.2 
 
 374 
 
 42,307 
 
 5-7 
 
 38.1 
 
 East North Central. 
 
 11,885 
 
 4.1 
 
 11.0 
 
 I 3 , 4 l 8 
 
 3-0 
 
 20.4 
 
 27,182 
 
 3-9 
 
 24-5 
 
 West North Central 
 
 I Ol8 
 
 2.4 
 
 .9 
 
 1,236 
 
 14 
 
 1.9 
 
 7,831 
 
 3-6 
 
 7.0 
 
 ’MVmntflin 
 
 
 
 
 44 
 
 .6 
 
 .1 
 
 152 
 
 •9 
 
 .1 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 
 
 
 IOI 
 
 1.0 
 
 .2 
 
 2,256 
 
 5 -i 
 
 2.0 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 10,392 
 
 20.7j 
 
 9.6 
 
 3,436 
 
 5-9 
 
 5-2 
 
 6,375 
 
 10.1 
 
 5-7 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 6,206 
 
 21.8 
 
 5-7 
 
 4,305 
 
 13.5 
 
 6.5 
 
 4438 
 
 12.7 
 
 3-7 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 8,870 
 
 304 
 
 8.2 
 
 4,951 
 
 15-8 
 
 7.5 
 
 5,253 
 
 16.7 
 
 4-7 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 5,386 
 
 7-3 
 
 5-0 
 
 3,585 
 
 3-6 
 
 5-5 
 
 3,202 
 
 2.6 
 
 2.9 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 912 
 
 84 
 
 .8 
 
 651 
 
 44 
 
 1.0 
 
 543 
 
 3 -i 
 
 .5 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 3 414 
 
 11.0 
 
 3-2 
 
 2,690 
 
 7.3 
 
 4.1 
 
 1,833 
 
 4.0 
 
 1.7 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 30,123 
 
 12.4 
 
 27.8 
 
 15,398 
 
 5-0 
 
 234 
 
 26,447 
 
 6.8 
 
 23.8 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 2,072 
 
 5-6 
 
 1.9 
 
 3,207 
 
 6.6 
 
 4.9 
 
 4472 
 
 6.2 
 
 3-8 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 9,536 
 
 5-5 
 
 8.8 
 
 5 , 98 i 
 
 2.6 
 
 9-1 
 
 11,688 
 
 4.0 
 
 10.5 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 5,805 
 
 3.8 
 
 54 
 
 5,058 
 
 2.6 
 
 7-7 
 
 8,695 
 
 3-7 
 
 7.8 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 1,526 
 
 2.2 
 
 14 
 
 2.083 
 
 2.1 
 
 3-2 
 
 3,867 
 
 2.9 
 
 3-5 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 2,025 
 
 2.3 
 
 1.9 
 
 2,515 
 
 30 
 
 3-8 
 
 5 , 54 i 
 
 3-2 
 
 5-0 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 2,109 
 
 9.9 
 
 1.9 
 
 2,360 
 
 5-9 
 
 3-6 
 
 5,261 
 
 7.0 
 
 4-7 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 420 
 
 136 
 
 4 
 
 1,402 
 
 4.6 
 
 2.1 
 
 3 ,8 i8 
 
 4-9 
 
 3-5 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \finnPQota . 
 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 3-5 
 
 
 2,565 
 
 14.9 
 
 2.3 
 
 Iowa. 
 
 234 
 
 54 
 
 .2 
 
 276 
 
 1.4 
 
 4 
 
 2,807 
 
 4.2 
 
 2.5 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 784 
 
 2.0 
 
 •7 
 
 939 
 
 14 
 
 i -5 
 
 1,991 
 
 1-7 
 
 1.8 
 
 Ualrnta T'erritnrv 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 2.0 
 
 
 Nehra 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 162 
 
 5-6 
 
 .1 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 296 
 
 2.8 
 
 •3 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 Utah . 
 
 
 
 
 44 
 
 3-9 
 
 .1 
 
 141 
 
 3-5 
 
 .1 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 .8 
 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 164 
 
 14.1 
 
 .1 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 
 
 92 
 
 6.9 
 
 .2 
 
 303 
 
 5-8 
 
 •3 
 
 California . 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 • • • • • 
 
 • ••••• 
 
 1,789 
 
 4-7 
 
 1.6 
 
 * Less than 500 bushels. 
 
 The appearance of the new crop enemy attracted much attention, but then 
 there were no scientists, in the United States at least, who could explain the 
 nature and cause of the disease. Various theories were propounded, among 
 which insect origin, atmospheric influence, excess of growth caused by ma- 
 
 11 Ibid., 1843 , pp. 57, 59- 
 
376 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 nure, and seed deterioration were prominent. “ Premature ripening caused 
 by superabundant moisture of the soil in which they were allowed to remain 
 too long ”; 12 “a vegetable cholera ”; “ imperfect process of assimilation ” ; 
 
 “ something in the atmosphere ”; were some of the opinions expressed. But 
 no single theory appeared to meet all the difficulties of the case. 
 
 When it was found that many sections had suffered from the new disease 
 in 1843, it was hoped that it might prove temporary and that the loss was 
 owing to some peculiarity of that year which would not occur again. But the 
 attacks of the following years were even more severe. From Vermont, in 
 1844, came the report: 13 
 
 “ In the entire Green Mountain region, from the Berkshires on the south, to the 
 Canada line on the north, there has been such a failure in the crop of potatoes that it is 
 said there will be none left the present year for the manufacture of starch.” 
 
 The Patent Office Report for 1844 reported the disease to have been thus 
 far largely limited to the New England States, New York, northeastern Ohio, 
 parts of Pennsylvania, and as far South as Virginia. Maine suffered its first 
 severe loss in 1845. By 1848 the disease had reached Illinois, Wisconsin, and 
 Iowa. In that year the loss in New England and the Middle States, while 
 considerable, was not so great as in the preceding years. In the Northwestern 
 States the rot prevailed more than ever, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, 
 and Illinois suffering the heaviest losses. 14 The Patent Office Report of 1847 
 stated: 15 
 
 “ The time was when this crop was numbered among our most successful ones. 
 
 But within a few years there has been a sorrowful change, and throughout almost 
 the whole extent of the country where the common potato is cultivated, instead of ascer¬ 
 taining the amount of the crop, our attention is rather demanded to learn the amount of 
 the loss suffered.” 
 
 From Kennebec County, Maine, in 1850, it was reported: 16 
 
 “Twelve years ago it was estimated that more than $250,000 were paid for potatoes 
 sent out of this state by way of the Kennebec River alone. Now there are not enough, 
 which are free from disease, to supply the wants of the inhabitants.” 
 
 DECLINE OF POTATO PRODUCTION SHOWN IN CENSUS 
 
 OF 1850 . 
 
 The potato crop of 1849 was generally reported as much better than 
 that of the preceding few years. Reports of the time, however, corroborate 
 the census figures, which show that the potato crop of the North Atlantic 
 States had decreased nearly one-half since 1839. (See fig. 90.) The decrease 
 was said to be the result both of smaller acreage and of lessened yields caused 
 by “ the potato rot.” A total crop of 108,300,000 bushels was reported in 1839 
 and only 65,600,000 bushels in 1849. New Jersey and Delaware were the 
 only northern States east of Indiana showing an increased production. In 
 the West there was a small gain. The three States showing the greatest in¬ 
 crease were Wisconsin, with 982,000 bushels gain over 1840, Illinois, 489,000 
 bushels gain, and Kentucky 437,000 bushels. 
 
 ™ Ibid., 61. ' 
 
 13 Ibid., 1844, p. 71. 
 
 14 Ibid., 1848, p.135. " M 
 
 15 Ibid., 1847, p. 134. 
 
 16 Ibid., 1850, Agriculture, p. 296. 
 
POTATOES AND ROOTS 
 
 3 77 
 
 In some sections of the West, near the Great Lakes and navigable rivers 
 the potato was extensively cultivated either for the lake trade or for the New 
 Orleans market. In Ohio County, southeastern Indiana, potatoes were said 
 to rank next to corn in importance. It was not unusual for a single farmer 
 to cultivate 40 acres producing from 50 to 300 bushels an acre. 17 It was re¬ 
 ported in 1849 that in one day 35,800 barrels of potatoes were shipped from 
 the port of Louisville, Kentucky, nearly all of which were raised within the 
 
 Fig. 90.—Potatoes, 1849. Each dot represents 100,000 bushels. 
 
 During the forties the blight caused a general reduction, especially in the East in 
 the potato crops. ’ 
 
 immediate vicinity of the city. Several individuals had planted over 100 acres 
 each. 
 
 HIGHER PRICES FOR POTATOES CAUSE BETTER 
 
 CULTIVATION. 
 
 Not all people, however, considered the prevalence of the potato disease as 
 a calamity. To the farmer the severity of the loss was considerably mitigated 
 by the increased price received. From Oneida County, New York, in 1854 
 there came the following report: 18 
 
 “ Potatoes are successfully and somewhat extensively cultivated in this vicinity. Since 
 the commencement of the ‘ potato disease/ the aggregate product has been greatly re¬ 
 duced, but the increased price has continued to furnish remunerating profit to the pro¬ 
 ducer. While the average [production] has diminished more than one-half, the price 
 per bushel has more than doubled, thus furnishing a greater return for a'much less 
 quantity of heavy cartage.” 
 
 17 Ind. State Agric. Soc., 1st Annual Report (1852), p. 142. 
 
 1 U. S. Patent Office Annual Report 1854, Agriculture, 166. 
 
378 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 A Rhode Island farmer wrote in 1849: 19 
 
 “ Our farmers realize more for the sale of potatoes than any other crop they produce 
 Previous to the rot, the price was from twenty to twenty-five cents per bushel; but 
 since it has ranged from forty cents to one dollar and^in some instances still hig er. 
 Average for the last six years not far from sixty cents. 
 
 By i860 increased attention was again given to the cultivation of the 
 potato (See fig. 91.) New varieties were introduced and greater care 
 was taken in the selection of land and in the cultivation of the crop Maine 
 had nearly doubled her crop since the census of 1850. New Hampshire and 
 Vermont reported about the same production as in 1849. In Massachusetts, 
 Connecticut, and Rhode Island, on the other hand, there was a considerable 
 
 F IG . 91.—Potatoes, 1859. Each dot represents 100,000 bushels. 
 
 By i860 the potato crop was again increasing in the East as well as in the West. 
 
 decrease. Pennsylvania had surpassed, and New York had nearly regained, 
 the figures of 1839. Farther west there had been a general increase. Ine 
 total crop of the country was 110,600,000 bushels in 1859 as compared wit 
 108,300,000 bushels in 1839. The manner of culture in i860 was nearly the 
 
 same as in 1840. t 
 
 Owing to lessened yields and higher prices after the appearance of the 
 
 potato disease/’ the use of potatoes for stock feed and for the manufacture of 
 starch fell off. One Vermont county reported in 1853 : 20 
 
 “Our country sent 1,000 tons of starch to market, before the potato was diseased. We 
 do not now exceed 20 tons a year, as only the refuse potatoes are worked. We orme y 
 raised 300 bushels per acre, but now 150 is an average yield. __ 
 
 19 Ibid., 1849, p. 9 7 - „ . . , 
 
 20 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1853, Agriculture, 174. 
 
POTATOES AND ROOTS 
 
 379 
 
 ROOT CROPS—CARROTS, TURNIPS, ETC. 
 
 While root crops other than potatoes were not extensively grown in 
 1840, their culture was generally increasing in favor, especially in New Eng¬ 
 land and New \ ork. The carrot was regarded as especially good feed for 
 driving and teaming norses and for dairy cows. Turnips, sugar beets, ruta- 
 bagas, and other loots were frequently grown in small lots for cattle, sheep, 
 and hogs. The potato, however, was the crop chiefly used for stock-feeding! 
 
 The occurrence of the potato disease ” and consequent increased selling 
 price of potatoes somewhat stimulated the production of roots as a fodder 
 crop. The sugar beet was commended with spirit by many during the thirties 
 the carrot during the forties. The New York State census of 1855 reported 
 the following roots produced in the state in the previous year : 
 
 Turnips . 
 
 Carrots . 
 
 Beets . 
 
 Rutabagas . 
 
 Miscellaneous Roots 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 985,500 
 
 478,000 
 
 29,000 
 
 3,000 
 
 54,ooo 
 
 As root crops were commonly estimated to yield about 500 bushels an acre, 
 the table indicates only a small acreage. In New England, turnips were com¬ 
 monly sown in the midst of the corn at the last cultivation, or on land broken 
 up for reseeding. 21 
 
 The large amount of labor necessary to produce root crops prevented their 
 coming into general use. They were for a time cultivated by many farmers 
 as a field crop, but their extensive culture proved disappointing and was soon 
 discontinued. “ So large a field as an acre is rarely seen,” 22 commented a 
 correspondent from Berkshire County, Massachusetts, in 1847. Another from 
 Ontario County, New York, 23 in 1851 reported that 
 
 “ The culture of roots in this country is not extensive. Farmers who come to this 
 country from Scotland and England, after a few years’ trial, usually come to the con¬ 
 clusion that Indian corn is raised with less labor, and will make more fat than the 
 same cost of roots.” 
 
 21 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1850, Agriculture, 273. 
 
 22 Ibid., 1847, p. 359. 
 
 23 Ibid., 1851, Agriculture, 219. 
 
Chapter XXXII. —Fruits and Minor Crops. 
 
 In 1840, apple orchards were to be found throughout the agricultural 
 region of the northeastern States. A majority of the trees, however, were 
 native stock and the surplus fruit was used largely for cider-making and the 
 feeding of livestock. 1 New York and New England farmers generally tried 
 to raise enough apples for the consumption of their families and to make a 
 few barrels of cider. 2 As late as 1838 the planting of apple orchards was 
 recommended for the single purpose of feeding the apples to hogs, to beef 
 cattle, or even to milch cows. 3 So plentiful was the supply of apples, and so 
 limited the demand, that cider was frequently a drug on the market. 4 In the 
 Mohawk Valley apples were a source of considerable income. Both the Hud¬ 
 son and the Mohawk Valleys were widely known for the extent of their 
 apple, pear, and peach orchards. 
 
 INCREASED PLANTING OF ORCHARDS AFTER 1840 . 
 
 After 1840, and in an increasing degree after 1847, niuch attention was 
 given to the planting of orchards. Fruit-tree nurseries multiplied rapidly, 6 
 interest was taken in the formation of horticultural societies, improved varie¬ 
 ties of apples were planted, and the old native fruit trees were frequently 
 grafted. 6 By 1850 it seemed, indeed, as if every eastern farmer were planting 
 an apple orchard. The growth of cities was furnishing a market for the fresh 
 fruit, and the development of transportation was improving the means of 
 reaching the market. Oneida County, in the Mohawk Valley, it was estimated, 
 shipped nearly 18,000 barrels of apples in 1847. 7 Wayne County, on the shore 
 of Lake Ontario, was said to have shipped more than 30,000 bushels of dried 
 fruit in 1848. 8 In Ohio, orcharding was developing along the shores of Lake 
 Erie, and by 1855 Michigan was shipping fruit. 9 As early as 1843, it was said 
 that 2,000 barrels of cranberries had been sent from Michigan in one year. 10 
 
 PEACH ORCHARDS IN DELAWARE AND MARYLAND. 
 
 Other prominent fruit-growing districts of this period were Long Island, 
 central and southern New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland. 11 Delaware and 
 
 1 u. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1852, Agriculture, 15 7 > 1850, P* 205. 
 
 2 Ibid., 1853, p. 270. o on 
 
 * 2 d Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1838), p 141. ^ „ 0 
 
 4 Cultivator, new series, VI (1849), p. 23; U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1851, 
 
 Agriculture, 152. . TTT . 
 
 5 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, III (1843), P- 470 - 
 
 c u S Patent Office, Annual Report 1850, Agriculture, 274; 1851, p. 168. 
 
 7 Ibid., 184 7 , p. 363- . 
 
 8 Cultivator, new series, VII (1850), p. 174 - 
 
 9 Country Gentleman, V (1855)» P- 58. 
 
 i°U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1843, p. hi. . 
 
 11 Ibid., (1847), p. 196; Country Gentleman, IV (1854), p. 90; Cultivator, new series, VIII 
 
 (1851), P- 92 . 
 
 380 
 
FRUITS AND MINOR CROPS 
 
 381 
 
 Maryland especially were famous for the extent of their peach orchards. 
 Water transportation enabled them to place their perishable product upon the 
 markets of Philadelphia, Baltimore, and New York within a relatively short 
 time. In 1847 the peach crop of the State of Delaware was estimated at 
 300,000 baskets. 12 
 
 Many large orchards had been developed. That of Major Reybold & Sons, 
 of New Castle County, Delaware, was thus described in 1848: 13 
 
 “ Quantity of peaches sent to market (to the 29th of August inclusive) by Major 
 Reybold from his Maryland and Delaware orchards; . . . . baskets, 63,344. Number 
 of baskets employed for transit, 40,000 to 50,000. Number acres of orcharding, 1,090. 
 Number of trees in orchards, 117,720. Steamboats were constantly arriving and de¬ 
 parting loaded with the produce of these orchards, which were sent to New York and 
 Boston, as well as to Philadelphia and near markets. It is probable that before the close 
 of the season as many as 80,000 baskets, if not more, were thus disposed of from these 
 orchards.” 
 
 The New York Tribune estimated the number of baskets of peaches sold 
 in New York in 1844 at 12,000 daily during the peach season. 14 In good sea¬ 
 sons prices were said to vary from 5 to 50 cents a basket, and in poor years 
 went as high as $1.50 to $3. 15 
 
 VINEYARDS IN THE OHIO AND MISSOURI VALLEYS. 
 
 The manufacture of wine was receiving attention principally in the Ohio 
 Valley and to a less extent in the Missouri River Valley. Around Cincinnati, 
 Ohio, then the center of the grape-growing industry of the country, many of 
 the roughest hillsides were being “ trenched and benched ” for vineyards. 16 
 Nicholas Longworth, “ the father of successful vine culture in the West,” 17 
 who was the largest wine-maker in Ohio, was reported in 1844 to have a vine¬ 
 yard of 91 acres, promising a yield of nearly 20,000 gallons. 18 In 1856 he was 
 said to have bottled about 150,000 quarts. 19 In 1853, the Patent Office reported 
 
 1.500 acres of land devoted to grape-growing in Ohio, 200 or 300 acres in 
 Indiana, and about 100 (?) acres in Illinois and Kentucky, making about 
 
 2.500 acres in all. It was said in 1854 that within 20 miles of Cincinnati some 
 1,400 acres were planted to Catawba, “the great wine grape.” 20 The vine¬ 
 yards were cultivated chiefly by Germans, many of them from the wine dis¬ 
 tricts of the Rhine, who found in this industry a means of employing the help 
 of the entire family. 21 Nicholas Longworth, John Dufour, and others operated 
 extensive vineyards on the tenant system, with newly arrived German immi¬ 
 grants as tenants. The census of i860 reported the Ohio Valley as the leading 
 wine-making district of the country. 
 
 12 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1847, p. 196. 
 
 13 Ibid., 1845, PP- 307, 954 - 
 
 14 Ibid., 308. 
 
 15 Ibid., 1849, p. 121. 
 
 16 Ohio State Board of Agric., 3d Annual Report (1848), p. 59; U. S. Patent Office, 
 
 Annual Report 1845, p. 937. 
 
 17 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. clx. 
 
 18 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Reports 1845, p. 312. 
 
 19 Country Gentleman, VIII (1856), p. 20. 
 
 20 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1854, Agriculture, 265. 
 
 21 Ibid., 313; 1845, p. 936. 
 
382 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 In 1849, California ranked first in amount of wine produced, with 58,000 
 gallons, Ohio second, with 48,200 gallons, Pennsylvania third, with 25,600 
 gallons, and Indiana fourth, with 14,000 gallons. 22 In 1859, Ohio ranked first 
 in order of production with 568,600 gallons, California second with 246,500 
 gallons, 23 Kentucky third with 179,900 gallons, Indiana fourth with 102,900 
 gallons, New York fifth with 61,400 gallons and North Carolina sixth with 
 54,100 gallons. The total for the country was 1,618,000 gallons. The census 
 of i860 stated: 24 
 
 “ The cultivation [of grapes] had spread over all the western and southwestern States, 
 and we thought then (1850), as we do now, that wine-growing would eventually be 
 ranked amongst our most important agricultural interests. This the next generation 
 may possibly realize.” 
 
 SPECIAL CROPS. 
 
 Many minor crops attracted attention during this period, some of which 
 were tried out with much enthusiasm. The memory of the spectacular rise 
 and fall of the famous “ Morus multicaulis speculation” was fresh in mind 
 in 1840, and was by no means entirely forgotten in i860. It was still urged 
 that the development of silk production would provide a means of utilizing 
 the spare hours of the women and children on the farm. 
 
 About 1833, much interest was centered in the growing of sugar beets. 
 France was successfully manufacturing sugar from beets at that time, and it 
 was thought that beet sugar could also be made in America. Many farmers 
 and promoters in Pennsylvania and the Ohio Valley for a time had visions of 
 a large sugar-beet industry in their home communities. After numerous 
 trials, however, the enthusiasm subsided. 
 
 About 1855 the United States Patent Office introduced sorghum into the 
 United States and widely urged its production for sugar. Farmers of the 
 West, however, still remembering the Morus multicaulis speculation, were 
 distrustful about embarking in the new enterprise, and before the Civil War 
 it was not widely tried. The production of sugar from cornstalks continued 
 to attract attention, from promoters at least. 
 
 Broom corn was another special crop which attracted considerable attention. 
 Grown mostly in small patches, a part of the corn was sold and the remainder 
 was worked up into brooms on the farm during the winter. A few farmers 
 went into the business extensively. In the Muskingum Valley of Ohio, in 
 1845, one farm was reported to have 400 acres of broom corn; another, in 
 Schenectady, New York, 200 acres. In the Connecticut Valley in Massachu¬ 
 setts, broom corn was grown rather extensively. 25 
 
 TOBACCO IN NEW ENGLAND AND NEW YORK. 
 
 The early history of tobacco culture in New England has been discussed in 
 an earlier chapter. 26 It was reported from Massachusetts in 1844 that on 
 
 22 U. S. Census of 1850, Agriculture, p. lxxxiii; Census of i860, p. 190. 
 
 23 U. S. Census of i860. Agriculture, 186; Calif. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, 1858, 
 
 p. 52 , n 3 . 
 
 24 Agriculture, p. clx. 
 
 25 See p. 245. 
 
 26 See pp. 98, 246. 
 
FRUITS AND MINOR CROPS 
 
 383 
 
 Table 48. — Tobacco: Production in the United States. 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division 
 and State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cap¬ 
 
 ita 
 
 (lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cap¬ 
 
 ita 
 
 (lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cap¬ 
 
 ita 
 
 (lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 United States . 
 
 219,163 
 
 12.8 
 
 100.0 
 
 199,753 
 
 8.6 
 
 100.0 
 
 434,209 
 
 13-8 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 538 
 
 .2 
 
 .2 
 
 1,406 
 
 •5 
 
 .7 
 
 9,266 
 
 3-0 
 
 2.1 
 
 Middle Atlantic ... 
 
 328 
 
 .1 
 
 .1 
 
 996 
 
 .2 
 
 .5 
 
 9,096 
 
 1.2 
 
 2.1 
 
 East North Central. 
 
 8,329 
 
 2.8 
 
 3-8 
 
 12,343 
 
 2.7 
 
 6.2 
 
 40,180 
 
 5-8 
 
 9-3 
 
 West North Central 
 
 9 076 
 
 21.3 
 
 4.1 
 
 17,120 
 
 19.4 
 
 8.6 
 
 25,452 
 
 11 -7 
 
 5.9 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 
 
 
 Q 
 
 .1 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 a 
 
 • • • • • 
 
 • • • • • • 
 
 a 
 
 • • • » • 
 
 • • • • • • 
 
 19 
 
 .1 
 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 Massachusetts 
 
 65 
 
 .1 
 
 
 138 
 
 .1 
 
 .1 
 
 3,233 
 
 2.6 
 
 .7 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 •/ 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 472 
 
 1-5 
 
 .2 
 
 1,268 
 
 3-4 
 
 .6 
 
 6,000 
 
 130 
 
 1.4 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 1 
 
 • • • • • 
 
 • ••••• 
 
 83 
 
 • • • • • 
 
 • • • • • • 
 
 5,765 
 
 i -5 
 
 1-3 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 2 
 
 • • • • • 
 
 • •••it 
 
 a 
 
 • • • • • 
 
 • ••••• 
 
 149 
 
 .2 
 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 325 
 
 .2 
 
 .1 
 
 913 
 
 
 -5 
 
 3,182 
 
 1.1 
 
 .8 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 5,942 
 
 3-9 
 
 2.7 
 
 io ,455 
 
 5-3 
 
 5-3 
 
 25,093 
 
 10.7 
 
 5-8 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 1,820 
 
 2.7 
 
 .8 
 
 1,045 
 
 1.1 
 
 -5 
 
 7,994 
 
 5-9 
 
 1.9 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 565 
 
 1.2 
 
 •3 
 
 841 
 
 1.0 
 
 •4 
 
 6,885 
 
 4.0 
 
 1.6 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 121 
 
 .2 
 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 87 
 
 .1 
 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 .2 
 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 8 
 
 .2 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 .4 
 
 .1 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 9,068 
 
 23.6 
 
 4.1 
 
 17,114 
 
 25.1 
 
 8.6 
 
 25,086 
 
 •t 
 
 21.2 
 
 5-8 
 
 Dakota Territory .. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 .1 
 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 .2 
 
 
 Mountain : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New Mexico. 
 
 
 
 
 Q 
 
 .1 
 
 
 7 
 
 .1 
 
 
 Utah . 
 
 
 
 
 27 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Pacific : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 California . 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 ..... 
 
 ’. 
 
 3 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 * Less than 500 pounds 
 
384 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 account of the profit derived from tobacco-growing in the vicinity of the 
 Connecticut River in the northern part of the State, more land was devoted 
 to its use from year to year. Henry Watson, of East Windsor, Connecticut, 
 wrote in that year: 27 
 
 “ We grow in this town annually about three hundred tons of tobacco, and in the valley 
 of the Connecticut about five hundred tons are grown annually. The yield the last year 
 
 (1843) was less than usual, 1,500 pounds being about the average per acre. We 
 
 have two varieties of the weed, the broad leaf and the narrow leaf—the latter is about 
 two weeks the earliest.” 
 
 Another reported that in 1843 in the town of East Windsor and in 5 or 6 
 adjoining towns, within a circumference of 25 miles, 2,500 tons were pro¬ 
 duced annually. The Connecticut Valley tobacco was said to be better for cigar 
 wrappers than that of the South. 28 
 
 The Springfield (Massachusetts) Republican reported in 1845 that the culti- 
 tion of the tobacco plant had been very largely undertaken in that town and 
 vicinity within a year or two. One man was said to have 26 seeded acres. 29 
 In 1850 it was said that 800 tons of tobacco were grown in the Connecticut 
 Valley on a tract extending 40 miles northward from Hartford. Connecticut 
 seed leaf, the principal variety, was said to bring, usually, double the price of 
 the tobacco grown in Virginia and Kentucky. 
 
 It was reported from Oneida County, New York, in 1851, that several 
 farmers had been induced to enter largely into tobacco culture. 30 A farmer 
 in Onondago County had 10 acres in 1847. 31 After 1850 the New York 
 acreage expanded rapidly until in i860 it was nearly equal to that of Connecti¬ 
 cut. Ohio produced 5,942,000 pounds of tobacco in 1839, nearly all of which 
 was grown in a few southeastern counties. By i860, Ohio’s production had 
 increased to 25,100,000 pounds, a considerable portion of which was produced 
 in the southwestern counties. 
 
 HOPS. 
 
 Nearly 1,250,000 pounds of hops were reported by the census of 1840. Of 
 this amount, over 75 per cent was produced in two very limited areas, one in 
 central Massachusetts and southern New Hampshire, the other in central New 
 York in the vicinity of Otsego and Madison counties. By i860 production 
 had considerably declined in the old hop-growing region of New England, 
 while a new center was rising in Vermont. New York had become the hop¬ 
 growing State of the Union. It produced nearly 90 per cent of the total crop 
 of the country, and over one-third of the crop of this State was in the single 
 county of Otsego. 
 
 27 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, p. 740. 
 
 28 Ibid., 1844, p. 101. 
 
 29 Ibid., 1845, P- 264. 
 
 30 Ibid., 1851, Agriculture, 197. 
 
 81 Ibid., 1847, p. 167. 
 
FRUITS AND MINOR CROPS 
 
 385 
 
 Fig. 93.—Hops, 1859. Each dot represents 100,000 pounds. 
 
 26 
 
386 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Table 49. — Hops: Production in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 1,000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion 
 
 (lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 1,000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion 
 
 (lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 1,000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion 
 
 (lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 cent 0 
 U. S. 
 total; 
 
 United States . 
 
 1,239 
 
 73 ! 
 
 IOO.0 
 
 3,497 
 
 151 
 
 100.0 
 
 10,992 
 
 350 
 
 IOO.i 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 588 
 
 263 
 
 47-5 
 
 708 
 
 259 
 
 20.2 
 
 984 
 
 314 
 
 9 -' 
 
 OO 
 
 Middle Atlantic .... 
 
 501 
 
 III 
 
 40-5 
 
 2,561 
 
 434 
 
 73-2 
 
 9,719 
 
 1,303 
 
 OO.* 
 
 East North Central. 
 
 130 
 
 44 
 
 10.5 
 
 187 
 
 4 i 
 
 5-3 
 
 259 
 
 37 
 
 2. 
 
 West North Central 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 . 1 
 
 12 
 
 14 
 
 •4 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 .1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 164 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 37 
 
 74 
 
 3-0 
 
 40 
 
 69 
 
 1.1 
 
 103 
 
 I. 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 243 
 
 855 
 
 19.6 
 
 257 
 
 809 
 
 7-4 
 
 130 
 
 400 
 
 I. 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 48 
 
 1 65 
 
 3-9 
 
 288 
 
 917 
 
 8.2 
 
 639 
 
 2,027 
 
 5 - 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 255 
 
 345 
 
 20.6 
 
 122 
 
 122 
 
 3-5 
 
 hi 
 
 90 
 
 1. 
 
 
 a 
 
 1 
 
 
 a 
 
 2 
 
 
 a 
 
 • • • • • • 
 
 • • • • • 
 
 
 C 
 
 15 
 
 .4 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 0 
 
 • *~T 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 447 
 
 184 
 
 36.I 
 
 2,537 
 
 819 
 
 72.5 
 
 9,672 
 
 2,492 
 
 88. 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 5 
 
 12 
 
 •4 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 . 1 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 49 
 
 29 
 
 4.0 
 
 22 
 
 10 
 
 .6 
 
 43 
 
 15 
 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 62 
 
 4 i 
 
 5 -o 
 
 64 
 
 32 
 
 1.8 
 
 27 
 
 12 
 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 39 
 
 56 
 
 3-1 
 
 93 
 
 94 
 
 2.6 
 
 28 
 
 21 
 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 18 
 
 37 
 
 1-5 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 . 1 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 n 
 
 54 
 
 •9 
 
 11 
 
 27 
 
 • 3 
 
 61 
 
 81 
 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 a 
 
 4 
 
 
 16 
 
 52 
 
 •5 
 
 136 
 
 175 
 
 1. 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "N/f inn £»cr»ta 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Tnwa . 
 
 a 
 
 2 
 
 
 8 
 
 43 
 
 .3 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 .1 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 . 1 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 
 "NT obra <;ka 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 1 
 
 
 ICan sa s 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 2 
 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Utah 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 4 
 
 
 1 
 
 14 
 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 W a sh i n crfrvn 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Oregon 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 T 
 
 
 1 
 
 9 
 
 • • • • • 
 
 California 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 .... 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 | 
 
 
 
 
 Less than 500 pounds. 
 
 I 
 
Chapter XXXIII. —Beef Production. 
 
 THE CENTERS OF CATTLE RAISING IN 1840 . 
 
 The number of cattle in the United States was first reported in the census of 
 1840. As all cattle were reported together it is impossible to separate the dairy 
 from the beef cattle in that year. The leading cattle sections of the North 
 were then New York, New England, Ohio, and the bluegrass region of Ken¬ 
 tucky. Eastern and western Pennsylvania, New Jersey, parts of Maryland, 
 and the northern portion of Delaware were other important cattle areas. 
 
 Cattk gnizing was early developed in the West. The limestone region of Kentucky 
 and the Miami and Scioto river valleys of Ohio were prominent western cattle fattening 
 sections. The vicinity of Chester County, Pennsylvania, was a center in the East. 
 
 (See fig. 94.) Cattle were generally distributed throughout the agricultural 
 regions east of Ohio. New York and southwestern Pennsylvania were the most 
 prominent cattle districts of the East, and west of Pennsylvania, Ohio and 
 the bluegrass region of Kentucky were the important areas. In the sparsely 
 settled States of Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri cattle were abundant and the 
 proportion of cattle to population was larger here than in any other group of 
 States. Cattle were still driven into the newly settled regions of Michigan, 
 Wisconsin, and Iowa, as well as into central and eastern Maine. 
 
 387 
 
388 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The census of 1850 showed little change in the centers of the cattle industry. 
 (Fig. 95.) In every northern State east of Ohio, except Maine, cattle were less 
 numerous. Ohio reported a slight increase. In Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, 
 and Iowa cattle had increased, but not in proportion to the growth of popula¬ 
 tion nor to the development of other lines of production. Missouri showed 
 
 Fig. 95.—All cattle, 1850. Each dot represents 5,ooo head. 
 
 During the forties there was a general increase in neat cattle in the western region, 
 chiefly in the corn and wheat growing regions. 
 
 a considerable increase. On the Pacific Coast, California reported 262,700 neat 
 cattle, and Oregon 41,700. 
 
 BEEF CATTLE IN THE WEST. 
 
 The outstanding centers of the beef-cattle industry of the country from 
 1840 to i860 were the Scioto Valley of Ohio and the bluegrass region of 
 Kentucky. Situated on the eastern edge of the great surplus-corn-growing 
 area, these favored districts were nearer to eastern markets than any other 
 of the regions producing cheap corn. Consequently, they became the leading 
 sections in the West for the fattening of cattle before their long journey over 
 the mountains to supply the eastern markets. Cheaper feed was the advantage 
 which enabled the western cattleman to send his livestock over the mountains 
 and still place them on the eastern market in competition with the eastern 
 feeder. 
 
 The early settlers of the Scioto Valley had found that although large crops 
 of Indian corn could be raised with but little labor, there was no accessible 
 and remunerative market for the crop. They had therefore devised the plan 
 
BEEF PRODUCTION 
 
 389 
 
 of fattening large herds of cattle on corn and then driving the cattle to eastern 
 markets. Since the year of the first drive, about 1805, 1 the number fed had 
 gradually increased, until by 1850 it reached between 15,000 and 16,000 head 
 
 Table 50. —Neat Cattle: Number in . the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. censuses of 1840, 1850, and i860.] 
 
 
 
 1840. 
 
 
 
 1850. 
 
 
 
 i860 
 
 
 Geographic division 
 and states. 
 
 Total 
 
 (.thou¬ 
 
 sands'). 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popu¬ 
 
 lation. 
 
 Per 
 cent 
 of U.S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (thou¬ 
 
 sands). 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popu¬ 
 
 lation. 
 
 Per 
 cent 
 of U.S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 (thou¬ 
 
 sands). 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popu¬ 
 
 lation. 
 
 Per 
 cent 
 of U.S. 
 total. 
 
 United States . 
 
 14.972 
 
 877 
 
 100.0 
 
 17,779 
 
 767 
 
 100.0 
 
 25 620 
 
 815 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographical Division : 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 D 545 
 
 691 
 
 10.3 
 
 1,469 
 
 538 
 
 8-3 
 
 1,573 
 
 502 
 
 6.1 
 
 Middle Atlantic .... 
 
 3,304 
 
 730 
 
 22.1 
 
 3,243 
 
 550 
 
 l8.2 
 
 3,631 
 
 487 
 
 14.2 
 
 East North Central. 
 
 2,680 
 
 916 
 
 17.9 
 
 3,444 
 
 761 
 
 194 
 
 5,290 
 
 764 
 
 20.6 
 
 West North Central. 
 
 472 
 
 1,106 
 
 3-2 
 
 930 
 
 1,057 
 
 5-2 
 
 1,960 
 
 903 
 
 7.6 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 46 
 
 625 
 
 •3 
 
 128 
 
 733 
 
 .5 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 304 
 
 2,875 
 
 1-7 
 
 I -363 
 
 3,069 
 
 5-3 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 327 
 
 652 
 
 2.2 
 
 343 
 
 589 
 
 1.9 
 
 377 
 
 600 
 
 i -5 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 275 
 
 968 
 
 1.8 
 
 268 
 
 843 
 
 1-5 
 
 265 
 
 811 
 
 1.0 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 384 
 
 1,316 
 
 2.6 
 
 349 
 
 I,III 
 26l 
 
 2.0 
 
 370 
 
 1,176 
 
 1.4 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 283 
 
 383 
 
 1.9 
 
 260 
 
 i -5 
 
 280 
 
 227 
 
 1.1 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 37 
 
 339 
 
 .2 
 
 36 
 
 246 
 
 .2 
 
 39 
 
 224 
 
 .2 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 239 
 
 770 
 
 1.6 
 
 213 
 
 574 
 
 1.2 
 
 242 
 
 526 
 
 •9 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 1,911 
 
 787 
 
 12.8 
 
 1,878 
 
 606 
 
 10.5 
 
 D 973 
 
 508 
 
 7-7 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 220 
 
 590 
 
 i -5 
 
 211 
 
 432 
 
 1.2 
 
 239 
 
 355 
 
 •9 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 i,U 3 
 
 680 
 
 7-8 
 
 1,154 
 
 499 
 
 6-5 
 
 1,419 
 
 488 
 
 5-6 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 1.218 
 
 802 
 
 8.1 
 
 1,359 
 
 686 
 
 7-7 
 
 1,635 
 
 699 
 
 6.4 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 620 
 
 904 
 
 4.2 
 
 715 
 
 723 
 
 4.0 
 
 1,069 
 
 792 
 
 4.2 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 627 
 
 i, 3 i 5 
 
 4.2 
 
 912 
 
 1,071 
 
 5-1 
 
 1,584 
 
 925 
 
 6.2 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 185 
 
 872 
 
 1.2 
 
 275 
 
 690 
 
 1.6 
 
 480 
 
 641 
 
 1.8 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 30 
 
 978 
 
 .2 
 
 183 
 
 601 
 
 1.0 
 
 522 
 
 673 
 
 2.0 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 2 
 
 329 
 
 • • • • 
 
 119 
 
 693 
 
 •5 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 38 
 
 883 
 
 •3 
 
 137 
 
 711 
 
 .8 
 
 540 
 
 800 
 
 2.1 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 434 
 
 1,131 
 
 2.9 
 
 791 
 
 1 160 
 
 4.4 
 
 1,169 
 
 989 
 
 4-5 
 
 Dakota Territory ... 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 2 
 
 166 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 37 
 
 1,290 
 
 .1 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • 0 • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 93 
 
 872 
 
 •4 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New Mexico. 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 33 
 
 536 
 
 .2 
 
 89 
 
 949 
 
 •4 
 
 Utah . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • * • • 
 
 13 
 
 1,109 
 
 .1 
 
 34 
 
 847 
 
 .1 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • * 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 5 
 
 798 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 29 
 
 2,455 
 
 .1 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 42 
 
 3 T 39 
 
 .2 
 
 154 
 
 2,938 
 
 .6 
 
 California . 
 
 .... 
 
 .... 
 
 .... 
 
 262 
 
 2,837 
 
 1-5 
 
 1,180 
 
 3,106 
 
 4.6 
 
 annually. It was reported in 1849 that with the exception of a few hundred 
 head slaughtered and packed at Chillicothe for the English trade, all the fat 
 cattle of the valley were driven East. 2 Nine-tenths of the corn-fed cattle from 
 
 1 See p. 177. 
 
 2 Ohio State Board of Agric., 3d Annual Report (1848), p. 162. 
 
390 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 the West arriving on the eastern markets about 1850 were said to be from 
 Ohio and Kentucky, but chiefly from Ohio. 3 In some instances between 400 
 and 600 head were fed by a single farmer and driven to the eastern markets. 
 100 head, however, was a more usual number. 4 
 
 METHOD OF FEEDING CATTLE IN THE SCIOTO VALLEY. 
 
 Cattle feeders in the Scioto Valley of Ohio and the bluegrass region of Ken¬ 
 tucky from 1840 to 1850 usually divided their cattle into two lots during the 
 feeding season. The animals which were to be marketed the following spring 
 or summer were put on “ full-feed ” and the remainder on “ half-feed/’ 
 Those upon “ full-feed ” were given corn on the fodder, equivalent to one-half 
 bushel of shelled corn, and those upon “ half-feed ” were fed one-half as 
 much. Two hogs followed a “ full-fed ” steer and one a “ half-fed ” steer. 
 It was expected that each steer, when full fed, would consume about 60 
 bushels of corn during the feeding season. It was the practice to feed out the 
 corn on land which needed manuring. Corn was cut and shocked 14 by 16 
 hills to the shock. In feeding, a low wagon was used to haul the shock corn 
 from the field where grown to the field where the feeding was done. In 
 unloading, the wagon was driven across the field, one man riding the wagon 
 and throwing the corn, alternately on each side, about 4 stalks in a place and 
 10 feet apart, and so on at each successive feeding until the corn, at different 
 feedings, had been regularly distributed over the whole field. This method 
 of distributing the corn was intended to furnish sufficient room for the cattle 
 and to give every part of the field a due proportion of manure. The practice 
 came into the valley from Virginia and spread west with the westward move¬ 
 ment of Virginia and Maryland people. 5 
 
 Outside the Scioto Valley there was considerable diversity in the mode of 
 feeding corn. Some graziers followed the practice of feeding down their corn 
 by turning in both cattle and hogs to consume what they wished. The fat 
 cattle and fat hogs were first admitted to consume what they wished, next the 
 store cattle and store hogs. The more common practice, however, was the 
 Virginia method. Others pulled the ears from the stalks and then pastured 
 their cattle on the standing stalks. 6 In the grazing districts of Ohio, cattle, 
 until 3 years old, were generally kept running on pasture summer and winter. 
 The scant feed in the latter season was supplemented from the stack of corn- 
 fodder from which the ears had been husked. 
 
 The stock for feeding consisted mostly of four or five year old steers. The 
 period of feeding on corn was from 4 to 5J months. The feeding season usu¬ 
 ally began about the first of November, a little later or a little sooner according 
 to the season, and according to whether the cattle about to be fed were intended 
 for an early or late market. The driving began about the middle of February 
 and continued until the first or middle of June, the drover arriving in New 
 
 3 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. cxxxi. 
 
 4 Cultivator, new series, VIII (1851), p. 325; Ohio State Board of Agric., 3d Annual 
 
 Report (1848), p. 163. 
 
 5 Beatty, Essays on Practical Agriculture, p. 265. 
 
 6 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report (1845), p. 384. 
 
BEEF PRODUCTION 
 
 391 
 
 York or other eastern markets between the middle of April and first of 
 August. 7 As to the cost of driving, a writer in the Cultivator in 1851 stated: 8 
 
 “It costs at a low average, to get a drove of cattle from the Scioto Valley into the 
 New York market, from $10.00 to $12.00 per head, without including the loss of flesh 
 sustained by driving, which may safely be calculated at $10.00 per head, reckoning beef 
 at $7.00 per hundred lbs. which is much below the New York price.” 
 
 VARIOUS GROUPS INTERESTED IN THE FATTENING OF 
 
 WESTERN CATTLE. 
 
 The fat-cattle business of the West, as carried on in 1849, employed four 
 classes of persons. There was first the raiser of cattle, who sold his animals 
 at 1 or 2 years old, or even 3, to the grazier. The raisers were chiefly in the 
 great prairie regions of Illinois, Missouri, and Iowa, or in the wheat-growing 
 regions of Ohio. A second class were the graziers, who were chiefly the owners 
 or renters of large tracts of pasture land, notably in Madison, Fayette, and 
 Union Counties, Ohio, on the western edge of the Scioto Valley. The cattle 
 feeders composed a third group. They had farms in the corn-raising district 
 of Ross, Pickaway, Franklin, and Madison Counties, and took the cattle in 
 the autumn and fed them on corn till they were fat enough for the markets 
 of the Atlantic cities. Sometimes two of these occupations were united, but 
 not often. The fourth class of persons comprised the bankers who furnished 
 the funds. The banks of Chillicothe, Columbus, and Xenia were said to do 
 much of this sort of business. 9 Renick 10 wrote in 1848: 
 
 “ Perhaps a majority of the cattle fed in the valley are raised in Ohio, or at least 
 have been in the state one year previous to the feeding of them; though a considerable 
 portion of the number fed, are drawn from the states of Indiana and Illinois, and even 
 Missouri furnishes a part; though the western cattle are generally too thin in flesh to feed 
 to advantage, unless they are brought in the previous year; but when made fat they 
 are generally preferred by the drovers, (though not so profitable to the feeder), to our 
 home raised cattle, for the reason that they are better travellers and consequently will 
 lose comparatively less in weight, in the long drive they have to make to an Eastern 
 market.” 
 
 GRAZING IN NORTHERN OHIO. 
 
 While some cattle from north of the National Road in Ohio were corn-fed 
 and driven to eastern markets, by far the greater number were only grass-fed, 
 or slightly corn fed. They were either sold to drovers from the feeding 
 regions to the South, or were sent east across the Alleghenies where they 
 were disposed of to eastern feeders, or were sold on the Boston, New York, 
 Philadelphia, or Baltimore markets as grass-fed beef. Many were disposed 
 of in Cincinnati or in eastern packing centers. The number of these grass- 
 fed cattle driven east from Ohio was much greater than that of corn-fed 
 cattle. From Madison County alone, in the grazing and feeding section, in 7 
 months of 1848, nearly 20,000 head of cattle, 3 years old and upwards, were 
 said to have been sold and driven mostly to the New York and Pennsylvania 
 markets. 11 
 
 7 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, cxxxi. 
 
 8 Cultivator, new series, VIII (1851), p. 325. 
 
 0 Prairie Farmer, IX (1849), p. 305. 
 
 10 Ohio State Board of Agric., 3d Annual Report (1848), p. 163. 
 
 11 Ibid ., p. 92. 
 
392 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 In the dairy section of the Western Reserve a few cattle were driven in from 
 other sections to be fed, but a large part of the cattle slaughtered consisted of 
 dry cows, heifers, and steers. 12 In the wheat-raising regions of eastern Ohio, 
 considerable stock was raised, grazing in the summer and consuming the wheat 
 straw or corn stover in winter. Some were fattened, but many, owing to the 
 relative scarcity of corn, were driven to the Scioto Valley or to eastern feeding 
 districts to be prepared for market. Gallia, situated among the hills to the 
 east of the Scioto Valley, was said to be a center for gathering lean cattle to 
 be taken to the valley of the Scioto or to that of the Ohio. 13 
 
 CATTLE GRAZING ON THE OPEN PRAIRIES. 
 
 To the west, in Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Iowa, the open prairies fur¬ 
 nished abundant free range. Settlement, as yet scarce, still clung to the edge 
 of the prairie skirting the timber. There was still a large range for livestock 
 in the center of the prairie, which could be occupied by all who chose to 
 allow their cattle to graze upon it. Much of this common grazing-land still 
 remained in Indiana, and more to the west. Many methods of stock-feeding 
 prevailed; but in all the prairie regions range was the important factor. Mar¬ 
 kets were distant and hard to reach, and consequently the surplus cattle were of 
 necessity disposed of at a low price. 
 
 In some prairie sections an extensive cattle-grazing business had developed, 
 as described by a writer in Clinton County, Indiana, in 1853: 14 
 
 “We have in this county a number of individuals who are engaged in buying cattle 
 in small lots, and taking them to the prairies, where they collect large numbers to sell 
 to drovers from Ohio and Pennsylvania. These cattle are kept on the prairies in Indiana 
 and Illinois, in the following manner: The owner selects his location for grazing 
 early in the spring, hires a man to herd them, and furnishes him with a pony, and pre¬ 
 pares a lot called a * pound ’ to put them in at night. As soon as the grass starts in the 
 spring, he fakes his cattle to the grazing ground, adjacent to some farmer on the edge 
 of the prairie. He starts his cattle out in the prairie early in the morning by them¬ 
 selves.He remains with them until night, when he brings them in and puts them 
 
 in the pound for the night. The cost of keeping a lot of cattle in this manner, during the ( 
 summer, is the herdsman’s wages and board, and their salt, one hundred dollars will 
 keep four to five hundred head of cattle during the summer.” 
 
 • 
 
 WINTER FEEDING IN THE PRAIRIE REGION. 
 
 There were many practices of feeding in the prairie region in the winter. 
 Some allowed their cattle to obtain winter sustenance by remaining in the 
 pasture and digging the grass out of the snow. Wintering around the straw- 
 stack was a common practice. Corn fodder and prairie hay provided other 
 available food. 16 Cattle, until about 3 years old, were allowed to run winter and | 
 summer exposed to all kinds of weather. It was common to feed them a little 
 corn in the spring to give a good start on the pasture. H. L. Ellsworth wrote 
 in 1845: 16 | 
 
 “ As for sheds, they are, as yet, unknown; no large feeder has them, to my knowledge, 
 in Indiana. It is said that so much shed room is required, that it will not pay. Hence 
 
 32 Ibid., 4th Annual Report (1849), P- 5 2 - 
 
 13 Ibid., p. 99; 3d Annual Report (1848), p. 52. 
 
 14 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1853, Agriculture, 6. 
 
 15 Prairie Farmer, III (1843), P- 108. 
 
 16 Ibid., (1845), p. 386. 
 
BEEF PRODUCTION 
 
 393 
 
 cattle are stuffed with corn, and remain in the open air during all kinds of weather. 
 
 At present, farming is done upon a great and easy scale, and little, very little, attention is 
 given to economy; and what is real economy in the present state of the fertile west, 
 where land and stock are so plenty, is not quite certain” 
 
 BEGINNINGS OF CATTLE FATTENING IN THE CORN BELT. 
 
 A large part of the surplus cattle raised in the prairie region was sold to 
 drovers and driven east to be fed by Ohio and eastern feeders. In the corn¬ 
 growing region of Illinois, Indiana, and Missouri, however, after 1850, a 
 considerable amount of stock was fattened. Cattle were bought up in the fall, 
 driven to the interior corn-growing region, where corn was cheap, fed one 
 or two winters, and then driven to market. By 1850, McLean County, Illinois, 
 was developing as a western feeding center. A sample transaction of the 
 business in this county reads as follows: 17 
 
 Messrs. Isaac Funk and P. Hapoter of McLean County, a few weeks since, sold 96 
 head of beef cattle to a New York drover, for $4,383 or $46.65 per head. They were 
 started for New York the first of April.” 
 
 PACKING OF WESTERN GRASS-FED BEEF IN CHICAGO. 
 
 By 1850, Chicago was developing as a western packing center for grass- 
 fed beef. The Chicago Tribune in 1845 was “ inclined to believe that Chicago 
 was destined to become the greatest beef market in the United States, if not 
 in the world.” It was estimated that something like 200 to 250 cattle were 
 slaughtered in the city daily. 22,000 cattle were packed in 1851, and 25,000 in 
 1852. By 1850, Chicago was rapidly coming to be the outlet for a large part 
 of the grass-fed beef of northern Illinois, western Michigan, and parts of 
 Iowa and Indiana. 18 
 
 CATTLE IN WISCONSIN AND MICHIGAN. 
 
 In Wisconsin, but very little attention had been given to stock-raising. Its 
 cattle were reported to be of very ordinary quality, brought originally from 
 Illinois and Missouri. 19 But the failure of the wheat crop in 1847 an d following 
 years, and consequent increased attention to general farming, caused farmers 
 to give more thought to cattle feeding and dairying. 20 It seems to have been 
 a general opinion that other systems of farming, particularly the raising of 
 cattle and sheep, even if not more profitable than wheat-growing in ordinary 
 seasons, were less speculative. Immigrants were bringing to the State cattle 
 of a better quality, 21 and by 1851 the number of cattle driven into the State 
 from Illinois and Indiana was said to be decreasing each year because of the 
 increased attention given to livestock-raising at home. 22 In Michigan, before 
 1850, cattle had been marketed at home to immigrants and the lumber trade, 
 but after that date a beginning was made in droving to Ohio and the eastern 
 markets. 23 
 
 17 Prairie Farmer, X (1850), p. 166. 
 
 18 Ibid., p. 382. 
 
 19 Wis. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1851), p. 146. 
 
 20 Ibid., 216. 
 
 21 Ibid., 146. 
 
 22 Ibid., 201. 
 
 23 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 183, 185. 
 
394 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 EFFECT OF THE CALIFORNIA MIGRATION. 
 
 Emigration to California had a stimulating effect upon the cattle business 
 west of the Mississippi. W. G. Edmumson wrote from Keokuk, Iowa, in 
 1852: 24 
 
 “ Prior to the California emigration, stock cattle for feeding could be bought at one- 
 half the prices asked in Ohio, but the outfit for the overland route being made almost 
 exclusively along the upper Mississippi and her tributaries, tens of thousands of oxen, 
 steers and cows have been bought up at nearly eastern prices, thus changing material y 
 the market value of stock cattle for feeding.” 
 
 From Lee County, in the same State, in 1854, it was reported: 25 “ Cattle, 
 here, are a great article of trade, for home use, the East and California. 
 From Marion County: 26 “ Cattle are found to be the most profitable stock 
 raised here. They are sold mostly to California emigrants.” From Cooper 
 County, Missouri, it was reported in 1849: 27 
 
 “ Our stall-fed cattle are principally driven to St. Louis and slaughtered. But im¬ 
 mense droves of 3, 4 and 5 year old steers, are annually bought up in this section and 
 driven to Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Virginia, there fattened, and then driven to Balti¬ 
 more and other eastern markets.” 
 
 Three years later, however, a report in different terms came from the 
 neighboring county of Boone. 28 “ The California trade, it observed, has 
 produced quite a revolution in the cattle trade of Missouri. They have ad¬ 
 vanced at least 200 per cent in price, and decreased in numbers in about the 
 same proportion. ’ At the same time the cattle business was developing on the 
 Pacific Coast. Calaveras County, California, reported in 1851: 29 
 
 “Neat Cattle, Sheep, and Hogs are raised on the large farms for the purpose of 
 supplying the miners. They invariably feed upon wild grasses and acorns, no attention 
 being paid to them other than is necessary to prevent their straying.” 
 
 On the Pacific Coast the improved English breeds crossed on the Spanish 
 breeds were becoming common. 
 
 THE EASTERN CATTLE-FEEDING INDUSTRY. 
 
 Eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, northern Delaware, and eastern and 
 southern New York had long been the centers of the eastern cattle-feeding 
 industry. Formerly many eastern cattle-feeders had raised their own stock, but 
 with the development of better markets in the East and the opening of cheap 
 grazing lands in the West, and in remote sections of the Eastern States, they 
 had come to depend largely on the drovers for their supply of cattle.. Cattle 
 from the grazing regions of the West, even from beyond the Mississippi River, 
 were driven east across the Allegheny Mountains in the fall. Shorter drives 
 were made from the grazing regions of northern and central Pennsylvania, 
 and from northern New York and New England. Natural conditions, dis¬ 
 tance from market, and transportation facilities were important determining 
 
 24 Cultivator, new series, IX (1852), p. 364. 
 
 25 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1854, Agriculture, 13. 
 
 26 Loc. cit. 
 
 27 Cultivator, new series, VI (1849), p. 302. 
 
 28 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1853, Agriculture, n. 
 
 29 Ibid., 1851, p. 476. 
 
BEEF PRODUCTION 395 
 
 factors in the type of livestock farming pursued. This movement of cattle was 
 an important characteristic of the cattle industry of the period. 
 
 Western cattle arriving in the Eastern States in poor condition were sold to 
 local farmers, who kept them over one winter, or one year and a winter, and 
 then disposed of them on the market, usually during the winter or spring 
 months, before the western fat cattle began to arrive. Stockmen who lived 
 near the large cities had a decided advantage in being able to drive their cattle 
 to market in a short time, thus taking advantage of temporary rises in price. 
 
 IN CHESTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 In Chester County, Pennsylvania, a center of the eastern feeder industry, 
 farmers were said to find the feeding of cattle one of the most profitable 
 branches of their business. 30 It was usual for a Chester County farmer to 
 fatten from 12 to 20 head of cattle annually. The cattle were secured largely 
 from drovers who brought them in from Ohio, Virginia, Illinois, or from 
 northern Pennsylvania. 31 In an adjoining county in Delaware it was said 32 
 that the cattle raised consisted of “ a comparatively few from choice stock for 
 the dairies, probably not exceeding one-eighth of the whole number in use.” 
 Somerset County, New Jersey, reported 33 that “ fifty per cent of all our cattle 
 are raised in the county ; the other half are driven principally from New York 
 State or Ohio.” The feeding of cattle in Lancaster and adjoining counties was 
 increasing, because with the decline of distilleries the grain formerly consumed 
 by them was now converted into food for stock. 34 Throughout all the southern 
 counties of Pennsylvania the feeding of cattle was a leading farm enterprise. 
 In the northern and central counties, on the rougher land, many young cattle 
 were raised. A writer from Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania, in 1851 
 reported: 35 “ Large numbers of young cattle are raised, and sold to drovers, 
 principally two and three years old, together with a fair amount of oxen; but 
 no cattle are fattened for the city market.” 
 
 IN NEW YORK, SOUTHERN AND EASTERN COUNTIES. 
 
 In New York, the southern and eastern counties carried on an extensive 
 cattle-feeding industry, drawing their cattle from the West and from northern 
 New York. The wheat region of western New York also furnished many 
 lean cattle for the eastern feeder. From Wayne County, in the wheat region, 
 in 1849, it was reported: 36 “About one-third are slaughtered at home; the 
 remainder are driven to the Southern and Eastern counties to be fattened.” 
 The dairy section of New York, Oneida County, reported as follows: 37 
 
 “ Many are fed in this portion of the county; but our farmers who turn their atten¬ 
 tion to this branch of business find that they can usually purchase steers three or four 
 
 30 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1852, Agriculture, 240. 
 
 31 Ibid., 1853, p. 17. 
 
396 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 years of age at a cheaper price than they can afford to raise them. They are 
 
 generally obtained by picking them up singly about the country, or by purchasing from 
 droves, which come annually from the West, usually from Ohio.” 
 
 From Herkimer, a leading dairy county, in 1841, the report ran: 38 
 
 “ In the spring of the year, large droves of cows are brought here from the eastern, 
 western, northern and southern counties, and Canada. They are milked through the 
 summer, and in the fall the oldest and poorest are partially grass fattened, and driven 
 to the eastern markets.” 
 
 Throughout New York more or less cattle were fed, but the southern and 
 eastern counties were the leading cattle-feeding sections. 39 
 
 IN NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 In New England, beef was generally produced in connection with the raising 
 of steers for the yoke and cows for the dairy. In Maine, the lumbering indus¬ 
 try furnished a large market for working oxen, but as the lumbering region 
 receded, 40 increased attention was being given to farming and to the raising of 
 neat cattle. “ Five years ago,” states the Patent Office Report for 1849, 41 
 “ large droves of working oxen, principally for lumbering, found a market 
 in this county. Considerable numbers are now driven to Brighton (Mass.), 
 from the central counties of the State, yielding fair profits.” It was estimated 
 that 14,000 cattle were received at Cambridge (Brighton Market), Massachu¬ 
 setts, from the western and central counties of Maine during the year 1850. 
 From the cheap pastures of New Hampshire and Vermont large droves were 
 annually driven South to be sold either at the Brighton Market, or to feeders or 
 dairymen in the three southern New England States. In Massachusetts, Con¬ 
 necticut, and Rhode Island it was the custom of the farmer to buy a large part 
 of his cattle from drovers coming down from the north. 42 A writer from 
 Worcester County, Massachusetts, in 1850 stated: 43 
 
 “ Fifty per cent of all our cattle are raised in the county, and the other half are 
 driven in principally from Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire. This foreign stock 
 is purchased late in autumn, principally for the purpose of consuming the poor sorts 
 of fodder, and to be grazed in summer, and used to supply our market with early beef.” 
 
 New England beef was essentially fed on grass, supplemented, while finish¬ 
 ing, with roots and a little grain. A writer in a Massachusetts report of 1849 
 gives the following directions for feeding beef cattle. It will be noted that 
 corn was used to a less extent than in the West: 44 
 
 “ After the spring work is over, commence giving them the best pasturage during 
 the summer, also the best fall feed until they come to the barn; then feed them with 
 good hay and Indian meal, at first from one to two quarts per day, gradually increasing 
 till six or eight quarts are given, until they are slaughtered, or about fifteen bushels 
 of meal to each animal.” 
 
 38 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1841), p. 137. 
 
 39 Cultivator, new series, VIII (1851), p. 235. 
 
 40 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1850, Agriculture, 114; (1854), P- I 5 - 
 
 41 Ibid., 1849, 294. 
 
 42 Ibid., 295. 
 
 43 Ibid., 1850, p. 272. 
 
 44 Mass., Transactions of the Agricultural Societies 1849, P- 88- 
 
BEEF PRODUCTION 
 
 397 
 
 DESCRIPTION OF THE BRIGHTON MARKET. 
 
 The Connecticut River Valley was a center of the cattle-feeding industry in 
 New England. 45 At Brighton, the great New England cattle market, it was 
 said in 1844 that $2,000,000 worth of hogs, cattle and sheep were sold annu¬ 
 ally. 46 The following account of the Brighton Cattle Market may help in 
 developing a picture of New England agriculture in 1840: 47 
 
 “ Thursday of every week, which by common consent and custom is the market day, 
 changes the generally quiet village of Brighton into a scene of bustle and excitement. 
 At early morning the cattle, sheep, etc., are hurried in and soon the morning train 
 from Boston, omnibuses, carriages and other ‘ vehicular mediums ’ bring in a throng 
 of drovers, buyers, speculators and spectators; so that, by 10 o’clock, there are generally 
 gathered as many as two or three hundred vehicles in the area fronting the Cattle Fair 
 Hotel. The proprietors thereof throng the spacious bar-room for the purpose of warm¬ 
 ing themselves in winter, and in summer ‘cooling off’—the process for effecting both 
 results being precisely the same. The portico of the hotel is occupied by hawkers and 
 peddlers, who sell clothing, jewelry, soap, watches, knives, razors, etc., (to say nothing 
 of their customers), at astonishingly low rates. An ‘English hunting lever eighteen 
 carots fine,’ is frequently sold for five or six dollars, and, of course, is a genuine article. 
 In the region round about, ‘ Mammoth Steer,’ ‘ Living Skeletons,’ ‘ Snakes,’ etc., are on 
 exhibition at reasonable prices. 
 
 “ One of the outside features of the market is the horse auction. A Brighton horse 
 has become a proverb. Here are gathered all the old, wornout, broken-down, and 
 used-up omnibus, cart and livery stable steeds, and these are knocked down (if they 
 don’t tumble down,) at sums varying from five to forty dollars. These sales are pro¬ 
 ductive of a deal of merriment and the mettle, speed and fine points of the animals 
 are exhibited, (the ‘points’ perhaps being sufficiently prominent already). 
 
 “ All this time, the butchers and the drovers are busily engaged in their traffic. The 
 fattest and best of the cattle in the pens find ready sale, and long before all the drovers 
 are in, select lots begin to be driven from the grounds. Men and boys hurry up and 
 down the lanes and through the pens, each armed with a stock which is a sort of a 
 shillelah, shouting to the half-crazed cattle, and with screams and blows directing them 
 where they should go. Occasionally a drove of cows and calves come along, the latter 
 muzzled, and the former looing and bellowing in chorus to the shouts of their drivers. 
 Farmers from the neighboring towns are selecting ‘stores’ from the large number 
 of that class in the pens, and dairymen carefully examining the ‘ milky-mothcrs ’ that 
 are so anxiously seeking their young from the midst of their companions. Working 
 oxen are driven in by farmers from the vicinity, who sell, only after much banter, to 
 buy again when prices are low. In the midst of these, dogs, and goats and mules are 
 offered for sale, and nearby, are the hog pens, containing, at this season, only stores, 
 which are sold singly and in pairs to small farmers, mechanics and others who think 
 they can afford to ‘keep a pig.’ 
 
 “The forenoon is busy enough. At high noon the huge bell of the hotel announces 
 dinner, and for a brief period there is a breathing spell for man and beast. After 
 dinner, business again resumes its sway. The voice of the hawker becomes hoarse, 
 but it is by no means silenced. Drovers who have not made many sales get nervous, 
 and pens are cleared out without much regard to profit on the part of the seller. The 
 butchers begin to turn their faces homewards, and the drovers, generally with well 
 filled wallets, start for Boston. A few, not liking the prices, and hoping for ‘better 
 times,’ make arrangements to turn out their cattle to pasture, and hold over to another 
 week. By five o’clock the business of the day is over, and Brighton subsides once 
 more into a quiet, matter-of-fact Massachusetts village, till another Thursday brings 
 round another market day.” 
 
 45 U-S Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 291, 294; Country Gentleman 
 XVII (1861), p. 410. 
 
 46 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report (1844), p. 158. 
 
 47 Hawthorne, American Note Books, in Collected Works (nth ed., 1887), IX p. 248. 
 
 Reprinted in Country Gentleman, XVI (i860), p. 100. 
 
398 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 WESTWARD SHIFT OF CATTLE FEEDING. 
 
 By i860 the frontier of the cattle feeding industry had moved west. The 
 railroads now extended from the Atlantic beyond the Mississippi River. The 
 remote corn-growing regions of central Illinois and eastern Iowa had become 
 cattle-feeding centers. Missouri and Texas were now the chief sources of 
 western feeder cattle, for Texas had advanced from the rank of eighteenth 
 in number of cattle, in 1850, to first in i860. California, which in 1850 was 
 twenty-second, had in i860 become sixth. (See fig. 96.) 
 
 Formerly western cattle could be put on the eastern markets only during 
 the spring, summer, and fall months. The long drive deprived the western 
 
 During the fifties the number of cattle in the West rapidly increased as the frontier 
 was pushed farther west Cattle grazing had rapidly developed on the Pacific coast. 
 Before i860 cattle feeding accompanied general farming in its extension westward 
 through the Ohio and Mississippi valleys. 
 
 grazier of the opportunity of taking advantage of temporary rises in prices. 
 The Eastern feeder profited by such opportunities, because of his nearness to 
 market. After 1850, however, western cattle were shipped by railroad to the 
 East at all seasons of the year. The eastern feeder thus lost one of his chief 
 advantages. In 1840, Baltimore received from the West over the Baltimore and 
 Ohio Railroad 432 tons of livestock; in 1850, 14,863 tons, and in 1859, 25,184 
 tons. 48 In 1852 Philadelphia received from the West over the Pennsylvania 
 Railroad, 1,562 tons of livestock. In 1859, there were received over the same 
 
 48 B. & O. Railroad Co., 33d Annual Report (1859), p. 81. 
 
BEEF PRODUCTION 399 
 
 road, private cars included, 49,418 tons, of which 32,552 tons were forwarded 
 from Pittsburg. 49 
 
 EFFECT OF RAILROAD TRANSPORTATION ON NEW 
 ENGLAND CATTLE FEEDING. 
 
 By i860, cattle-feeding in the southern New England States had reached its 
 height and in many regions had begun to decline. The extension of railroads 
 was a leading cause. James L. Grinnel, in 1862, wrote as follows: 60 
 
 “It was admitted all round that owing to the great facilities for bringing cattle 
 from the far west at a low price, and in great quantities, at all times of the year, cattle 
 which had roamed on the prairies, costing the government price, $1.25 per acre, and 
 fattened upon corn worth ten cents per bushel—or distillery slops made at the same 
 rate—we here could not compete on pastures worth $30 per acre, and corn worth 
 75 cents.” 
 
 The Patent Office reported in 1861 that the facilities for bringing in cattle 
 at all times by railroad from the West and other States was so great that the 
 business of feeding in the East was rapidly declining. 51 The extension of 
 railroads into former remote cattle-grazing regions and the increasing price 
 of store cattle, after about 1847, made it more difficult for the New England 
 farmer to buy lean cattle. Says a Connecticut report of 1856: 52 
 
 “Neat cattle have decreased enormously in many of the counties since 1850. Ten 
 years ago our drovers could get a drove of store cattle, by going out fifty or one hundred 
 miles west of the Hudson or to Western Massachusetts, Vermont, or Northern Penn¬ 
 sylvania. Now they go further and often return without them.” 
 
 The development of a market for dairy produce, hay, and other crops was 
 furnishing increased opportunities for the New England farmer to change the 
 method of disposing of his field produce. Dairy cows and working oxen, how¬ 
 ever, still furnished a large supply of store cattle to be fattened in the fall. 
 
 WESTWARD EXTENSION OF RAILROADS ENDS CATTLE 
 FATTENING IN THE SCIOTO VALLEY. 
 
 In Ohio, the opening of through railroads resulted in many changes. The 
 driving of fat cattle from the regions of the Scioto to the eastern market, 
 which had reached its height during the period 1840 to 1850, had almost ceased 
 by i860. Cattle could now be sent east by railroad from the grazing lands 
 of Illinois without stopping to be fed in Ohio. Of the cattle received on the 
 New York market in 1858, Illinois was reported to have sent 53,500, Ohio 
 37,600, Indiana 11,100, Kentucky 9,400, Iowa 2,700, Michigan 1,700. And 
 in addition, large numbers of western cattle were “ carried into New York 
 State where they are grazed a few weeks and then entered as New York 
 cattle.” 53 
 
 Now that the long, hard drive across the Alleghenies could be avoided, 
 it was no longer profitable to fatten cattle to such a degree as formerly. Other 
 
 49 Penn. Railroad Co., 6 th Annual Report (1853), P- 64; 13th Annual Report (i860), 
 
 p. 103. 
 
 50 Country Gentleman, XIX (1862), p. 61. 
 
 61 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1861, Agriculture, 258. 
 
 62 Conn. State Agric. Soc. Transactions 1856, p. 47. 
 
 53 Chicago Board of Trade, 1st Annual Report (1858), p. 26. 
 
400 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 markets were also opened for Ohio corn. Grass was now relied upon to a 
 greater extent to prepare the cattle for market. Formerly from 50 to 75 
 bushels had been fed to a fattening steer the winter before being sent to mar¬ 
 ket ; now 25 to 40 bushels was a more common amount. There was a tendency 
 to fatten cattle at an earlier age and for a shorter period. In 1858 there were 
 shipped east from Cleveland 124,046 head of cattle, of which the New York 
 market took 53,652 head and the remainder went to Albany, Brighton, or to 
 New York State as feeders. 54 
 
 WESTWARD MOVEMENT OF CATTLE FEEDING AND 
 
 GRAZING. 
 
 The construction of railroads, which tended to diminish the feeding of cat¬ 
 tle in Ohio, contributed largely to the increase in this branch of farming in 
 Illinois and other Western States. The cattle-supply region had been pushed 
 farther west. Texas, Missouri, and Iowa were now the great cattle-grazing 
 States. Central Illinois and eastern Iowa were developing as western feeding 
 centers. Free grazing lands to the South and West, railroad connection with 
 eastern markets, the temperate climate, the adaptability of the rich prairie 
 grasses for grazing, and the ease with which corn could be produced were 
 establishing this region as a finishing-ground for the western packing industry. 
 
 In 1859, eight Chicago firms packed a total of 51,606 cattle. 55 The business 
 of a leading feeder of McLean county, Illinois, was thus described in 1862: 56 
 
 “ [He] usually winters over from seven hundred to one thousand head of cattle, and 
 stall-feeds for early spring market from three hundred to five hundred head. He 
 markets his stall-fed cattle about the 1st of April. He buys cattle all the time, whenever 
 he can do so profitably. Those he sells in the summer and fall are generally three years 
 
 old.He prefers to buy cattle (steers) the spring they are two years old. They 
 
 usually cost them, if good ones, from $18 to $25 per head. These are kept one summer, 
 one winter, and the half the next summer, when they are in condition to market, and 
 will average from $45 to $52 per head.” 
 
 BEGINNING OF CATTLE DRIVING FROM TEXAS. 
 
 In 1854, Texas cattle in large numbers were driven north to be fed in Illi¬ 
 nois. There is a report of a drive of 1,500 head to Missouri in 1842, but the 
 earliest authenticated record of a business venture of the kind found by the 
 writer was that of Edward Piper, of Decatur, Illinois, who in 1846 drove 1,000 
 head of Texas cattle to Ohio, where he fed and sold them. From 1846 to 
 1861 the drives increased. In 1850, drives began from Texas to California. 
 In 1855, 154 head of Texas cattle appeared in New York; they were said to 
 have been brought by Mr. Rankin, of Illinois, who, after feeding them, 
 shipped them to New York by railroad. 57 By i860, Texas cattle were driven 
 directly to the packing market of Chicago. The cattle went through Missouri 
 and Iowa to the Mississippi River, grazing by the way, and from there were 
 transported by rail to Chicago. 58 The first drive of Texas cattle through to 
 
 54 Country Gentleman, XIX (1862), p. 12. 
 
 55 Chicago Board of Trade, Annual Report (1859), P- 59 - 
 
 56 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1862, Agriculture, 333. 
 
 57 Prairie Farmer, XY (1855), p. 248. 
 
 58 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1862, Agriculture, 330. 
 
BEEF PRODUCTION 
 
 401 
 
 Chicago is said to have been made in 1856. 09 But by far the larger number of 
 Texas cattle which went north were fed in the corn or grazing districts of 
 Illinois or Iowa before being sent to market. 60 
 
 TYPES OF NATIVE CATTLE FOUND IN KENTUCKY 
 
 AND OHIO. 
 
 There was great diversity in the prevailing type of cattle in 1840. A Ken¬ 
 tucky writer described the native cattle of that State in 1840 as a small, bony, 
 black-haired, blue-nosed animal; which, “ nevertheless, from long breeding for 
 its milk alone, had come to possess a soft and richly colored skin and fine hair 
 that some of its betters might envy.” Adam Beatty wrote in 1844 that the 
 improved breeds of Kentucky were sent to market when 3 years old, but 
 the common stock and half-blood had to be kept 6 to 12 months longer. 61 The 
 native cattle of Ohio in 1841 were described as “ ring streaked, speckled and 
 gray, with black, dun, yellow and bay, their quarters consisting in a big wiry 
 tail, and a sharp crowning rump that will take on fat with the same avidity 
 as Pharaoh’s lean kine did of old.” 62 Their weight at 4 years old was com¬ 
 monly from 500 to 700 pounds. By 1840, however, a spirit of improvement was 
 abroad, and no subject attracted more attention in the agricultural journals 
 of the time than the improvement of breeds of cattle. 
 
 IMPORTATION OF IMPROVED ENGLISH CATTLE. 
 
 The fertile bluegrass region of Kentucky had long been famous throughout 
 the land for its fine stock of Shorthorn cattle. Another early center of 
 improved cattle-breeding was the rich cattle-feeding region of the Miami and 
 Scioto Valleys in south central Ohio. Desiring a larger and more economical 
 animal, and inspired by the work of breeders, in Kentucky and elsewhere, 
 several of the leading cattle feeders and citizens of Ross and two or three 
 adjoining counties in Ohio in 1833 formed an association “ for the purpose 
 of promoting the interests of agriculture, and of introducing an improved 
 breed of cattle into this State.” 63 It was called the “ Ohio Company for 
 Importing English Cattle.” The company appointed Felix Renick, a promi¬ 
 nent cattle man, to proceed to England and “ to select and purchase, with less 
 regard to cost than to their intrinsic and prospective value, a sufficient number 
 of cows and bulls requisite fairly to introduce their breed into this neighbor¬ 
 hood. This mission was highly successful.” 64 
 
 After inspecting the best herds of England and Scotland, Mr. Renick 
 returned to Ohio bringing “ some score of animals ” of the Shorthorn breed. 
 During the following two years, other importations were made bringing the 
 total number of cattle imported by the Ohio company up to 61 head. In 
 1 836-37 the object of the society having been accomplished, the cattle which 
 it then possessed were disposed of by public auction. Two bulls sold for 
 
 59 U. S. Census of 1880, vol. Ill, Agriculture, Live Stock Supplement, 11. 
 
 60 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report, 1862, Agriculture, 329. 
 
 61 Beatty, Essays on Practical Agriculture, p. 269. 
 
 62 Cultivator, VIII (1841), p. 67. 
 
 63 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1851, Agriculture, 98. 
 
 64 Ibid., 1849, p. 298. 
 
 27 
 
402 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 $2,500 each, the cow Teeswater and her calf for $2,225. 65 Importations in 
 increasing numbers succeeded the operations of the Ohio company. Mr. John 
 Powell, of Powellton, Pennsylvania, was one of the large importers of im¬ 
 proved cattle. Up to 1840, however, improved cattle were largely confined 
 to the rich and the well-to-do farmers; it was not until about 1850 that their 
 introduction became at all general. 
 
 In New England the farmers were nearly unanimous in their preference for 
 the common native stock, in which the Devon blood predominated. The native 
 cows were said to be good milking cattle and the steers made good oxen. Devon, 
 Shorthorn, Hereford, Ayrshire, and Jersey cattle had been introduced and 
 crossed on the native stock. In New York and Pennsylvania improved breeds 
 had been introduced, but their influence up to 1840 was comparatively local. 
 In awarding the premium at the New York State Fair in 1841, the committee 
 regretted “ that a matter so important as the improvement of our native cows, 
 
 does not excite more attention.It is a matter yet at issue whether 
 
 such crosses will not make the most desirable animal for the common farmer. 
 Many farmers were prejudiced against English cattle because of the earlier 
 importation of “ unimproved Durham ” or “ Yorkshire ” cattle commonly 
 called “ Hog-hams ” or “ Pumpkin rumps ”—names said to have been sug¬ 
 gested by the peculiar conformation of the hind quarters. These cattle had 
 proved unsuccessful, and were deemed inferior to the native breeds. 60 
 
 By 1850 “ a commendable zeal” was said to be evident among the New 
 England farmers for the improvement of livestock. 67 A difficulty with the 
 Shorthorns was said to be found in the expensiveness of their keep, and the 
 care which they required. 68 In Maine, Herefords were regarded as good beef 
 cattle, as well as good oxen. The Massachusetts Agricultural Society went to 
 great expense to introduce the Ayrshire breed of cows. 69 The Devon, how¬ 
 ever, was still the favorite with the New England farmer, who sought a type 
 of cattle that would rear heifers for the dairy, steers for the yoke, and both 
 ultimately for the shambles. A New Hampshire man writes: 70 
 
 “As working cattle they [Devons] are unsurpassed, and from their uniformity of 
 color and build, are easily matched. They are active, docile, and tractable, as well as 
 tough and hardy, and will perform much hard labor without losing flesh.” 
 
 Another writes: “ The Devons readily appropriate the sour grasses to their 
 support. They do well upon meadow hay, and grow finely in our old, sour 
 pastures.” 71 In the valley of the Merrimac, the pure Devon was said to be 
 more generally kept than any other breed of blooded stock. They were pre¬ 
 ferred by many on account of their color, a bright red. 72 
 
 Many New England farmers insisted that the native stock, the cows of 
 which were commonly regarded as good milking cattle, was as good as any. 
 In the East, at least during this period, better feed, shelter, and care of the 
 native stock was the greatest source of improvement in cattle. Early maturity 
 
 65 Ibid., 1851, Agriculture, 101, 102. 
 
 66 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1841), pp. 5 L 93 * 
 
 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 295. 
 
 63 Agriculture of Massachusetts, 2d Annual Report (1838), p. 142. 
 
 09 Ibid., 55. 
 
 70 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 295; 1854* P- 
 
 71 Ibid., 1854, Agriculture, 17. 
 
 72 Ibid., 1849, Agriculture, p. 294. 
 
BEEF PRODUCTION 
 
 403 
 
 and a tendency to fatten were qualities wanted by the western farmer, and 
 consequently there the Shorthorn soon came into favor. In the East, however, 
 dairy ing was of greater importance, and more attention was given to the 
 dairy breeds and the improving of the native cattle. Although the Jersey was a 
 
 favored breed, there were less than 75 purebred Jerseys in Massachusetts 
 in 1853. 73 
 
 In the fertile pastures and milder climate of the West, Shorthorn stock had 
 found more favor than in the East. In 1849* the average weight of the 
 fattened cattle driven from the region of the Scioto Valley was not less than 
 100 pounds per head above that which had prevailed 20 years before. West 
 of Ohio few of the improved breeds of cattle had been introduced up to 
 i860. A drove of 1,000 head of cattle slaughtered at Chicago in 1850, pur¬ 
 chased from Isaac Funk, of McLean County, “ averaged over 650 lbs. each; 
 and 200 killed in one day averaged 736 pounds—only twenty of them being 
 over three yeais old. ‘ 4 In 1854 Funk sold 1,400 head which averaged 700 
 pounds each. This was said to be a high figure for so large a number. 75 600 
 pounds was considered a good weight for a good western steer at 3 years of 
 
 age. Droves from this region were said to be mingled with the improved 
 breeds and their crosses. 76 
 
 After 1850 the improvement of cattle progressed at a more rapid rate. 
 Adaptability for a long drive to market was no longer a requirement in 
 regions having railroad facilities. Of the 140,534 cattle received at Chicago 
 in 1858, only 21,000 were driven in. 77 Agricultural societies and agricultural 
 fairs were a large stimulus to the movement. The practice of buying cattle 
 from drovers was a great hindrance. 
 
 OXEN VS. HORSES AS DRAFT ANIMALS. 
 
 The time-honored discussion of the relative merits of oxen and horses was 
 at its height during the period 1840 to i860. Ploughing and hauling contests 
 between cattle and horses were leading attractions at the agricultural fairs, 
 and much was written of the relative merits and costs of each as draft animals 
 in the agricultural periodicals. 
 
 As the census of 1840 did not report oxen separately, there is no statistical 
 account of their increase or decrease in the years 1840 to 1850. During the 
 following decade, however, oxen appear to have been losing in favor in the 
 East. In the country as a whole their number increased from 1,701,000 to 
 2,255,000, but in every Northern State east of Indiana, except Connecticut 
 and Maryland, oxen decreased. In New England, where the ox was in most 
 common use, the proportion of oxen to horses in 1850 was about 3 to 2; in 
 i860 they were nearly equal in number; oxen had decreased in number, while 
 horses had increased. West of the Ohio the proportion of oxen to horses was 
 much less. The number of western oxen was increasing, but not so rapidly 
 as the number of horses. Oxen were particularly numerous in Michigan and 
 Wisconsin, where much lumbering was carried on. In Michigan in 1850 oxen 
 
 7;! U. S. Commissioner of Agric., Annual Report 1872, o. 207. 
 ,4 Prairie Farmer, X (1850), p. 382. 
 
 II XV (1855), p. 36. 
 
 ' Ibid., IX (1849), p. 367. 
 
 77 Chicago Board of Trade, 1st Annual Report (1858), p. 26. 
 
404 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 had nearly equaled horses ; in Wisconsin oxen were the more numerous. 
 In i860 the number of horses far exceeded the number of oxen in both States. 
 Farmers in the prairie region often preferred oxen for ploughing, but horses 
 were increasing in number much faster than oxen. 
 
 The oxen of New England had long been celebrated for their fine appear¬ 
 ance and excellent working qualities. The red Devon was the breed preferred. 
 Great care was bestowed upon their raising and training. Men made a pro¬ 
 fession of breaking steers. The attention of strangers in New England was 
 often “ attracted by the noble teams of oxen which are so frequently met with 
 in the city of Boston and vicinity.Their spirited and lively air, and 
 
 the brisk and springy walk with which they moved along their heavy loads, 
 was a matter of remark. 78 In Rhode Island in 1849 most of the farm teaming 
 was performed by oxen, and the manufacturing teaming by horses. In the 
 north lumbering was carried on largely with oxen. 
 
 HORSES REPLACING OXEN IN THE EAST; REASONS 
 
 FOR THE CHANGE. 
 
 The horse was replacing the ox for farm work. The reasons ascribed for 
 this change were many. For working in the woods, or for breaking up a 
 tough new sod, or for ploughing fields filled with rocks and stumps, the 
 ox was quite generally preferred to the more nervous and energetic horse. 
 The price and the cost of keeping an ox was less than that for a horse. The 
 price of a yoke was less than that of a harness. The ox would continue to 
 
 78 Cultivator, new series, IV (1847), p. 20. 
 
BEEF PRODUCTION 
 
 405 
 
 grow for several years and could be then disposed of for beef, thus serving the 
 two-fold purpose of working and providing beef. The horse, on the other 
 hand, was more tractable, and worked at a more rapid pace. The growth of 
 cities in the East was causing an increased demand for horses. With the 
 building of roads and the movement towards a more commercial agriculture, 
 more and more of the produce was sent to market, and for work of this kind 
 the horse was regarded as superior to the ox. Farming in the East was be¬ 
 coming separated from lumbering. Fields were being cleared of rocks and 
 stumps, and the sod was more frequently broken than formerly. Cattle were 
 now sent to market at an earlier age, so that an increasing portion of the cost 
 of raising the ox had to be paid for by the work accomplished. 79 Still another 
 reason for the change was the increased use of improved farm machinery. 
 When used with the cultivator, the horse rake, and other light machinery, 
 the horse proved capable of much more work than the ox. 80 For the mowing 
 machine and reaper the horse was considered indispensable. 81 Moreover, 
 by i860 things were moving at a “ faster pace,” the wages of labor were 
 higher, time was more valuable, the more rapidly moving horse enabled the 
 laborer to accomplish more work in a day. 
 
 ,n Mass. Board of Agriculture, 8 th Annual Report (i860). Report of Secretary and 
 Committees, 274; Abstract of Returns of Agricultural Societies, 125. 
 
 80 Ibid., Abstract of Returns of Agricultural Societies, 126. 
 
 81 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1863, Agriculture, 259. 
 
Chapter XXXIV.— Sheep. 
 
 The sheep-raising* regions of the North in 1840 were New England, New 
 York, Ohio, western Pennsylvania, and the bluegrass region of Kentucky. 
 Of these, Vermont, the Berkshire region of western Massachusetts and Con¬ 
 necticut, and the State of New York were outstanding. Vermont raised more 
 sheep in proportion to its population than any other State in the Union. Indi¬ 
 ana reported 676,000 sheep. In Illinois and Missouri there were 396,000 and 
 348,000 respectively. Sheep-raising in these sparsely settled States was usu¬ 
 ally carried on in a small way to supply the domestic needs for mutton and 
 wool. Few sheep were as yet to be found in Michigan, Wisconsin, or Iowa. 
 (See fig. 98.) The census of 1840 reported a total wool production of 
 
 Fig. 98.—Sheep and lambs, 1840. Each dot represents 10,000 head. 
 
 The sheep industry had become well established in New England and 
 New York before 1840. After 1830 it had rapidly developed in Ohio and 
 western Pennsylvania. 
 
 35,800,000 pounds from 19,300,000 sheep, an average weight of fleece of 1.8 
 pounds. The Cultivator asserted that the average was much too low, and be¬ 
 lieved that the yield certainly must have been 2\ or 3 pounds per fleece, 1 a 
 figure which was corroborated by many other contemporary estimates. 
 
 During the thirties, sheep husbandry had been pursued with great en¬ 
 thusiasm in the Eastern States. In New England, attracted by the high prices 
 for fine wool, small farmers had increased the number of their sheep, large 
 flocks had been established, and dairying and grain-raising had in places 
 given way to the sheep industry. It was asserted that in one of the best towns 
 
 1 Cultivator, IX (1842), p. 99. 
 406 
 
SHEEP 
 
 407 
 
 of Berkshire County, western Massachusetts, about 1837, some families were 
 actually without bread for a time, because farmers had turned all their land 
 into sheep pasture. There were— 
 
 persons for example who worked for the large wool farmers. They asked for money 
 for their labor, but money was not to be had because the clipping of wool, owing to 
 the derangements of business, had not been sold. They asked to receive their pay in 
 grain, but the wool farmer had abandoned all cultivation for the sheep husbandry. 
 They asked for their pay in pork, but the farmers who raised no grain could raise 
 no pork.” 2 
 
 Throughout the sheep-raising districts of New York and New England, 
 flocks of from 300 to 1,000 sheep were commonly grazed. 3 After 1837 the price 
 of fine wool declined (see fig. 29, p. 219). By 1840 the New York and 
 New England wool-growers were decreasing the size of their flocks and turn¬ 
 ing their attention to dairying. 4 
 
 WESTWARD MOVEMENT OF WOOL GROWING, 1850 TO 1860 . 
 
 By 1850 the center of the wool-growing industry had moved westward. 
 (See fig. 99 -) Ohio now led in sheep, the number in that State having nearly 
 
 In the old sheep regions of New England and eastern New York the 
 number of sheep rapidly declined during the forties. In New York the 
 number decreased nearly one-third. In Ohio sheep nearly doubled. 
 Southern Michigan was developing as a sheep region. 
 
 doubled since 1840. The census of 1840 had shown that in the Northern 
 States east of Ohio there were more than twice as many sheep as in the 
 region west of Ohio, but by 1850 sheep were more numerous in the western 
 region. Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Iowa showed the 
 greatest increase during the forties. Every State in the East, except Pennsyl- 
 
 2 Agriculture of Massachusetts, 2d Report (1838), p. 136. 
 
 3 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1841), p. 143. 
 
 4 Agriculture of Massachusetts, 2d Report (1838), p. 45. 
 
408 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 vania, showed a large decrease; every State in the West showed an increase 
 in number of sheep (see figs. 98, 99). 
 
 FURTHER DECLINE OF WOOL GROWING IN NEW ENG¬ 
 LAND AND NEW YORK—CAUSES. 
 
 In the region comprising New York and the New England States the 
 number of sheep declined over 63 per cent between 1850 and i860. The 
 reasons commonly assigned by the writers of the time were the low price of 
 wool and the high price of dairy products. Among eastern wool-growers it 
 was a much discussed question, “ How much does it cost to grow a pound 
 of wool?” From Windsor County, Vermont, in 1848 a correspondent ob¬ 
 served : 5 
 
 “The productions of the dairy are increasing in the same ratio that that of wool is 
 decreasing, in consequence of the low prices of the latter, and the enhanced value of 
 the former.” 
 
 Another wrote: 6 
 
 “ The number of sheep in our State has been diminishing for several years. The low 
 and fluctuating price of wool has contributed to bring about this result. Under the 
 impression that the great West would produce wool to such an extent as would depress 
 the price so low that competition would be impossible, many of our farmers prematurely 
 disposed of their flocks 
 
 In Windham County, Vermont, it was said 7 to cost 
 
 “ from $1.25 to $1.50 to keep sheep by the year. The average of wool per head will not 
 
 much exceed 3 pounds.While wool sells for 40 cents per pound, our flocks must 
 
 produce an average yield of 3 pounds and upwards, or wool growing will not yield 
 a profit.” 
 
 From Claremont, New Hampshire, in 1849 came the following report: 8 
 
 “ This branch of husbandry rather flags in this section. Many of our farmers are 
 discouraged, and are getting rid of their sheep as best they can, selling them for their 
 pelts, or killing them for mutton. The cause of this is that cattle-raising is found 
 much more profitable than sheep raising. Hence farmers are selling off their flocks of 
 sheep, and are going more extensively into the breeding of cattle for the Brighton 
 Market.” 
 
 From Litchfield County, Connecticut: 9 
 
 “The raising of fine-wooled sheep is generally abandoned in this vicinity, and coarse 
 sheep, for mutton, have been substituted, which are considered the most profitable 
 stock of the farmer.” 
 
 In Franklin County, Vermont, in 1848, sheep were said to have diminished 
 15 to 20 per cent since shearing. 10 The Cultivator of 1849 estimated that 
 within the past 2 years 1,000,000 of sheep had been killed in Vermont for their 
 pelts and tallow . * 11 This was probably an exaggeration, but it shows the trend 
 of affairs. 
 
 5 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1848, Agriculture, 368. 
 
 6 Ibid., 1854, p. 28. 
 
 7 Ibid., 1851, p. 157. 
 
 8 Ibid., 1849, p. 242. 
 
 9 Ibid., 1851, p. 179. 
 
 10 Ibid., 1848, p. 367. 
 
 11 Cultivator, new series, VI (1849), p. 157. 
 
SHEEP 
 
 409 
 
 Table 51.— Sheep: Number in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 
 Total 
 (thou 
 sands ). 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 ( thou¬ 
 sands ). 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 ( thou¬ 
 sands ,). 
 
 Jnited States . 
 
 ieographic Division: 
 
 New England . 
 
 Middle Atlantic .... 
 East North Central. 
 West North Central 
 Mountain . 
 
 19 311 
 
 3,820 
 
 7,106 
 
 3,203 
 
 363 
 
 1,131 
 
 1,709 
 
 1,570 
 
 1,095 
 
 851 
 
 100.0 
 
 19.8 
 
 36.8 
 16.6 
 
 1.9 
 
 21,723 
 
 2,258 
 
 5,436 
 
 6,831 
 
 913 
 
 381 
 
 33 
 
 452 
 
 385 
 
 1,014 
 
 189 
 
 44 
 
 174 
 
 3,453 
 
 161 
 
 1,822 
 
 3,943 
 
 1,123 
 
 894 
 
 746 
 
 125 
 
 a 
 
 150 
 
 763 
 
 937 
 
 828 
 
 922 
 
 i,5io 
 
 1,037 
 
 5,218 
 
 3 ii 
 
 774 
 
 1,210 
 
 3,228 
 
 190 
 
 300 
 
 470 
 
 1,115 
 
 328 
 
 788 
 
 1,991 
 
 1,136 
 
 1,050 
 
 1,877 
 
 409 
 
 13 
 
 780 
 
 1,118 
 
 100.0 
 
 10.4 
 
 25.0 
 
 31-4 
 
 4.2 
 
 1.8 
 
 .2 
 
 2.1 
 
 1.8 
 
 4 - 7 
 .8 
 .2 
 .8 
 
 15.9 
 
 •7 
 
 8.4 
 
 18.2 
 
 5 - i 
 
 4.1 
 
 3-4 
 
 .6 
 
 22,471 
 
 1,780 
 
 4,385 
 
 6,912 
 
 1,230 
 
 868 
 
 1,184 
 
 452 
 
 3 ii 
 
 752 
 
 115 
 
 33 
 
 117 
 
 2,618 
 
 135 
 
 1,632 
 
 3,547 
 
 991 
 
 769 
 
 1,272 
 
 333 
 
 13 
 
 259 
 
 938 
 
 a 
 
 2 
 
 18 
 
 830 
 
 38 
 
 a 
 
 10 
 
 86 
 
 1,088 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 
 
 
 lew England: 
 
 Maine . 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 [iddle Atlantic: 
 
 New York . 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 ast North Central: 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 est North Central: 
 Minnesota . 
 
 649 
 
 6l/ 
 
 1,682 
 
 378 
 
 90 
 
 404 
 
 5 ,H 9 
 
 219 
 
 1,768 
 
 2,028 
 
 676 
 
 396 
 
 IOO 
 
 3 
 
 1,294 
 
 2,170 
 
 5 , 76 l 
 
 513 
 
 828 
 
 1,302 
 
 2,107 
 
 587 
 
 1,025 
 
 1,335 
 
 986 
 
 831 
 
 469 
 
 113 
 
 3-4 
 
 3-2 
 
 8.7 
 
 1.9 
 
 .5 
 
 2.1 
 
 26.5 
 1.1 
 9.2 
 
 10.5 
 
 3-5 
 
 2.1 
 
 •5 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 Dakota Territory . . 
 
 15 
 
 348 
 
 356 
 
 907 
 
 .1 
 
 1.8 
 
 • 7 
 3-5 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ountain: 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 
 
 
 378 
 
 3 
 
 6,130 
 
 287 
 
 1.8 
 
 Utah . 
 
 
 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 
 
 
 
 acific: 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 18 
 
 i,i 57 
 
 190 
 
 . 1 
 
 . 1 
 
 California . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * Less than 500. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 715 
 
 100.0 
 
 568 
 
 7-9 
 
 588 
 
 19-5 
 
 998 
 
 30.8 
 
 567 
 
 5-5 
 
 4 , 96 l 
 
 3-9 
 
 2,667 
 
 5-3 
 
 720 
 
 2.0 
 
 952 
 
 1.4 
 
 2,387 
 
 3-4 
 
 93 
 
 • 5 
 
 187 
 
 .1 
 
 254 
 
 •5 
 
 675 
 
 11.6 
 
 201 
 
 .6 
 
 561 
 
 7-3 
 
 1,516 
 
 15-8 
 
 734 
 
 4.4 
 
 449 
 
 3-4 
 
 1,698 
 
 5-7 
 
 429 
 
 i -5 
 
 76 
 
 . 1 
 
 384 
 
 1 . 1 
 
 793 
 
 4.2 
 
 40 
 
 
 82 
 
 
 164 
 
 . 1 
 
 8,877 
 
 3-7 
 
 927 
 
 .2 
 
 55 
 
 
 876 
 
 
 1,640 
 
 •d 
 
 2.863 
 
 4.9 
 
410 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 IN NEW YORK. 
 
 In New York similar conditions prevailed. From Washington County a 
 correspondent reported: 12 
 
 “Many who kept large flocks of sheep in this county, have quit the business and 
 gone into the dairy business, which is much more profitable, for when cows are rightly 
 managed, it is not uncommon to realize from $30 to $40 per head. Almost any kind of 
 business will pay better than growing wool at 2\ pounds per fleece.” 
 
 Jefferson County in 1849 reports 13 that “ the low price of wool and the 
 profits of dairy-husbandry have done away with most of our sheep farms.” 
 Madison County, in 1841 reported that Merino and Saxony grade sheep were 
 kept in flocks from 70 to 100, and from 300 to 1,000 on a farm, no pains 
 being taken to shelter them in winter, except by a few of the best farmers. 14 
 In 1848 it was again reported: 15 
 
 “ There are some excellent flocks of sheep in this county, but since the growing of 
 wool in the far west has been so extensively gone into, many of our wool growers have 
 quit that business, and turned their attention to the dairy.” 
 
 Chautauqua County reported 10 that— 
 
 “ The land in this county is as well adapted to dairying purposes as to wool-growing; 
 and as the former business is the more profitable it has been largely increased, to the 
 neglect of the wool-growing interest, which has commonly decreased in the same ratio.” 
 
 Thousands of sheep were annually slaughtered for fat and tallow. 17 
 
 MEDIUM AND COARSE WOOLED MUTTON BREEDS GAIN 
 
 IN THE EAST. 
 
 With the decrease of wool-growing in the East came a movement away from 
 fine-wool sheep to the medium wool and mutton type. 18 Medium wool had 
 suffered much less than fine wool from the decline in wool prices following 
 1837. The growth of population and of wealth of the eastern cities was caus¬ 
 ing an increasing demand for mutton. By 1840 the growing popularity of 
 Southdown, Leicester, and other medium or coarse-wooled mutton breeds was 
 apparent. Improved breeds of sheep had been introduced into the United 
 States at an early date. (See above, p. 217.) The tendency of improvement 
 up to about 1840, however, had been towards fine-wooled sheep. The Merinos 
 imported by Humphrey, Livingston, Jarvis, and others had been carefully 
 bred in the Eastern States, especially in Vermont. They were widely crossed 
 on the native sheep, and thus the weight of their fleeces had been greatly 
 increased. In the search for fine-wooled sheep during the thirties, Saxony 
 sheep had been introduced and crossed upon the Merino and native ewes—a 
 step deeply regretted by most flock owners at a later date. 19 Only a few flock 
 masters, and these mostly in Vermont, kept their Merino stock pure. The 
 
 12 Cultivator, new series, IX (1852), p. 80. 
 
 is u. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 112. 
 
 14 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1841) , p. 143. 
 
 13 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1848, Agriculture, 404. 
 
 16 Ibid., 1849, p. 243. 
 
 17 Ibid., 1848, p. 409. 
 
 is Cultivator, new series, VII (1850), p. 291. 
 
 19 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, III (1843), p. 445. 
 
SHEEP 
 
 411 
 
 Saxony, while having a very fine wool, yielded a very light fleece, had a small 
 body, and proved less hardy in the northern climate than the other breeds. 
 In nearly all western wool-growing sections in 1840, fine-wooled Saxony and 
 Mei ino grades were still in vogue; 20 although in the East they were giving 
 way to the Southdown, Leicester, and other coarse-wooled mutton breeds. 
 
 Table 52.— Wool: Production in the United States. 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 1 
 
 i860. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 and State. 
 
 Total 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 United States . 
 
 35,802 
 
 100.0 
 
 52,517 
 
 100.0 
 
 60,265 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 8,441 
 
 23.6 
 
 7,086 
 
 13.5 
 
 6,578 
 
 10.9 
 
 Middle Atlantic . 
 
 13,291 
 
 37.1 
 
 14,928 
 
 28.4 
 
 14,556 
 
 24.2 
 
 East North Central... 
 
 5,733 
 
 16.0 
 
 17,254 
 
 32.9 
 
 20,124 
 
 33-4 
 
 West North Central.. 
 
 585 
 
 1.6 
 
 2,001 
 
 3.8 
 
 2,779 
 
 4-6 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 
 
 42 
 
 35 
 
 T 
 
 568 
 
 2,922 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 
 
 T 
 
 •9 
 
 4 • 8 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 1,466 
 
 4.1 
 
 1,364 
 
 2.6 
 
 1,495 
 
 2.4 
 
 New Hampshire. 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 1,260 
 
 3.699 
 
 3-5 
 
 10.4 
 
 1,109 
 
 3 , 40 i 
 
 2.1 
 
 6-5 
 
 1,160 
 
 3 ,H 9 
 
 1.9 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 s . z 
 
 942 
 
 2.6 
 
 585 
 
 1.1 
 
 377 
 
 .6 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 184 
 
 • 5 
 
 130 
 
 .2 
 
 9 1 
 
 .2 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 890 
 
 2.5 
 
 497 
 
 1.0 
 
 336 
 
 .6 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 9,845 
 
 27-5 
 
 10,071 
 
 19.2 
 
 9,454 
 
 15.7 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 397 
 
 3,049 
 
 1.1 
 8-5 
 
 375 
 
 4,482 
 
 •7 
 
 8.5 
 
 349 
 
 4,753 
 
 .6 
 
 7-9 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 3,685 
 
 10.3 
 
 10,197 
 
 19.4 
 
 10,609 
 
 17.6 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 1,238 
 
 3-5 
 
 2,610 
 
 5-0 
 
 2,552 
 
 4.2 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 650 
 
 1.8 
 
 2,150 
 
 4 -1 
 
 1,990 
 
 3-3 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 153 
 
 •4 
 
 2,043 
 
 3-9 
 
 3 , 96 i 
 
 6.6 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 7 
 
 
 254 
 
 •5 
 
 1,012 
 
 1-7 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 20 
 
 661 
 
 2,070 
 
 -3 
 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 23 
 
 562 
 
 T 
 
 374 
 
 1,627 
 
 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 1.5 
 
 •7 
 
 <3 T 
 
 1.1 
 
 • Nebraska . 
 
 3 • 1 
 
 3-4 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 
 0 
 
 25 
 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 1 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 
 
 33 
 
 9 
 
 T 
 
 493 
 
 75 
 
 a 
 
 .8 
 
 Utah . 
 
 
 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 
 
 
 • 1 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 219 
 
 2,683 
 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 c 
 
 T 
 
 
 California . 
 
 
 
 • I 
 
 • 4 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 0 
 
 
 4.4 
 
 a Less than 500 pounds. 
 
 From Columbia County, New York, in 1849 it was reported: 21 
 
 “ Wool growers located in the vicinity of our large cities and towns, who have here¬ 
 tofore bred fine Saxony sheep, have to a great extent within the past five years changed 
 
 20 Ibid., (1841), p. 134. 
 
 21 L. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 244. 
 
412 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 their flocks for large-framed, coarse-wooled sheep, whose carcasses are valuable for 
 mutton; and they derive a great profit from the Leicester, Southdown, and Cotswold 
 sheep, and their crosses with the native and other breeds.” 
 
 From Rhode Island in 1850: 22 
 
 “ Sheep have decreased in number very much, of late. They are now kept, not so 
 much for wool, as for the rearing of lambs, which are sold to the butchers at about 
 three months old, and bring about $2 per head.” 
 
 IN PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 The increase in sheep-raising in Pennsylvania during the decade 1840 to 
 1850 occurred entirely in the western counties of the State, while in the central 
 and eastern counties, as in New England and New York, there was a large 
 decrease. In Washington County, on the western edge of the State, wool 
 was said to be “ perhaps more extensively grown than in any other county 
 in the Union/’ 23 In the central and eastern part of the State but few sheep 
 were raised, and these mostly in small flocks for domestic use or to be sold 
 as mutton (see figs. 98, 99). In the southeastern counties of Pennsylvania, 
 in New Jersey, and in northern Delaware many sheep were purchased from 
 western drovers in the fall and fed during the winter season. 24 In 1848 it was 
 said that 25,000 head were annually driven into Delaware County, Pennsyl¬ 
 vania, from the western portion of that State, “ fattened on spare pasture after 
 the harvest, and sold principally for the Philadelphia market.” 25 
 
 INCREASE OF WOOL-GROWING IN THE WEST. 
 
 While wool-growing was declining in the East, it was increasing in the 
 West. In Ohio the number of sheep nearly doubled during the decade 1840 
 to 1850. East of the Scioto River, wool-growing was considered one of the 
 most profitable pursuits. 26 In the wheat-growing region and in the Western 
 Reserve their number was rapidly increasing. As early as 1830 the improved 
 English breeds had been taken into the State, but Merino and Saxony grade 
 sheep were more popular. It was said that for fineness, the wool staple grown 
 in the western counties bordering on the Ohio River could not be excelled 
 in any other portion of the Union. 27 Merino bucks in large numbers were 
 imported from the best Vermont flocks. A notable flock was that of Wells 
 & Dickinson, of Steubenville, established in 1806, which became one of the 
 most celebrated in the United States and a source of improved sheep for 
 Ohio and western wool-growers. 28 
 
 By 1849, however, it was reported 29 from Green County, Ohio, that— 
 
 “a tide is now setting in, in favor of long coarse wool, as the merchants pay nearly 
 as much for it as for fine and on account of the mutton properties of the long wooled 
 sheep, the true policy of wool-growers is to produce such wool as the wants of the 
 
 22 u. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1850, Agriculture, 477. 
 
 23 Ibid., 1849, p. 256. 
 
 24 Ibid., 1850, p. 306; 1852, p. 172. 
 
 25 Ibid., 1848, p. 450. , 
 
 26 Ibid., 1850, p. 392; Ohio State Board of Agric., 1 st Annual Report (1846), p. 7. 
 
 27 Ohio State Bd. of Agric., 1st Annual Report (1846), p. 30. 
 
 28 Cultivator, new series, V (1848), p. 10. 
 
 28 Ohio State Bd. of Agric., 4th Annual Report (1849), p. 106. 
 
SHEEP 413 
 
 country demand, and that will be but a small amount of the very fine, and an equally 
 small amount of the coarse, hairy Leicester and others of a similar grade." 
 
 In Ohio, as in Vermont, large numbers of sheep were slaughtered for their 
 pelts and tallow; ,i0 but in the former State it was regarded as a question 
 whether on the cheap and productive pastures sheep could not be profitably 
 raised for this purpose alone. 31 
 
 In Michigan, where the number of sheep was rapidly increasing, wool¬ 
 growing was second only to wheat-raising as the chief business of the farmers, 
 and those who gave it proper attention were said to be reaping even a richer 
 reward than those who confined themselves to the great staple, wheat. 32 With 
 the opening of the railroads, sheep for mutton began to be sent to the eastern 
 markets. 33 
 
 WOOL-GROWING ON THE PRAIRIES. 
 
 West of Ohio but few farmers had begun sheep-raising as a business before 
 1840. Many kept flocks of 100 or less for domestic purposes, but not for the 
 sale of wool. But as the settlement of the prairies, which had well begun by 
 1840, became increasingly dense, farmers, in seeking for a marketable staple, 
 began to turn their attention to wool. The free range of the prairie furnished 
 abundant food; wool with a high specific value was easily sent to the distant 
 eastern market. 34 Adam Beatty expressed the opinion of many in the West 
 in the American Agriculturist , 35 in 1845. He wrote: 
 
 “ The difficulty of finding an adequate market for our rapidly increasing agricultural 
 products, renders it necessary that we should avail ourselves of as many new sources 
 for the profitable employment of land and labor as possible. Nothing, in our present 
 circumstances, is better calculated for this purpose, than sheep husbandry. We have 
 land in great abundance, whilst labor is comparatively scarce. Sheep husbandry re¬ 
 quires much land, and is attended with the advantages of requiring comparatively few 
 laborers, and, instead of exhausting, tends greatly to fertilize the land thus appro¬ 
 priated." 
 
 In the minds of many of the early settlers of the West, who were acquainted 
 with the rough, hilly sheep-raising section of the East, the impression pre¬ 
 vailed that the western climate and prairie lands were not adapted to the 
 raising of wool. It was assumed that “ the prairies are too level for sheep; 
 affording no protection against winds or chance for climbing.” 36 Prairie and 
 timber wolves proved a source of considerable loss to the early flocks. 37 In¬ 
 creased interest in sheep, however, caused the publication of statements by 
 many men who had been long engaged in wool-growing, notably George 
 Flower, of Edwards County, Illinois, who had been breeding sheep in that 
 county since 1817. 38 These reports helped to overcome the belief among the 
 settlers on the prairie region that sheep could not be made to thrive. 39 
 
 30 Cultivator, new series, VI (1849), P- 157- 
 
 31 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, p. 338. 
 
 32 Ibid., 1852, Agriculture, 281 ; (1850), p. 330. 
 
 33 Ibid., 1852, Agriculture, 275. 
 
 34 Prairie Farmer, IV (1844), p. 274; III (1843), p. 207. 
 
 35 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, p. 1013. 
 
 36 Prairie Farmer, III (1843), p. 2?8. 
 
 87 Ibid., VII (1847), p.213. 
 
 33 Foe cit 
 
 "Ibid., Ill (1843), P.238. 
 
t 
 
 414 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 DRIVING SHEEP WESTWARD. 
 
 While the eastern wool-growers in the early forties were asking, “ How 
 much does it cost to grow a pound of wool?” the farmer of the Western 
 States was asking, “ How, when and where can I obtain a drove of sheep? ” 40 
 The prairie farmer or newly arrived immigrant in this newly settled region 
 sought a flock of sheep with which to begin wool-growing. Sheep were in 
 demand; but they were not to be had except in small numbers, of a poor 
 quality, and at high prices. 41 The driving of large flocks of sheep from Ohio 
 and Pennsylvania and other old sheep-raising regions into the newly settled 
 region of Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, and Wisconsin began. By 1843 sheep were 
 said to be pressing westward at an “ enormous rate.” 
 
 A farmer in Kane County, Illinois, in 1843 wrote to a wool-grower near 
 Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, “that he would be glad to take 1,000 sheep and 
 give the owner all the wool, reserving to himself the increase of the flock for 
 the keeping, or he would give the increase and take the wool for the keep¬ 
 ing.” 42 Others, possessing capital, brought sheep by the thousands to the 
 prairies and loaned them to settlers on contract “ to pay one and a half to two 
 pounds of wool annually per head and to return a flock equal in all respects 
 after a term of years.” 43 
 
 SHEEP DRIVING FROM CENTRAL OHIO TO CHICAGO 
 
 IN 1843 . 
 
 Solon Robinson, in 1844, * n an article in the Prairie Farmer , 44 under the 
 heading, “ When, where, and how to get a drove of sheep,” states that “ The 
 nearest point where sheep can be bought to good advantage, is in some of the 
 central counties of Ohio.” These counties were about 300 miles distant from 
 Chicago. He writes further regarding a drive: 45 
 
 “I left home last year the last of August, with one man and a boy 12 years old; I 
 was absent 37 days, and brought in about 800 head of ‘ good common ’ sheep; that is, 
 an average of about half-blood Merino. I bought in Champaign and Clark Counties, 
 (Ohio), on the waters of Mad River. The prices varied from 50 to 87! cents, and 
 
 averaged upon the 500 which I bought myself, 661 cents. It may safely be said 
 
 that one can go from Chicago to Ohio and bring in from 500 to 800 head of sheep, at 
 25 cents a head, and that a good lot will cost less than 70 cents a head. 
 
 “ Distance from Chicago, 300 miles; the route, by La Porte, South Bend, Goshen, 
 and Fort Wayne, Ind., Wiltshire, St. Mary’s, Sidney, Urbana, Springfield, etc.; or else 
 from St. Mary’s bear more east through Logan, Union and Delaware Counties of Ohio. 
 Another route is through Michigan by way of Toledo, into the northeastern part of 
 Ohio, which will increase the distance and cost of sheep, but generally speaking gives a 
 better quality—that is to say, a finer wool breed; leaving the word better for future 
 
 discussion. When starting for a drove from here, I would have a good light 
 
 two horse wagon, a feed trough attached behind; a good tent, made of 30 yards cotton 
 drilling; 2 buffalo skins, 3 blankets, 1 horse bucket, 1 do. for drinking water, 1 tea 
 kettle, (as men will drink coffee, and so will I when on the road where I am obliged to 
 make the water bitter to destroy a worse taste), 1 coffee pot, a pound of ground coffee 
 
 40 Prairie Farmer, IV (1844), p. 205. 
 
 41 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1853, Agriculture, 47. 
 
 42 Prairie Farmer, III (1843), P- 3- 
 
 43 Sears, Pictorial Description of the United States (1848), p. 546. 
 
 44 Prairie Farmer, IV (1844), P- 205. 
 
 43 Loc. cit. 
 
SHEEP 
 
 415 
 
 in a little bag, a frying pan, a small pot, 6 round tin plates, 3 cups, 3 knives and forks, a 
 little pail for butter, a wooden box for sugar, a few other small fixings in the provision 
 chest, 40 pounds of bacon, a week’s supply of bread, a bag of potatoes, two or three 
 bags of oats, a trunk of necessary clothes (old ones), an axe, an auger, a little spare 
 rope and a few leather strings—and I am ready for a start. Rain or shine I would 
 sleep dry and warm in my tent, which is made, when set up, in the shape of the roof 
 of a house, the ridge supported on a pole placed upon two posts about seven feet long, 
 sharpened and stuck into the ground; the bottom is fastened with pins, one gable end 
 closed and the other open towards the fire—cooking my own supper and eating it from a 
 broad board held up on four sticks stuck in the ground, and partaking of all the comforts 
 ana com emences that an old camper ’ always knows how to provide. 
 
 I would take with me a man and a boy, and a saddle and bridle, but no saddle 
 horse, because I can purchase one there for $25 or $30 that would bring $40 at home, 
 in driving sheep, a good dog or horse is very necessary; the average distance should 
 not be over ten miles a day, if yarded at night; or thirteen miles if pastured at night. 
 The expense of the baggage wagon and horses and driver is much less than it would 
 be without them, besides the great convenience of having a wagon along, which enables 
 one to camp wherever wood, water and feed can be had at night, without being obliged 
 to push ahead ’ to a tavern. 
 
 “ Two good drivers can drive from 500 to 800, though three are much better, and 
 sometimes actually necessary. 
 
 “ I find on looking over my memorandum, that I was nine days traveling last summer, 
 before I commenced buying, with three hands and three horses—cash out $5.61, in- 
 cluding horse-shoeing and wagon-repairing—all the horse feed purchased, and nearly 
 all the provision taken from home. I spent about a week in buying, and hired an extra 
 hand at a dollar a day, which with the cost of collecting and keeping sheep, etc., is all 
 included, as before stated, in the average expense per head. I was 3 weeks on the 
 road home—800 sheep, 4 horses, 3 hands, and about half the time four hands to board 
 and the expense of everything was $35.04, averaging $1.66! a day, and grain enormously 
 dear on account of the scarcity occasioned by the great drought. The actual cost of 
 
 driving 800 averaged per head 4! cents, and adding in time of men and horses, not 
 over 9 cents a head.” 
 
 EASTERN SHEEP FARMERS MOVE WESTWARD. 
 
 Bauer & Eno of Sagamon County, Illinois, in 1844, assisted by a Mr. 
 Flower, brought about 3.500 ewes and 80 bucks into the State, selected from 
 various flocks in western Pennsylvania and Ohio. The flocks were headed by 
 a “ Merino buck from Vermont.” 
 
 Because of the high costs involved, relatively few ewes were driven from 
 Vermont, unless for the purpose of establishing a breeding-flock. Most west¬ 
 ern wool-growers, however, preferred a “ Vermont Merino ram ” to head the 
 flock. In Lee County, Iowa, in 1854* good “ Vermont Merino rams ” were 
 valued at from $50 to $200 each. 
 
 Many eastern wool-growers moved to the West, bringing their flocks with 
 them. The Prairie Farmer noted this movement in 1843: 46 
 
 “ Eastern farmers seem to be already aware of the advantage enjoyed over them by 
 prairie farmers in wool-growing, and many are turning their attention to other articles. 
 Others, who have informed themselves, are removing here, where they know they can 
 successfully compete with farmers from any section. Last fall we were called upon by 
 James Harris, Esq., of Penn Yan, N. Y., who said he was engaged in wool-growing, 
 and that he had come out to look for himself and see if the truth had been told with 
 regard to competition from the West. He found it was indeed so, and that he must 
 change his business or remove West. He returned East to form his determinations, 
 
 40 Prairie Farmer, III (1843), p. 207. 
 
416 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 and in the spring we saw him here again, and he said he should the coming fall drive 
 out 2,000 Merino ewes.” 
 
 Messrs. Harvey of Illinois wrote in 1844 : 47 
 
 “ But a few years since we emigrated from Vermont into this state. We soon became 
 satisfied that wool could be grown much cheaper here than in our own native state. 
 In 1843, we purchased in Columbiana County, Ohio, 2,300, and drove them through 
 by land into this region.” 
 
 In 1844, “the great sheep year,” it was said that the rush of sheep from 
 the East into Illinois, Wisconsin, and Missouri was “ a perfect tornado.” 48 
 Many of the ventures in wool-growing, however, resulted in loss. On the 
 long drives from the East many sheep died. Newly arrived immigrants, of 
 limited means and unacquainted with the prairies or the care of sheep, failed 
 to provide winter feed, or shelter from the winds and storm, the prairie mud, 
 or the wolves. 
 
 Moreover, 1843 marked the beginning of the return of better prices for the 
 staple products in the West. Wheat had just begun to find sale at prices 
 which would a little more than pay the cost of production. The rate of 
 increase in sheep was therefore much less during the next few years, until 
 the general failure of the winter-wheat crop in northern Illinois, Wisconsin, 
 and Iowa led many farmers to turn their attention again to general farming, 
 in which sheep-raising occupied a prominent place. 49 Wool-growing in the 
 prairie region of the West in 1849 was not carried on to the exclusion of 
 other branches of farming, nor could any large territory west of Ohio and 
 Michigan be called a distinctly sheep-raising region. Many large flocks had 
 been established, 50 but the increase was only in proportion to that of other 
 lines of production. In Peoria County, in the sheep region of central Illinois, 
 there were reported in 1849 to t> e 5 A° c ks of from 1,000 to 2,000 sheep, 2 flocks 
 of from 500 to 1,000, and 3 flocks of from 300 to 500. 51 
 
 SHELTER AND FEEDING OF SHEEP IN THE EAST AND 
 
 IN THE WEST. 
 
 Among the best farmers of New York and New England in 1849, sheep 
 were sheltered during the winter months in cheap but well-constructed build¬ 
 ings. 52 Hay, straw, and corn stover, with occasionally oats, potatoes, or other 
 roots, 53 was the usual ration during the winter feeding season, which lasted 
 for fully 5 months. In the wheat-growing regions of New York, Michigan, 
 and eastern Ohio, sheep were regarded as especially useful to reduce the 
 straw stack to manure in the winter and to graze over the stubble-land in the 
 fall. In addition to the profits from the sale of wool, the sheep was said to 
 cheapen very much the raising of wheat. They ran upon the fallow land in 
 the summer and to the straw-stack through the winter almost until spring, 
 when a little hay and a little grain were fed to them. 54 A cheap method of 
 
 47 Cultivator, new series, III (1846), p. 21. 
 
 48 Prairie Farmer , IV (1844), p. 204. ^ . 
 
 49 Wis. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1851), p. 228; Prairie Farmer, XII (1852), 
 
 p. 114. 
 
 50 Prairie Farmer, IX (1849), p. 296. 
 si Ibid. 
 
 52 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1849), pp. 58, 700. 
 
 53 Ibid., (1842), p. 140; U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, p. 341. 
 
 54 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1854, Agriculture, 52. 
 
SHEEP 
 
 417 
 
 wintering sheep was to put them on good winter pasture, “ feeding only in 
 severe weather in time of snow,” and then only corn stover or other rough 
 fodder. 55 Among many of the “ old wealthy farmers ” of Jefferson, Harrison, 
 Belmont, and other eastern counties of Ohio, who had realized large fortunes 
 from their extensive flocks of fine-wooled sheep, it was said to be well under¬ 
 stood that “ the more sheep, the more clover the land can be made to produce, 
 and the larger the yield of clover the greater will be the quantity of wheat 
 the soil is capable of producing.” 
 
 MANAGEMENT OF SHEEP ON THE PRAIRIES. 
 
 In the prairie region sheep were commonly allowed to graze during the 
 spring and fall, and frequently during the entire year, with no other care or 
 
 STATE NO. 
 
 Ohio 3.546.757 
 NY 2.6/7,855 
 Pa. 1,631540 
 Mich. 1.27/743 
 Ca/ifi 1,088,002 
 te. 1,043,265 
 
 STATE NO. 
 !nd. 551/75 
 K y . 933,590 
 Mo. 937.445 
 N.Mex. 830./76 
 Other 7,574,373 
 
 US. 22,47/275 
 
 Fig. ioo. —Sheep and Lambs, i860. Each dot represents 10,000 head. 
 
 During the fifties the decline in the eastern states continued. Sheep had 
 begun to decrease in Ohio by i860. The wool growing region was 
 moving farther west into Michigan, Texas, and New Mexico. In Cali¬ 
 fornia there was an increase of over 6,000,000 sheep during the decade 
 1850-1860. 
 
 protection than that afforded by the strawstack or a rail fence. Many of the 
 best sheep raisers took their sheep to the open prairie in April, where they 
 were allowed to run, rent free, under the care of a shepherd who supplied 
 them with salt. In the fall they were turned on tame-grass pastures, and in 
 the winter brought to an inclosure where they were supplied with hay and 
 a little oats and corn. 56 
 
 A much-debated question among wool-growers was the washing of the 
 fleece on the back of the sheep. The practice had the support of ancient usage, 
 but was open to serious objection, as the sheep were liable to serious injury, 
 and sometimes death resulted from exposure. 57 The practice was rapidly 
 declining. 
 
 65 Ibid., 1852, p. 263. 
 
 6(5 Country Gentleman, XIV (1859), P- 347 - 
 
 67 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1847, p. 212; 1854, Agriculture, 37. 
 
 28 
 
418 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 The census of i860 showed that for the country as a whole, sheep had 
 increased hardly at all during the previous decade. In the Eastern States the 
 decrease of 1840 to 1850 had continued, but at a slackened rate. Ohio, New 
 York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, in the order named, were the leading States. 
 Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, which had been the center of sheep-raising from 
 1840 to 1850, showed a decrease during the next decade. The center of 
 sheep-raising had moved west, and in i860 California, Texas, and New Mex¬ 
 ico showed the largest increase. In California there were in 1850 less than 
 20,000 sheep and in i860 over 1,000,000; in Texas the increase was from 
 100,000 to 750,000, and in New Mexico from 377,000 to 830,000 (see figs. 
 99, 100). The sheep drives of the previous decade were repeated; not now 
 from the East to Illinois, but from Illinois to Texas. 58 
 
 In New England, the three southern States, Massachusetts, Connecticut, 
 and Rhode Island, had shown the largest decrease in the number of sheep 
 since 1840. In the three northern States, Vermont, New Hampshire, and 
 Maine, there was still much cheap mountain land adapted to grazing, but 
 which because of the lack of buildings or means of transportation was not suit¬ 
 able for dairying. The relatively heavy fleeces yielded by many Vermont flocks, 
 together with the high prices received from western and southern breeders for 
 purebred Vermont Merino stock, enabled many Vermont breeders still to main¬ 
 tain their flocks at a proft. The census of i860 reports the average weight of 
 fleece in Vermont at 4.1 pounds; for the United States as 2.7 pounds. In 
 Maine, the only New England State showing an increase in sheep from 1850 
 to i860, they were regarded as of great assistance in clearing brush-land pas¬ 
 ture. In New York, in the dairying districts of the eastern and central part of 
 the State, wool-growing had greatly declined. In i860 it was centered in the 
 wheat-growing districts of the Genesee region. In Ohio, after about 1854* the 
 number of sheep began to decline. 
 
 Table 53 .—Decline of sheep in Ohio, 1850 to i860P 
 
 1850 . 3,812,707 
 
 1851 . 3 , 619,674 
 
 1852 . 3 , 059,796 
 
 1853 . 4 , 104,450 
 
 1854 . 4 , 845 , ^9 
 
 1855 . 4 , 337,943 
 
 1856 . 3,5i3,68o 
 
 1857 . 3 , 276,539 
 
 1858 . 3 , 377,840 
 
 1859 . 3 , 366,073 
 
 a U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1862 , Agriculture, 262 . 
 
 Fine-wool sheep rapidly diminished in number, and long-wooled mutton 
 sheep began to attract more attention. The Western Reserve region was con¬ 
 stantly increasing its dairy production, with a corresponding decrease in wool 
 production. In the southern part of the State a “ shorthorn mania ” was said 
 to have hindered somewhat the improvement of sheep. 59 
 A Miami County, Ohio, farmer wrote in 1858: 60 
 
 “ I have no doubt fine wooled sheep are decreasing yearly in this county, and I be¬ 
 lieve in the Miami valley generally, at least for the last few years. The cause, I think, 
 is obvious; lands are becoming too high priced to afford a profit from wool growing. 
 
 58 Country Gentleman, XV (i860), p. 284. 
 
 59 Loc. cit. 
 
 00 Ohio State Bd. Agric., 14th Annual Report (1859), P- 582. 
 
SHEEP 
 
 419 
 
 A farm, costing $50 or over per acre, cannot be made to pay a living profit by turning it 
 into a sheep farm, where the sheep are valuable mainly on account of their wool. 
 Besides, fine wooled sheep require more care and nursing than most of our farmers are 
 willing to give them, without which they will soon run down and become worth¬ 
 less. I know many farmers who are starting flocks of mutton sheep, but none 
 
 who are going into the business of raising fine wool.” 
 
 With the coming of the railroads, sheep were fattened in Ohio for the 
 eastern markets, and in addition there was a demand for sheep from the West 
 and South. Many sheep were driven from Ohio to Texas. In Michigan the 
 number of sheep continued rapidly to increase, as during the previous decade. 
 
 SHEEP DRIVING FROM ILLINOIS TO TEXAS IN 1860 . 
 
 D. A. A. Nichols gives a good description of a sheep drive from Illinois to 
 Texas in i860: 61 
 
 “ The distance from the Mississippi River at Hannibal, Mo., to the Missouri River 
 at Boonville is, in round numbers, 100 miles. From Boonville to Carthage, Mo., is 
 some more than 200 miles. From Carthage to the crossing of the Arkansas River in the 
 Indian Territory is 160 miles. From the Arkansas to the Red River is called by some 
 180 miles, by others 200 miles. There are three toll bridges on the route, and the toll 
 was usually five dollars for 2,000 sheep or more. The streams they ferried were 
 the Mississippi, Missouri, Grand, Osage, and Arkansas. Ferriage usually costs one-half 
 cent per head. They swam their flocks across the Canadian and Red Rivers, and all 
 the minor streams along the route. Water is plenty along the road; but sometimes 
 good drinking water cannot be found without going a little off the main Texas 
 road. 
 
 “ Sheep have to be penned every night when on the road, to keep them together 
 and preserve them from wolves. Those who are intending to start drives this summer, 
 would have to get their pens in Illinois or Missouri, as rope or cloth cannot be procured 
 reasonably in the ‘ Nation.’ Good yardwide sheeting makes a good pen. Stakes must be 
 sewed in at the corners, and in the middle of each side of the pen, to stretch or tighten 
 the cloth making the pen octagonal. A pen made of rope and stakes is not blown down 
 by winds as easily as cloth pens, but the cloth pens do not get tangled when rolled up. 
 like ropes. Drovers have to cook their own food on the road. Groceries must be 
 procured before starting. Flour and bacon can be obtained along the route. A good 
 covered wagon and team, a portable stove, an extra horse or mule to ride, good guns 
 and ammunition, to supply the larder with game, a small but good tent, are among the 
 necessaries in making up the outfit. 
 
 “ The cost per head of the sheep is about ten cents from Illinois to Texas. This is for 
 ferriage, bridges, etc., and is in addition to the cost of the driver’s provisions and outfit. 
 
 “ R is better to drive half way only, the first season, as the sheep get partially 
 acclimated, and it is too hard a drive to take sheep from Illinois to Texas in one year. 
 Mr. Dickson and my brother wintered in Jasper County, Missouri, and were satisfied 
 that they were wise, although it cost something for feed. Mr. D. says that he knows one 
 man who drove through in one year, who had 1,000 sheep, for which he paid $4 per 
 head in Illinois, and he lost 300 old sheep and all his lambs; another flock of 700 now 
 counts but 150, in consequence of the hard drive. Corn can usually be bought in the 
 shock, in Missouri for 25 to 30 cents, and the prairie grass and corn fodder with the 
 corn will keep sheep in good order. In the summer the dust is somewhat troublesome, 
 but after the middle of August, the roads are good and usually free from dust. Sheep 
 which cost $4 per head in Illinois are worth in Texas from $8 to $10 per head, and 
 the wool sheared in Missouri will more than pay all cost of wintering and labor. The 
 cost of wintering in Texas is simply the labor of penning. 
 
 “ I omitted to mention, among the necessary items of the outfit, a water keg. There 
 are times when it is impossible to camp on a * branch ’ or stream, and a keg of water is 
 
 61 Country Gentleman, XV (i860), p. 284. 
 
420 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 then needed. A good shepherd’s dog is of use, although not absolutely requisite. A 
 well trained dog will take the place of one man, in driving and watching.” 
 
 Sheep-driving from New Mexico to Mexico had been a common practice 
 since 1800. After 1849 the gold excitement in California attracted flocks to 
 that State. Between 1850 and i860, 600,000 sheep, it was estimated, were 
 driven from New Mexico to California. In 1856-57 sheep sometimes brought 
 as high as $16 per head, but when the drives were larger from $3 to $4 per 
 head was a more common price. 62 
 
 WHEAT DISPLACES SHEEP ON THE PRAIRIES, 1850 TO 1860 . 
 
 Of the prairie States of the Northwest, Indiana and Illinois showed a de¬ 
 cline in sheep raising, while Wisconsin, Iowa and Missouri showed but a 
 relatively small increase. A reason for the decline and neglect of sheep in 
 the prairie region lay in the rapid extension of wheat-growing. Improved 
 methods of harvesting, high prices, and good yields of wheat during the middle 
 years of the decade 1850 to i860, turned attention to that crop. The prairie 
 farmer as yet sowed little clover, and regarded as of little value the fertility 
 to be gained by grazing his wheat fields with sheep—practices which were 
 highly regarded by the Ohio wool and wheat grower. The rush of sheep into 
 the prairies during the forties had resulted in many failures. Newly-arrived 
 immigrants, frequently without any previous experience in handling sheep, 
 established large flocks, but failed to provide shelter or winter feed. The open 
 prairie furnished no protection from the cold winter winds or the spring rains. 
 The prairie grasses furnished abundant food during the summer months, but 
 were killed by the first frost of autumn, and few had as yet provided them¬ 
 selves with the tame grasses. 63 
 
 IN IOWA. 
 
 In Iowa, a writer thus explains the decline of wool growing: 64 
 
 “The pioneer removed from Pennsylvania or Ohio; he brought his flocks with him; 
 he left behind him tame grasses, small pasture fields highly cultivated, ‘ bbabling brooks’; 
 the cool shade of the woods, the sheep cote, built regardless of expense, and with wise 
 reference to the health and comfort of his sheep. He reaches Iowa and finds acres of 
 tall waving grass; no shade from sun or protection from cold. Of course his sheep 
 deteriorate; naturally his flock would decrease; for there was no care bestowed upon it, 
 such as had been practiced in the old home. Forgetting all the influences he had left, 
 and not appreciating the deprivations to which his flock was being subjected, he rashly 
 concluded that Iowa was no place for the wool-grower. Finding, also, a munificent 
 return for his labor in grain-growing, converted into hogs and cattle, he remained 
 satisfied with his full crib and broad acres, and abandoned his dwindling flock.” 
 
 By i860 it was commonly said in the prairie region that “ an easy way 
 to sink a fortune is to go into the sheep speculation.” 
 
 02 U. S. Census of 1880, vol. Ill, Agriculture, Supplement, Meat Production, 35. 
 c3 Iowa State Agric. Soc. 4th Annual Report (1857), p. 388. 
 
 04 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1864, Agriculture, 175. 
 
Chapter XXXV. —Dairying. 
 
 The dairy regions of the United States during the forties lay east of the 
 Allegheny Mountains. The census of 1840 reported the total value of dairy 
 products as $ 33 > 7 ^ 7 j 000 > of which nearly three-fourths was produced in the 
 Eastern States, comprising New England, New York, Pennsylvania, and 
 New Jersey. Over $10,000,000 worth, or nearly one-third of the total, was 
 produced in New York alone. The dairy product of Ohio was valued at less 
 than $2,000,000. Farther west few regions produced sufficient dairy products 
 to supply their home demand, and many had to bring in butter and cheese 
 from other sections. 1 During the forties dairying increased rapidly in the 
 Eastern States and in the Western Reserve in Ohio. 
 
 GROWING IMPORTANCE OF DAIRY INDUSTRY IN NEW 
 
 ENGLAND. 
 
 In New England, the growing importance of the dairy industry had long 
 been apparent. Between 1830 and 1840 its advance had been checked some¬ 
 what by expansion of sheep-raising in the regions more distant from market, 
 particularly in New Hampshire, Vermont, and in the Berkshires (western 
 Massachusetts and western Connecticut) ; but by 1840 the farmers of these 
 districts were disposing of their flocks and were giving more attention to 
 dairying. 2 By 1850 it was said that sheep were being neglected in Vermont, 
 and that all other branches of business were giving way in northern Ohio 
 to cheese-making. 3 From Windsor County, Vermont, the State which led 
 New England in the production of both butter and cheese, a writer stated: 4 
 “ The productions of the dairy are increasing in the same ratio that that of 
 wool is decreasing, in consequence of the low prices of the latter, and the 
 enhanced value of the former, . ...” In Berkshire County, Massachu¬ 
 setts, the increased attention to dairying was said to be due to the low price 
 of wool and the increased facility for placing the butter and cheese upon the 
 Boston and New York markets, whence much of the cheese was sent to the 
 Southern States. 5 From Somerset County, Maine, in 1851 it was reported: 6 
 
 “ But little attention has yet been paid to dairies. Our distance from a suitable market 
 for the produce of the dairy, and the difficulty of disposing of our calves, have compelled 
 us to raise more cattle than were profitable; .... but an increased attention is being 
 given to the dairy. Many farmers have reduced their sheep flock, and increased their 
 stock of cows.” 
 
 1 U. S. Census of 1840 ( Agriculture and Industries) , 409. 
 
 2 Agriculture of Massachusetts, 2d Report (1838), p. 45. 
 
 3 Prairie Farmer, IX (1849), p. 260. 
 
 4 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1848, p. 368; 1849, Agriculture, p. 88. 
 
 "Ibid. 1848, p. 356; Agriculture of Massachusetts, 2d Report (1838), p. 45. 
 
 8 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1851, Agriculture, 136. 
 
 421 
 
422 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Litchfield County, in western Connecticut, which produced one-half of the 
 Connecticut cheese, had long been celebrated for the quantity and fine quality 
 of its product. Farmers in eastern Connecticut and Rhode Island were not 
 so extensively engaged in the dairy business. There, butter and milk for the 
 supply of the villages and seaports were the principal dairy products. Many 
 farmers made their own supply of cheese, and but very little was put on the 
 market. 7 It seems that enlarging markets and more adequate means of trans¬ 
 portation were encouraging the development of the dairy industry in New 
 
 England. 
 
 DAIRYING IN THE HUDSON AND MOHAWK VALLEYS. 
 
 In New York State, the Mohawk and Hudson valleys were the centers of 
 the dairy industry. Herkimer, Oneida, Orange, and Dutchess Counties were 
 known throughout the country for the amount and quality of. their dairy 
 products. 8 The industry is said to have had its beginning in Herkimer County 
 about 1810, when dairymen from Cheshire County, Connecticut, settled there, 
 bringing with them the knowledge of the art of cheese-making. 9 In 1815 the 
 largest dairies in America were said to be in this county, where herds were 
 reported to number from 30 to 40 milking cows. By 1820 the soils of the 
 Mohawk Valley region had become exhausted from continuous cropping to 
 wheat, thus forcing general change in the system of husbandry, and the at¬ 
 tention of farmers was turned more to dairying. The increase of cheese pro¬ 
 duction after about 1830 is shown in table 54. 
 
 Table 54. —Cheese arriving at Albany over the Erie Canal. 10 
 
 lbs. 
 
 1834 . 6,340,000 
 
 1837 . 15,560,000 
 
 1840 . 18,820,000 
 
 1843 . 24,334,000 
 
 Erie and Chautauqua Counties, in western New York, were also rapidly 
 extending their dairy business. 
 
 EXPANSION IN CENTRAL NEW YORK. 
 
 By 1850, the dairy region of the Mohawk Valley had expanded, including, 
 in addition to Herkimer and Oneida Counties, Madison, Chenango, and 
 Otsego. Herkimer County alone produced in 1845 over 8,000,000 pounds of 
 cheese, of which 1,356,000 pounds were made in the single town of Fairfield. * 11 
 To the North, Jefferson and St. Lawrence Counties were developing as 
 prominent dairy centers. The canal system provided an easy, cheap transpor¬ 
 tation for the cheese to eastern and southern markets, and good prices also 
 stimulated production. A comparison of the figures given by the New York 
 
 7 Ibid., 1849, Agriculture, 98. 
 
 8 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, V (1845), p. 59. 
 
 9 Country Gentleman, XVIII (1861), p. 301. (See above, p. 228.) 
 
 10 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, p. 326. 
 
 11 Ibid., p. 325- 
 
DAIRYING 
 
 423 
 
 The extensive manufacture of cheese was confined to relatively few 
 regions. In the Berkshires and the Green Mountain region of New 
 England and in Herkimer County, New York, cheese making was an 
 established industry. Jefferson and St. Lawrence counties in northern 
 New York and the vicinity of Erie County in western New York and 
 the Western Reserve in Ohio were rapidly developing centers. 
 
 During the fifties the production of cheese declined in New England. 
 It remained nearly stationary in the country as a whole. 
 
424 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Stcitc census for 1845 with, those of the Federal census of 1850 indicates only 
 a slight increase in butter, but a relatively large increase in cheese production 
 
 in the 5 years. 
 
 Table 55 .—Cheese produced in New York in thousands of pounds. 
 
 
 New York 
 
 U. S. census, 
 
 
 census, 1845. 
 
 1850. 
 
 Butter . 
 
 . 79-502 
 
 79,766 
 
 Cheese . 
 
 . 36,745 
 
 49,741 
 
 Oneida County in 1854 reported: 12 
 
 “ Dairies in this vicinity comprise from ten to fifty cows each. The average product 
 may be estimated at 120 pounds of butter, or 250 to 275 pounds of cheese to a cow. 
 The business has been uniformly good for several years, and nearly all our farmers 
 are engaged in it to some extent; some in connection with other branches of agriculture, 
 and others to the exclusion of nearly everything else. This was once a great wool¬ 
 growing county, but as our flocks of sheep have diminished the number of cows has 
 increased in proportion.” 
 
 METHODS OF MAKING BUTTER AND CHEESE. 
 
 The making of butter and cheese, and frequently the milking of the cows 
 as well, was the duty of the women of the farm. Milking by women was, 
 however, becoming less customary. Various methods of making butter and 
 cheese were practiced. Some worked the butter by hand, others with a 
 wooden paddle; some added saltpeter, others thought this practice injured the 
 quality of the butter. Orange County butter was made by churning the whole 
 milk. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, butter was made from the cream 
 and was worked with a damp cloth. A cool spring-house or a damp cellar 
 was regarded as essential to all dairies. The cause of the superior quality of 
 Orange County butter and Herkimer County cheese was a popular subject 
 of discussion. Some ascribed it to the superior quality of the pastures and 
 springs; others thought it was owing to the method of churning, the quality 
 of the salt, or the neatness of the butter and cheese-makers. 13 
 
 It was the ambition of many dairy regions to produce butter and cheese 
 that would sell upon the New York market at the same price as the famous 
 products of these counties. But the lack of skill and equipment was a great 
 handicap especially in the more newly settled regions. A report from St. 
 Lawrence County, New York, in 1848 reads: 14 
 
 “ Our farmers find that the dairy business is the best in which they can engage. 
 
 But still there is a drawback. In several parts of the county, emigrants from Ireland 
 and Scotland, in considerable numbers, who were unacquainted with the business, are 
 engaged in making butter and cheese. They produce articles of an inferior kind. Their 
 productions injure the price of that which is good; but they are improving, and, no 
 doubt, will continue to mend.” 
 
 12 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1854, Agriculture, 21. 
 33 Ibid., 1848, p. 388. 
 
 14 Ibid., 417. 
 
DAIRYING 
 
 425 
 
 BUTTER-MAKING IN ORANGE COUNTY (N. Y.), 1843 . 
 
 Butter-making in Orange County in 1843 was thus described: 15 
 
 “ The milk is strained in pans or oaken tubs, holding two pails full. Every thing is 
 done in the cellar. The milk is not meddled with until it is coagulated, when each 
 
 Table 56.— Cheese: Production in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division 
 and State. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 (lbs.) 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 (lbs.) 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 United States. 
 
 105,536 
 
 4.6 
 
 100.0 
 
 103,664 
 
 3-3 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 27,120 
 
 99 
 
 257 
 
 21,621 
 
 6.9 
 
 20.9 
 
 Middle Atlantic . 
 
 52,612 
 
 8.9 
 
 49.9 
 
 51,239 
 
 6.9 
 
 494 
 
 East North Central.. 
 
 24 T 34 
 
 5-3 
 
 22.9 
 
 26,819 
 
 39 
 
 25-9 
 
 West North Central. 
 
 413 
 
 •5 
 
 .4 
 
 1,419 
 
 7 
 
 1.4 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 37 
 
 •5 
 
 • • • • 
 
 91 
 
 •5 
 
 .1 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 37 
 
 •4 
 
 • • • • 
 
 1,461 
 
 3-3 
 
 1.4 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 2,434 
 
 4.2 
 
 2.3 
 
 1,800 
 
 2.9 
 
 17 
 
 New Hampshire .... 
 
 3 T 97 
 
 IO.I 
 
 3 -o 
 
 2,232 
 
 6.8 
 
 2.2 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 8,721 
 
 27.8 
 
 8-3 
 
 8,215 
 
 26.1 
 
 7-9 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 7,088 
 
 7-1 
 
 6.7 
 
 5794 
 
 4-3 
 
 5 -i 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 317 
 
 2.1 
 
 •3 
 
 182 
 
 1.0 
 
 .2 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 5,363 
 
 14-5 
 
 5 -i 
 
 3,898 
 
 8-5 
 
 3-8 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 49,741 
 
 16.1 
 
 47.1 
 
 48,548 
 
 12.5 
 
 46.8 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 366 
 
 •7 
 
 •4 
 
 182 
 
 •3 
 
 .2 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 2,505 
 
 1.1 
 
 2.4 
 
 2,509 
 
 •9 
 
 2.4 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 20,820 
 
 10.5 
 
 197 
 
 2I,6l9 
 
 9.2 
 
 20.8 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 625 
 
 .6 
 
 .6 
 
 606 
 
 •4 
 
 .6 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 1,278 
 
 1-5 
 
 1.2 
 
 1,848 
 
 1.1 
 
 1.8 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 1,011 
 
 2.5 
 
 1.0 
 
 1,642 
 
 2.2 
 
 1.6 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 400 
 
 1-3 
 
 •4 
 
 1,104 
 
 1.4 
 
 1.1 
 
 W'est North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 
 
 
 IQQ 
 
 1 2 
 
 2 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 210 
 
 1.1 
 
 .2 
 
 919 
 
 1.4 
 
 •9 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 203 
 
 •3 
 
 .2 
 
 260 
 
 .2 
 
 •3 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 A 
 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 29 
 
 •3 
 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 6 
 
 .1 
 
 • • • • 
 
 37 
 
 •4 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Utah . 
 
 3 i 
 
 2.7 
 
 .... 
 
 54 
 
 1.3 
 
 .1 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 I 0 
 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 37 
 
 2.8 
 
 
 105 
 
 2.0 
 
 .1 
 
 California . 
 
 a 
 
 • • • 
 
 .... 
 
 1,344 
 
 3-5 
 
 1.3 
 
 a Less than 500 pounds. 
 
 day’s, or each half day’s milk is put in the churn with nearly an equal quantity of water, 
 cold in summer, and warm in autumn or winter, to bring it to the proper temperature, 
 which is from 55 to 60 degrees. The churn is made in the barrel form, of oak, hooped 
 with iron, with a wooden hoop three inches wide at top, in which the cover rests. For 
 six to ten cows, the churn should hold 30 gallons, and in that proportion for a large 
 
 16 Cultivator, X (1843), p. 22. 
 
426 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 number. I believe they rarely exceed two barrels, as in large dairies they prefer to 
 churn several times a day, to the use of larger vessels. Churning is never done by 
 hand, except for a single cow. In small dairies, the churn is worked by a dog or sheep, 
 the latter being preferred; the larger have water or horse-power. The dog or sheep, 
 
 Table 57. — Butter: Production in the United States. 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Per cap¬ 
 ita (lbs.) 
 
 Per cent of 
 U. S. total. 
 
 Total 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Per cap¬ 
 ita (lbs.) 
 
 Per cent of 
 U. S. total. 
 
 United States . 
 
 313,345 
 
 13-5 
 
 100.0 
 
 459,681 
 
 14.6 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 43,924 
 
 16.1 
 
 14.0 
 
 51,486 
 
 16.4 
 
 11.2 
 
 Middle Atlantic . 
 
 129,132 
 
 21.9 
 
 41.2 
 
 172,465 
 
 23.1 
 
 37-5 
 
 East North Central... 
 
 70,557 
 
 15-6 
 
 22.5 
 
 124,017 
 
 17.9 
 
 27.0 
 
 West North Central.. 
 
 10,007 
 
 11.4 
 
 3.2 
 
 29,054 
 
 13-4 
 
 6-3 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 83 
 
 1.1 
 
 • • • • 
 
 337 
 
 1.9 
 
 .1 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 212 
 
 2.0 
 
 .1 
 
 4,248 
 
 9.6 
 
 •9 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 9,244 
 
 15.9 
 
 30 
 
 11,688 
 
 l8.6 
 
 2-5 
 
 New Hampshire . 
 
 6,977 
 
 21.9 
 
 2.2 
 
 6,957 
 
 21.3 
 
 i -5 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 12,138 
 
 38.6 
 
 3-9 
 
 15,900 
 
 50.5 
 
 3-5 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 8,071 
 
 8.1 
 
 2-5 
 
 8,298 
 
 6.7 
 
 1.8 
 
 Rhode Island. 
 
 996 
 
 6.7 
 
 •3 
 
 1,022 
 
 5-9 
 
 .2 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 6,498 
 
 17.5 
 
 2.1 
 
 7,621 
 
 l6.6 
 
 i -7 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 79,766 
 
 25.8 
 
 25.5 
 
 103,097 
 
 26.6 
 
 22.4 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 9,487 
 
 19.4 
 
 3-0 
 
 10,714 
 
 15-9 
 
 2.3 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 39,879 
 
 17.2 
 
 12.7 
 
 58,654 
 
 20.2 
 
 12.8 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 34,449 
 
 17.4 
 
 II.O 
 
 48,543 
 
 20.7 
 
 10.5 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 12,881 
 
 130 
 
 4.1 
 
 18,307 
 
 13.6 
 
 4.0 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 12,527 
 
 14.7 
 
 4.0 
 
 28,053 
 
 16.4 
 
 6.1 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 7,066 
 
 17.8 
 
 2.2 
 
 15,503 
 
 20.7 
 
 3-4 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 3,634 
 
 11.9 
 
 1.2 
 
 13,611 
 
 17-5 
 
 3-0 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 1 
 
 .2 
 
 • • • • 
 
 2,958 
 
 17.2 
 
 .6 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 2,171 
 
 11.3 
 
 •7 
 
 n ,954 
 
 17.7 
 
 2.6 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 7,835 
 
 H -5 
 
 2-5 
 
 12,705 
 
 10.7 
 
 2.8 
 
 Dakota Territory ... . 
 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 2 
 
 .4 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 
 342 
 
 I I.Q 
 
 .1 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 1,093 
 
 10.2 
 
 .2 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 a 
 
 • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 13 
 
 • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Utah . 
 
 83 
 
 7-3 
 
 • • • • 
 
 316 
 
 7-8 
 
 .1 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 1.1 
 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 153 
 
 13.2 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 211 
 
 15-9 
 
 .1 
 
 1,000 
 
 I 9 .I 
 
 .2 
 
 California . 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 • • • • 
 
 3,095 
 
 8.1 
 
 •7 
 
 a Less than 500 pounds. 
 
 walks on a wheel 8 feet in diameter, inclined at an angle of 22 degrees, cleats being 
 
 nailed on to prevent the feet of the sheep from slipping. It [the butter] is 
 
 packed down solid in tubs of 40 or firkins of 80 pounds. When one churning 
 
 has been packed, a cloth is put on covered with salt. This is taken off at each addition, 
 and replaced, until the tub or firkin is almost full, when half an inch of strong brine is 
 poured over the cloth.” 
 
DAIRYING 
 
 427 
 
 The United States Navy used Orange County butter exclusively, as it was 
 claimed that no butter would as well resist the action of tropical climates. An 
 investigation in 1848, however, disclosed that much butter sold as Orange 
 County butter was in fact made in a number of surrounding counties. Dealers 
 in the butter from other counties labeled their product “ Orange County ” to 
 take advantage of the preference of the markets. 16 While much of the butter 
 and cheese placed upon the market was of very poor quality, the spread of 
 knowledge concerning the manner of care and making, together with discrimi¬ 
 nation in price among buyers, was leading to decided improvement in quality. 17 
 After 1830, dairy methods became a popular theme of discussion in the eastern 
 agricultural journals. 
 
 DAIRYING IN SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 In southeastern Pennsylvania—in Bucks, Montgomery, Chester, Delaware, 
 and surrounding counties—much attention was given to dairying, and espe¬ 
 cially to the production of butter and milk for the Philadelphia, Wilmington, 
 and Baltimore markets. Very little cheese was made in the State, except in 
 the three counties adjoining the Western Reserve region of Ohio. In New 
 Castle County, Delaware, dairies of from 15 to 100 cows were said to be com¬ 
 mon in 1847. 18 In northern Maryland, increased attention was given to butter¬ 
 making, owing, it was said, to the influence of several families of the Society 
 of Friends and a few enterprising northerners. Much of the butter from these 
 regions was carried to market in pound lumps and sold from wagons and 
 market-stalls. 19 The price of fresh butter on the Philadelphia market varied 
 from 16 to 40 cents during the year. 
 
 FEEDING METHODS IN THE EAST. 
 
 In the East, the dairy herd was commonly pastured during the summer 
 months, and in the winter was fed on corn-fodder and oat straw, with hay 
 once a day. Sometimes 2 quarts of Indian meal or wheat bran per day was 
 added for the last two months of feeding in the barn. 20 Especially was the 
 latter true if milk was being sold to the city trade. Much of the butter and 
 cheese was made during the spring, fall, and summer months. In the vicinity 
 of eastern cities, where there was an increasing demand for milk, farmers 
 experimented with soiling. In the neighborhood of Rochester, New York, 
 it was considered good management to keep a cow the year round on an acre 
 of ground. 21 The extension of transportation facilities, however, together 
 with the high prices of labor, prevented soiling from becoming general. 
 
 CHEESE PRODUCTION IN THE WESTERN RESERVE. 
 
 The Western Reserve of Ohio, which was settled almost exclusively by 
 New Englanders, was popularly known as “ Cheesedom.” 22 The uncertainty 
 
 16 Prairie Farmer, VIII (1848), p. 194. 
 
 17 Western Farmer, I (1840), p. 135; N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, II (1842), 
 
 P- 43- 
 
 18 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 119. 
 
 19 Ibid., 1850, Agriculture, 438. 
 
 20 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, V (1845), p. 59. 
 
 21 Loc. cit. 
 
 22 Cultivator, new series, VIII (1851), p. 325. 
 
428 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 of the grain crops in this region and its adaptability to grazing induced many 
 of the first settlers to turn their attention to dairying. The success attending 
 their efforts led others to follow their example, and before 1849 the manu¬ 
 facture of cheese had become the leading industry. 23 In 1836 the entire state 
 of Ohio produced but little over 1,000,000 pounds of cheese. In 1848 the 
 Western Reserve alone exported 15,593,000 pounds, chiefly to eastern mar¬ 
 kets, but also to Cincinnati and St. Louis. 24 During the forties, wool-growing 
 and dairying had both increased in this region; but by 1850 many farmers 
 who formerly had kept dairies and also raised stock, grew wool, etc., were 
 now turning “ their attention wholly to the dairy business.” 25 Of the 
 20,820,000 pounds of cheese reported for Ohio by the census of 1850, 
 17,648,000 pounds were in 7 of the northeastern counties—Ashtabula, Trum¬ 
 bull, Lake, Geauga, Portage, Cuyahoga, and Summit. Lake Erie and the 
 Ohio and Pennsylvania canals furnished cheap transportation for the greater 
 part of the cheese. With the development of California after 1849, large 
 quantities were shipped to that State. 
 
 The best dairymen of the Western Reserve erected substantial buildings 
 in which to shelter and feed their cows. In the large dairy sections herds of 
 30 to 60 cows were kept; in the districts where dairying was of less importance, 
 the herds ranged from 5 to 15 cows. 26 Outside of the Western Reserve region, 
 dairying in Ohio was commonly carried on in connection with other farm 
 enterprises. Butter was exported by many Ohio counties, but most counties 
 secured a large part of their supply of cheese from the Western Reserve. By 
 1850 Michigan was shipping butter to the East. 27 ’ 
 
 WHEAT VS. DAIRYING WEST OF OHIO. 
 
 West of Ohio, the greater portion of farmers made more or less butter for 
 use in the home, and a scattered few were engaged in cheese-making. Other 
 pursuits, however, proved more attractive to the western farmer, and in many 
 sections, as for example in the wheat region of southern Wisconsin and 
 northern Illinois, butter and cheese were imported from Ohio. Agricultural 
 journals, however, contended that the New Orleans butter markets should be 
 supplied by the farmers of the Mississippi Valley rather than by those of 
 Orange County, New York. The failure of winter wheat in northern Illinois | 
 and in southern Wisconsin for a number of years after 1847 led many trans¬ 
 planted New England and New York families to take up dairying. It was 
 anticipated in Wisconsin that this branch of agriculture would soon rank 
 among the leading interests of the State. Much butter and cheese, however, 
 was still imported. For example, Crawford County, Wisconsin, in 1851 re¬ 
 ported that “ the most of the cheese consumed in our mines, our pineries, and 
 on this frontier, is made on the Western Reserve in Ohio.” 28 Dane County 
 
 23 Ohio State Bd. of Agric. 1st Annual Report (1846), p. 8; 2d Annual Report (1847), 
 
 P- 25. 
 
 24 Ibid., 3d Annual Report (1848), p. 9. 
 
 25 Ibid., 32; 4th Annual Report (1849), P- 5 1 - 
 
 26 Ohio State Bd. of Agric. 3d Annual Report (1848), p. 43; 2d Report (1847), p. 25; 
 
 Country Gentleman, XIV (1859), P* 255. 
 
 27 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1850, Agriculture, 330. 
 
 28 Wis. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1851), p. 148. 
 
DAIRYING 429 
 
 reported in the same year: 29 “ Large quantities of butter and cheese, espe¬ 
 cially the latter, are annually imported from other states.” 
 
 BUTTER AND MARKET MILK DISPLACING CHEESE, 
 
 1850 TO 1860 . 
 
 During the decade 1850 to i860 the number of cattle reported as dairy cows 
 increased from 6,385,000 to 8,586,000. (See figs. 105, 106.) Butter produc¬ 
 tion increased from 313,000,000 pounds to 460,000,000 pounds while the 
 cheese production showed little change. The centers of production of dairy 
 products in i860 were much the same as in 1850. With the rapid settlement 
 of the West, the number of dairy cows was increasing, especially in northern 
 Illinois, eastern Iowa and Minnesota, southern Wisconsin, and Missouri. 
 
 The growing population of the eastern cities demanded an increasing amount 
 of fresh market milk. The extension of railroads was continually providing 
 new means of transportation and opening up new territories from which the 
 supply might be drawn. Regions within the reach of the large cites began to 
 abandon cattle-fattening and the making of butter and cheese and turned their 
 attention more directly to marketing milk. Orange and Dutchess County 
 farmers, long widely famed for their butter dairies, began the production of 
 market milk for New York City. In the State of Massachusetts the sales of 
 milk for the year 1855 amounted to $760,ooo. 30 
 
 With the exception of Pennsylvania and Maryland, every northern State 
 east of Ohio showed a decline in cheese production, while every northern State, 
 with the exception of New Hampshire, reported an increase in butter produc¬ 
 tion. In New England, where the movement was typical of the eastern 
 States, the figures were: 
 
 1850. i860. 
 
 Cheese made .27,120,000 21,621,000 
 
 Butter made . 43,924,000 51,486,000 
 
 Lew York, which during the period 1845 *849 had had a large increase 
 
 in cheese production and a very little increase in butter production, showed 
 a slight decline in cheese production and a large increase in butter production 
 during the period 1850 to i860. Cheese exports, which increased from 723,217 
 pounds in 1840 to 17,433,682 pounds in 1849, had fallen to 3,763,932 pounds 
 by 1853. Butter exports, on the other hand, nearly maintained the level of the 
 previous decade. 
 
 In the Western Reserve, cheese-making continued important. West of 
 Ohio there was a small increase in cheese-making, but a considerable increase 
 in butter production. Every section, with the exception of the Pacific Coast, 
 showed a decline in per capita cheese production. 
 
 ATTEMPTS TO ESTABLISH CHEESE FACTORIES IN THE 
 
 WESTERN RESERVE. 
 
 About 1850 attempts were made to establish the factory system of cheese 
 manufacture on the Western Reserve of Ohio. In 1847 an establishment in 
 
 29 Ibid., 155. 
 
 30 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1861, Agriculture, 261. 
 
430 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Trumbull County was said to be manufacturing 1,000 pounds of cheese a day. 31 
 In 1849 another factory was reported in operation in Ashtabula County. 
 Others were soon established in adjoining counties. The early factories did not 
 have the milk delivered at the plant, but sent out teams on regular routes, 
 which daily collected the curd from the farm house and hauled it to the fac¬ 
 tory. 32 The factories, however, were apparently unsuccessful; in 1859 the y 
 were all reported to have closed down. 33 
 
 ORIGIN OF THE ASSOCIATED DAIRY SYSTEM. 
 
 The associated dairy system, known as the “American system,” which 
 developed during this period, met with better success. Several factories were 
 in operation in Oneida County, New York, in that year and were said to be 
 turning out cheese of superior quality. The development of the system was 
 described by Mr. N. A. Willard, of Herkimer County, New \ork. 
 
 “The system had been first inaugurated by Jessie Williams, a farmer living near 
 Rome [in Oneida County], and was suggested from mere accidental circumstances. 
 Mr. Williams was an experienced and skillful cheese maker, and at a time when the 
 bulk of American cheese was poor, his dairy, therefore, enjoyed a high reputation, and 
 was eagerly sought for by dealers. In the spring of 1851, one of his sons, having 
 married, entered upon farming on his own account, and the father contracted the 
 cheese made on both farms at seven cents a pound, a figure considerably higher than was 
 being offered for other dairies in that vicinity. When the contract was made known to the 
 son, he expressed great doubt as to whether he should be able to manufacture the 
 character of cheese that would be acceptable under the contract. He had never taken 
 charge of the manufacture of cheese while at home, and never having given the sub¬ 
 ject that close attention which it necessarily requires, he felt that his success in coming 
 up to the required standard would be a mere matter of chance. His father, therefore, 
 proposed coming daily upon the farm and giving the cheese-making a portion of his 
 immediate supervision. But this would be very inconvenient, and while devising means 
 to meet the difficulties and secure the benefits of the contract, which was more than 
 ordinarily good, the idea was suggested that the son should deliver the milk from his 
 herd daily at the father’s milk-house. From this thought sprung the idea of uniting 
 the milk from several neighboring dairies and manufacturing it at one place. Buildings 
 are speedily erected and fitted up with apparatus, which, proving a success, thus gave 
 birth to the associated system of dairying.” 
 
 Table 58 shows the number of cheese factories erected in New York from 
 1850 to i860: 
 
 Table 58. —Cheese factories erected in New York State.' 1 
 
 a u. S. Commissioner of Agriculture, Annual Report 1865, p. 433 - 
 
 31 Ohio State Bd. of Agric. 2d Annual Report (1847), p. 92. 
 
 32 Prairie Farmer, XII (1852), p. 30. 
 
 33 Country Gentleman, XIV (1859)» P* 2 55 - 
 
 31 U. S. Commissioner of Agric., Annual Report 1865, p. 432. 
 
DAIRYING 
 
 431 
 
 PRODUCTION RECORDS OF DAIRY COWS. 
 
 \V ith the increased attention to dairying after 1830, the improvement of 
 dairy cattle or the development of a dairy breed became a popular subject 
 of discussion. The production of the average dairy cow during the period 
 1840 to 1850 was commonly estimated at 150 pounds of butter or from 300 to 
 400 pounds of cheese per annum. 35 Table 59 shows the performance of 
 several of the most extraordinary cows in Massachusetts previous to 1845: 
 
 Table 59. 
 
 Massachusetts, Transactions of the Agricultural Societies 1849, p. 9. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Place. 
 
 Weekly 
 production 
 of butter. 
 
 Length 
 of time. 
 
 1824 
 
 Nourse cow . 
 
 Danvers .... 
 
 lbs. 
 
 T A 
 
 Weeks. 
 
 l6 
 
 l6 
 
 l6 
 
 1826 
 
 Oakes cow . 
 
 . ...Do. 
 
 l 4 
 
 16 
 
 T A 
 
 1828 
 
 Sanderson cow. 
 
 Waltham .... 
 
 1830 
 
 Hazeltine cow . 
 
 Haverhill . 
 
 A 4 
 
 T A 
 
 1830 
 
 Barrett cow . 
 
 Northampton 
 
 1 4 
 
 15 
 
 T A 
 
 12 
 
 1830 
 
 Homer’s cow . 
 
 Bedford .... 
 
 12 
 
 1845 
 
 Buxton cow . 
 
 Danvers . 
 
 l 4 
 
 16 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 Fig. 103. —Butter, 1849. Each dot represents 100,000 pounds. 
 
 The manufacture of butter was more generally distributed than that of cheese. 
 Jrange County, New York, central New York, and Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 
 vere widely known for the quality and quantity of their butter. 
 
 15 U- S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, P- 995- 
 
432 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 36 Country Gentleman, XVIII (1861), p. 255 - 
 
 37 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1841), pp. 255, 261. 
 
 38 Cultivator, VII (1840), p. 134; Country Gentleman, III (1854), p. 233. 
 
 39 2d Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1838), p. 54 * 
 
 40 N. H. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1852), p. 246. 
 
 41 Ohio State Bd. of Agric. 4th Annual Report (1849), pp. 52, 79 - 
 
 Fig. 104—Butter, 1859. Each dot represents 100,000 pounds. 
 
 From 1850 to i860 there was a large increase in butter production. West of Ohio 
 there was no important center of butter production. 
 
 INTRODUCTION OF NEW BREEDS OF DAIRY r CATTLE. 
 
 Formerly, in the principal dairy regions of the East, dairymen had raised 
 their own stock; but as the price of dairy produce advanced the practice 
 became prevalent among dairymen of filling up their barns from herds driven 
 in from other counties. 36 The Holstein, Jersey, Ayrshire, and other dairy 
 breeds had been introduced before 1840. 37 A group of Boston men estab¬ 
 lished a model farm where the “ Cream Pot ” cattle were developed. The 
 Massachusetts Agricultural Society went to considerable expense to promote 
 the Ayrshire and Devon breeds of cattle for dairy purposes in that State 
 It was not until about 1850, however, that much attention was paid to the 
 
 development of a distinctly dairy type of cattle. 40 
 
 By i860 most of the leading dairy breeds of the present time had been 
 introduced and herds of cattle with some improved blood were well distributed 
 in the eastern dairy regions. A “ dash ” of pure blood in the sire was desired 
 by many of the best dairymen. In the Western Reserve, cows were said to be 
 mostly of the native breed, with some mixture of the Shorthorn, Devon, and 
 Bakewell stock; but as a rule little attention had thus far been given to any 
 particular breed. Improvement generally resulted from the retaining by 
 dairymen for their own use of such cows as proved good milkers and the 
 disposal of the others to drovers. 41 ______ 
 
DAIRYING 
 
 433 
 
 Fig. 105. Dairy cows, 1850. Each dot represents 2,000 head. 
 
 northeast* but shnwV^S throu £ hou ‘ ‘he agricultural region of th, 
 
 nortneast, but showed concentration in the western part of New England central Nev 
 
 York, southeastern Pennsylvania and northeastern Ohio. g ’ central Nev 
 
 Fig. 106.—Dairy cows, i860. Each dot represents 2,000 head. 
 
 exrand ng wl e ct fift f ni the .n dairy Centers of . the eastern states continued to develop and 
 expand. West of Ohio there was yet no important dairying center. 
 
434 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 
 Table 6o. —Dairy cows: Number in the United States. 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1850 and i860.] 
 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 Total 
 ( thou¬ 
 sands ]). 
 
 Per 1000 
 popula¬ 
 tion. 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 ( thou¬ 
 sands ). 
 
 Per 1,000 
 popula¬ 
 tion. 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 United States . 
 
 6,385 
 
 275 
 
 100.0 
 
 8,586 
 
 273 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 New England . 
 
 Middle Atlantic . 
 
 East North Central... 
 West North Central.. 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 608 
 
 1,580 
 
 1,288 
 
 276 
 
 15 
 
 223 
 
 268 
 
 285 
 
 314 
 
 212 
 
 9-5 
 
 24.7 
 
 20.2 
 
 4-3 
 
 .2 
 
 680 
 
 1,936 
 
 i ,945 
 
 611 
 
 47 
 
 217 
 
 260 
 
 281 
 
 282 
 
 270 
 
 604 
 
 7-9 
 
 22.5 
 
 22.7 
 
 7 -i 
 
 .6 
 
 Pacific . . 
 
 14 
 
 129 
 
 .2 
 
 268 
 
 3 - 1 
 
 New England: 
 
 Maine . 
 
 134 
 
 229 
 
 2.1 
 
 147 
 
 234 
 
 1.7 
 
 New Hampshire . 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 94 
 
 146 
 
 296 
 
 465 
 
 L 5 
 
 2-3 
 
 95 
 
 175 
 
 29I 
 
 554 
 
 1.1 
 
 2.0 
 
 A/f a cca elmsetts . 
 
 130 
 
 131 
 
 2.0 
 
 144 
 
 117 
 
 1.7 
 
 Pliode Tslnnd . 
 
 19 
 
 127 
 
 •3 
 
 20 
 
 113 
 
 .2 
 
 C' onneeticilt . 
 
 85 
 
 230 
 
 1-3 
 
 99 
 
 215 
 
 1.2 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 IMew "Vnrk . 
 
 931 
 
 119 
 
 301 
 
 14.6 
 
 1,124 
 
 290 
 
 131 
 
 1.6 
 
 7.8 
 
 7-9 
 
 New Tersev . 
 
 243 
 
 1.8 
 
 139 
 
 207 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 530 
 
 544 
 
 229 
 
 275 
 
 8.3 
 
 8.5 
 
 673 
 
 677 
 
 232 
 
 289 
 
 269 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 285 
 
 288 
 
 4-5 
 
 363 
 
 4.2 
 
 6.1 
 
 Tllinnis . 
 
 295 
 
 346 
 
 4.6 
 
 523 
 
 305 
 
 MirViicran . 
 
 100 
 
 251 
 
 1.6 
 
 179 
 
 240 
 
 2.1 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 64 
 
 211 
 
 1.0 
 
 203 
 
 262 
 
 2.4 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 A/tinneQota . 
 
 1 
 
 100 
 
 • • • • 
 
 40 
 
 235 
 
 •5 
 
 Town . 
 
 45 
 
 238 
 
 •7 
 
 190 
 
 281 
 
 2.2 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 230 
 
 337 
 
 3-6 
 
 345 
 
 292 
 
 4.0 
 
 Dakota Territory .... 
 "M^Kracl^^ . 
 
 ■ • • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 a 
 
 7 
 
 59 
 
 243 
 
 • • • • 
 
 .1 
 
 TT q ncQ Q .. 
 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 29 
 
 266 
 
 •3 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 "Mew Mexico . 
 
 10 
 
 173 
 
 .1 
 
 34 
 
 368 
 
 •4 
 
 Utah . 
 
 5 
 
 427 
 
 .1 
 
 12 
 
 297 
 
 .2 
 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 1 
 
 138 
 
 • • • • 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 Win cninorton 
 
 
 
 • • • • 
 
 10 
 
 833 
 
 .1 
 
 Orecfon . 
 
 10 
 
 709 
 
 .1 
 
 53 
 
 1,013 
 
 .6 
 
 California . 
 
 4 
 
 46 
 
 .1 
 
 205 
 
 541 
 
 2.4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a Less than 500. 
 
Chapter XXXVI. —Swine. 
 
 The corn-raising regions of Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana were the centers 
 of commercial swine production in the North in 1840. Cincinnati was the 
 leading pork-packing city of the country. In the corn-growing regions of 
 O no, Kentucky, Illinois, and Missouri, hogs were kept in abundance. 
 
 HOG-RAISING ON DAIRY FARMS IN THE EAST. 
 
 In the East, hogs were generally distributed over the agricultural area 
 with more or less concentration in the dairy districts. In these districts the 
 usual feed consisted of summer pasture, refuse from the dairy, potatoes 
 apples, pumpkins, and, towards the close of the period of fattening a little 
 meal. In Berkshire County, Massachusetts, it was said to be usual to keep 
 1 hog to 4 cows. In Connecticut it was said that the cheapest method of 
 raising hogs was “ to take spring pigs and feed them with the slops of the 
 dairy with a little provender mixed in, until September; then, in addition, 
 boil the refuse potatoes and apples together, and feed for 6 or 8 weeks • 
 afterwards for a few weeks, with provender scalded.” 2 In the greater part 
 of New England it was said that the cheapest way to raise hogs was to keep 
 just enough to consume the refuse of the farm. 
 
 . , In Herkimer County, New York, to fatten hogs on grain alone was con¬ 
 sidered questionable economy. The common method pursued was to fatten 
 them on whey, potatoes, apples, grain, etc. In Ontario County, it was said 
 that, since the temperance cause had been in the ascendant, many hogs were 
 attened on apples. In Putnam County, it was said that “ the pork that is 
 made for sale are pigs, fattened or made on the dairy, with but very little 
 grain m fitting them for market.” 3 In the upper valley of the Hudson hogs 
 were kept in large numbers, and were cheaply raised by pasturing on clover 
 peas, and oats during the summer. In eastern Pennsylvania, hogs were said to 
 depend mainly for subsistence on the refuse of the dairy, on pasture and 
 nuts for the summer, and on the stubble fields and large orchards in the fall 
 until 4 or 6 weeks previous to slaughtering, when they were fed liberally on 
 whole corn. In Maryland, New Jersey, Delaware, and central Pennsylvania 
 as well as in the less thickly-settled parts of other eastern States, mast fur- 
 mshed a large part of the food for swine. 
 
 CHEAP PORK PRODUCTION IN THE WEST. 
 
 In the West, except in the more thickly populated regions, the majority of 
 farmers allowed their hogs to run at large during the greater part of the 
 
 off Report, Agriculture of Massachusetts (1838), p. 74 
 
 3 v v c atent A 0ff l ce ’g Annual Report 1850, Agriculture, 180. 
 
 c'-d ate ^ nc * S° c * Transactions, I (1841), p. 154. 
 
 U * Patent Office, Annual Report 1850, Agriculture, 214; (1849) P 127 
 
 435 
 
436 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 season Much of the pork was made without any attention from the owner. 
 There was as yet but a limited market for hogs, and meat was plentiful. In 
 summer they were fed on pasture and allowed to run in the woods; in winter, 
 
 Table 6i. — Swine: Number in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S Censuses of 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 Total 
 ( thou¬ 
 sands ). 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 Total. 
 
 United States .... 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 New England . 
 
 Middle Atlantic ... 
 East North Central. 
 West North Central 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 New England: 
 
 Maine ... 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 New York . 
 
 New Jersey .. 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 Dakota Territory . 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 New Mexico. 
 
 Utah . 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 Washington . 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 California . 
 
 26,301 
 
 749 
 
 3,665 
 
 5,566 
 
 1,376 
 
 i,54i 
 
 335 
 
 810 
 
 i,903 
 
 3,224 
 
 117 
 
 122 
 
 204 
 
 143 
 
 3i 
 
 132 
 
 1,900 
 
 261 
 
 1,504 
 
 2,100 
 
 1,624 
 
 i,495 
 
 296 
 
 5 i 
 
 105 
 
 1,271 
 
 234 
 
 428 
 
 698 
 
 194 
 
 282 
 
 426 
 
 782 
 
 700 
 
 872 
 
 1,382 
 
 2,367 
 
 3,140 
 
 1,394 
 
 1,660 
 
 2,433 
 
 3.313 
 
 100.0 
 
 2.8 
 13-9 
 21.2 
 5-2 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 ( thou¬ 
 sands ). 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 (thou¬ 
 sands) . 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Per 
 cent 0: 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 30,354 
 
 1,309 
 
 100.0 
 
 33,513 
 
 1,066 
 
 100.C 
 
 36 l 
 
 133 
 
 1.2 
 
 326 
 
 104 
 
 I.( 
 
 2,309 
 
 391 
 
 7.6 
 
 2,178 
 
 292 
 
 6.' 
 
 6,510 
 
 1,439 
 
 21.4 
 
 8,560 
 
 1,236 
 
 25-: 
 
 2,027 
 
 2,302 
 
 6.7 
 
 3,554 
 
 1,638 
 
 10. ( 
 
 8 
 
 113 
 
 
 21 
 
 Il8 
 
 .] 
 
 33 
 
 312 
 
 . I 
 
 544 
 
 1,226 
 
 I.< 
 
 55 
 
 94 
 
 .2 
 
 55 
 
 87 
 
 
 63 
 
 200 
 
 .2 
 
 52 
 
 159 
 
 • 
 
 66 
 
 211 
 
 .2 
 
 53 
 
 l68 
 
 . 
 
 81 
 
 82 
 
 •3 
 
 74 
 
 60 
 
 . 
 
 20 
 
 132 
 
 . I 
 
 17 
 
 100 
 
 • 
 
 76 
 
 206 
 
 .2 
 
 75 
 
 163 
 
 • 
 
 1,018 
 
 329 
 
 3-4 
 
 910 
 
 235 
 
 2. 
 
 ) 251 
 
 5 ii 
 
 .8 
 
 236 
 
 351 
 
 • 
 
 T 1,040 
 
 450 
 
 3-4 
 
 1,032 
 
 355 
 
 3 - 
 
 > 1,965 
 
 992 
 
 6-5 
 
 2,252 
 
 962 
 
 6. 
 
 2 2,264 
 
 2,290 
 
 7-4 
 
 3,099 
 
 2,295 
 
 9- 
 
 7 I, 9 l 6 
 
 2,250 
 
 6.3 
 
 2,502 
 
 1,462 
 
 7 - 
 
 [ 206 
 
 5 i 8 
 
 • 7 
 
 373 
 
 497 
 
 1. 
 
 2 159 
 
 522 
 
 • 5 
 
 334 
 
 43 i 
 
 1. 
 
 I 
 
 121 
 
 
 101 
 
 589 
 
 
 4 323 
 
 1,682 
 
 1.1 
 
 935 
 
 1.385 
 
 2. 
 
 8 1,703 
 
 2,496 
 
 5-6 
 
 2,355 
 
 1,992 
 
 7 - 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 59 
 
 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 880 
 
 
 
 
 
 138 
 
 1,289 
 
 
 7 
 
 110 
 
 
 10 
 
 no 
 
 
 • / 
 T 
 
 80 
 
 
 7 
 
 167 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 521 
 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 55 i 
 
 
 30 
 
 2,274 
 
 . 1 
 
 82 
 
 i ,556 
 
 
 3 
 
 30 
 
 . 
 
 456 
 
 1,201 
 
 1 
 
 .1 
 • 4 
 
 . 1 
 
 .2 
 
 a Less than 500. 
 
 if mast was favorable, they lived in the timber; if not, they were fed a few 
 ears of corn. In the more broken and timbered regions of southern Illinois 
 and Indiana and in Kentucky, most of the pork was made by letting the hogs 
 
 s Prairie Farmer, III (1843), P- 441 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agri¬ 
 culture, 192. 
 
SWINE 
 
 437 
 
 run at large until nearly 2 years old. About 6 weeks before Christmas they 
 were hunted out of the woods and bottoms, and a dozen or more were put in a 
 rail pen or turned into the nearest corn field to fatten. 6 
 
 HOG RAISING IN THE CORN BELT. 
 
 In the corn-growing regions of Kentucky, Ohio, and other western States 
 corn was more commonly used in the feeding of hogs. It was generally con¬ 
 ceded that as land was cheap and labor dear in the West, little care could be 
 given to the feeding of hogs. In the bluegrass region of Kentucky, it was 
 common to pasture hogs on clover, rye, or oats during the summer, and in the 
 winter to have them follow the feeding cattle—2 hogs for each full-fed steer 
 or 1 for each half-fed steer. 7 The practice of “ hogging down ” corn, turning 
 the hogs into a field of standing corn and allowing them to do their own har¬ 
 vesting, had been prevalent in Indiana, more especially in alluvial districts 
 like that of the Wabash. 8 “ Hogging down ” required a minimum of labor, 
 and returned the manure to the soil. 
 
 Hogs in the West were usually raised and fattened on the same farm; but 
 in some of the best corn-growing districts, as in the valleys of the Miami and 
 Scioto, feeders purchased lean hogs from farmers living back from the river 
 and fattened them along with the cattle. Cincinnati, located in the center of 
 a large corn-growing and hog-raising region, had become the great hog-pack¬ 
 ing market of the country. Cincinnati hams were known throughout the East 
 and the South and in foreign markets. Louisville, St. Louis, and other Miss¬ 
 issippi points were hog-packing centers. 
 
 DECLINE OF SWINE RAISING IN THE EAST, 1840 TO 1850 . 
 
 The census of 1850 showed that the number of hogs in the country had 
 increased from 26,301,000 to 30,354,000 during the previous decade. Every 
 northern State east of Ohio showed a considerable decrease in number of 
 hogs. In New England, the decline was over 50 per cent—from 749,000 to 
 348,000. In New York, the rate of decrease was little less. In Ohio, the 
 number of hogs was nearly the same as in 1840. To the westward, on the 
 other hand, every State showed a considerable increase. The centers of 
 production were much the same as in 1840. Hogs had obviously become more 
 numerous in the corn-growing and newly-settled region of the West, and less 
 numerous in the dairy regions of the East (see figs. 107, 108). 
 
 The causes of the decline of swine-raising in the East received but slight 
 attention in the current literature of the day. A writer in Worcester County, 
 Massachusetts, in 1850, noted a 25 per cent decrease in the number of hogs 
 in that State in the preceding decade, resulting from increased demand for 
 corn for feeding to cows and from the loss of the dairy waste, now that whole 
 milk was marketed. 9 A New Hampshire writer in 1852 told of a large decrease 
 
 6 Prairie Farmer, VIII ( 1848 ), p. 52 . 
 
 7 Beatty, Essays on Practical Agriculture, 268. 
 
 8 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1853 , Agriculture, 51 . 
 
 9 Ibid., 1850, Agriculture, 273. 
 
438 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Swine were an important source of income in the East in 1840. In the West 
 cheap corn, abundant mast and free range made the production of pork very cheap. 
 
 
 During the forties the number of swine declined in every northern state east 
 of Ohio. In the West there was a small increase. Swine were especially nu¬ 
 merous in the corn region of the Ohio valley. 
 
SWINE 
 
 439 
 
 in hog-raising in most sections of that state during the preceding 15 or 20 
 years, which he explained as follows: 10 
 
 “ The average price of corn, oats and potatoes has been for many years past too 
 
 high to allow their being profitably fed to swine.It seems to be conceded by our 
 
 people generally that with the price of corn for a number of years past, and with the 
 breeds of hogs which have usually been kept, that we can not sucessfully compete 
 with the Western farmers in pork-raising.” 
 
 Another writer on New England agriculture in 1861 observed: * 11 
 
 “The number of swine raised, and the quantity of pork made in New England, is 
 far less than formerly. The high price of grain here, and the ease with which the 
 still-slop-fed hogs of the West are rushed from the Mississippi to the Atlantic, have 
 rendered the raising of hogs for market generally an unprofitable undertaking. Salt 
 pork is not made the unvarying staple upon the farmer’s table as it formerly was, 
 although still a most important element in New England housekeeping. The thicker 
 settling of the country, and the more frequent interspersion of villages, leads to a more 
 general distribution of fresh meats, so that the farmers are not now, as formerly, so 
 entirely dependent on the meat of their own killing and their own pork barrels.” 
 
 In summary, it appears that the causes of decline of hog-raising in the 
 East were: (1) in the increased attention to dairying; (2) the importation 
 of western pork; (3) the general improvement in the New England field 
 system. In addition, the supply of potatoes, one of the chief feeds for the 
 eastern hogs, had been cut in half since the appearance of the blight. Corn 
 and other grains had risen in value. Dairying gave a better return for the 
 time and feed expended; 6 cents per pound was the commonly estimated cost 
 of pork production in the East in 1850; in the West but 2 to 2 \ cents. 
 
 PORK PACKING AT CINCINNATI. 
 
 In the West the increase in the number of hogs from 1840 to 1850, although 
 large, was not in proportion to the increases in population and in corn produc¬ 
 tion. During the decade the business of packing hogs had extended to nearly 
 all the interior towns of any considerable size which lay near means of trans¬ 
 portation. 12 In Cincinnati, the packing center, there were no less than 13 
 factories for the conversion of lard into oil and stearin in full operation in 
 1843, making from 300 to 2,500 barrels each or 100,000 gallons in all. 13 In 
 1849 it was estimated that 16,000,000 pounds of pork would be run that year 
 into lard oil. 1,500 coopers in the city and the neighborhood were engaged in 
 making kegs, pork barrels, and bacon hogsheads. Many of them were farmers 
 who spent their spare time at cooperage or in getting out hoop poles. 14 
 
 Unlike cattle, hogs could not profitably be driven long distances. They were 
 generally fattened where raised and were driven to market or sold to drovers 
 who traveled through the country. In Indiana, 100 to 200 hogs were ordinar¬ 
 ily fattened by hog-raising farmers. In many corn-growing regions in the 
 vicinity of navigable rivers it was not considered profitable to feed corn to 
 hogs. Farmers within 12 or 15 miles of rivers could not compete with those 
 
 10 N. H. Agric. Soc. Transactions (1852), p. 254. 
 
 11 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1861, Agriculture , 260. 
 
 12 Ohio State Board of Agric., 4th Annual Report (1849), P- 13 ; Prairie Farmer, X 
 
 (1850), p. 166. 
 
 13 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1843, p. 118. 
 
 14 Prairie Farmer, IX (1849), p. 14. 
 
440 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 in the interior where, because of distance from market, corn was cheaper. 15 
 It was the opinion of the Prairie Farmer in 1848 that pork-making at a 
 distance of 50 miles from market was more profitable at $2 a hundred than 
 raising wheat at 80 cents a bushel. 16 
 
 Fig. 109.—Swine, i860. Each dot represents 5,000 head. 
 
 During the fifties the center of increase lay in the region of the Mississippi 
 river and to a less extent on the Pacific coast. 
 
 CORN AND HOGS IN THE WEST, 1850 TO 1860 . 
 
 The census reported an increase in the number of swine from 30,354,000 
 in 1850 to 33 , 573 >° 00 in i860. All northern states East of Ohio, with the 
 exception of Maine and Maryland, showed a slight decline. In the West there 
 was an increase, which, however, was not in proportion to the increase in 
 population or in corn production. As the extension of railroads through the 
 corn-growing region opened up new markets, the price of corn greatly 
 advanced and swine-raising moved further inland, where corn was cheap. 
 Of the 1859 corn crop, over 15,000,000 bushels were shipped to Chicago 
 alone. 1. In the regions nearer to market, or nearer to means of transportation, 
 more care was now taken in the feeding of swine. 18 It is said that 3,000,000 
 hogs were packed in the year i860. 19 
 
 TYPES OF HOGS. 
 
 Improved breeds of swine and their crosses were fairly common in the 
 eastern States in 1840. The Chester County type, which had been developed 
 
 15 Ibid., VII (1847), P- 304. 
 
 16 Ibid., VIII (1848), p. 88. 
 
 17 Chicago Board of Trade, gth Annual Report (1867), P- 43- 
 
 18 Ohio State Board of Agric., 14th Annual Report (1859), p. 193. 
 
 19 U. S. Census of i860, Agriculture, p. cxxxv. 
 
SWINE 
 
 441 
 
 in Chester County, Pennsylvania, and the Berkshire were coming into favor. 
 The early prejudice which had existed against the latter on account of its 
 small size and color was gradually subsiding. It was said in Massachusetts 
 that a shoat weighing 70 pounds in the spring and kept on the slops of the 
 dairy and on pasturage, supplemented by some meal, was expected to weigh 
 2 50 pounds in the fall. Adam Beatty, of Kentucky, wrote in 1844 that a hog 
 which followed full-fed cattle would gain 1 pound a day. 20 Besides the Berk¬ 
 shire and the Chester County hogs, other breeds which were introduced or 
 developed previous to 1840 were the Warren County, Byfield, Woburn, Irish 
 Grazier, China, Grass-breed, Russian, Suffolk, Essex, etc. $200, $300 and 
 even $500 had been paid for a pair of Berkshire hogs. 21 
 
 THE COMMON HOG IN THE WEST. 
 
 In the West, before 1840, but little attention had been given to the type 
 ol hog used for feeding. 22 The common hog was of an ungainly type, with 
 long legs and snout, a sharp back, of a roaming disposition, slow and expen¬ 
 se 6 to fatten. 23 For the packers they yielded small hams and little lard ; 
 Bieir sides were too thin for mess or clean pork and chiefly fit for bacon’ 
 type was variously known as "Alligator,” “ Landpike,” “ Razorback ” 
 Prairie Rooter,’ “ Seven-mile,” “ Hazlenut splitter,” etc. For the existence 
 that they were forced to lead they were well adapted. About 1840, however 
 there was so much talk about the breeds of hogs that it was said, “ a stranger 
 would have thought that the only business of the country hereafter was to be 
 por ' raising. 24 It was still considered necessary, however, by most farmers 
 to cross the improved breeds with a good traveling breed so as to enable them 
 
 more readily to feed upon the mast or pasture, and to give them endurance 
 when driven to market. 
 
 CHANGING STANDARDS FOR HOG BREEDING. 
 
 In the early attempts to improve the breeds, a common aim had been to 
 obtain large-sized animals. A breed was appraised according to the weight 
 which it could be made to attain, rather than by the profit with which it could 
 be fattened for the butcher. 25 By 1840, however, breeders were giving in¬ 
 creased attention to those breeds which, with a given quantity of food, would 
 lay on the most meat. In the West, in 1850, it was generally considered not 
 profitable to winter a hog more than one season. Hogs were commonly sold 
 at about 18 months of age at a weight of 200 to 250 pounds. The average 
 weight of hogs received on the Chicago market from 1852 to i860 was 228 
 pounds. 20 By i860 the long-legged razor-backed hog had nearly disappeared 
 from the corn-growing region of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. Probably in 
 
 no one other class of livestock was improvement so rapid during this period 
 as in swine. 
 
 20 Beatty, Essays on Practical Agriculture, 268. 
 
 21 Cultivator, VI (1839), p. 31. 
 
 22 Ibid., VII (1840), p. 167. 
 
 I 3 Ibid., I (1834), P. 5 . 
 
 24 Prairie Farmer, IV (1844), p. 2S1. 
 
 26 nu * l * * * - Hvat0 ^ VI < i8 39 )> P- 31 . 
 
 Chicago Board of Trade, 3d Annual Report (i860), p. 38. 
 
Chapter XXXVII.— Poultry. 
 
 The census of 1840 reports the value of “ all kinds of poultry at 
 $q 344,000; the number, however, was not given. New York State led with 
 poultry valued at $1,153,000, Pennsylvania second with $686,000. Although 
 the production of eggs was largely a side issue on the farm, poultry-raising 
 had become fairly well developed in a few sections of the East. Rhode 
 Island was celebrated throughout the country for its fine poultry. In Wash¬ 
 ington County, Rhode Island, all the farmers were said to be engaged more 
 
 or less extensively in the business. 1 
 
 The egg trade of Cincinnati in 1845 was described as follows: 2 
 « The egg trade of Cincinnati bids fair to rival the celebrated pork trade of that city, 
 to an extent which will soon sink the soubriquet of Porkopolis to that of Eggopohs. 
 
 It is indeed enormous—beyond computation. One firm alone (Townsend Sr Co.) during 
 the first six months of this year, shipped to New York 234 barrels of eggs; to Balti¬ 
 more, 70 barrels; and to New Orleans, 3,976 barrels! Each barrel contains 90 dozen; 
 which makes the aggregate shipments 4,624,400 eggs! .... There are five other houses 
 in Cincinnati engaged in the business. The foreign egg trade of Cincinnati the past 
 year has amounted to 10,700 barrels; which is 963,000 dozen, or 11,556,000 eggs, the 
 aggregate value of this trade for the year, according to data here given, is $90,361.50. 
 The business is a very hazardous one, owing to the great fluctuations in the New 
 Orleans market. In the course of the past year, for example, western eggs have sold 
 there as high as $22 per barrel, and as low as $3. In addition to this export trade, these 
 establishments do also a heavy home trade. That of Townsend & Co. supplies regu- , 
 larly five steamboats with 36 barrels a trip; which, at 12 trips a year, is 432 barrels. It 
 also furnishes constantly the consumption of several of the largest hotels, which use 
 at least 260 barrels per year, and does a retail business amounting to not less than 33 j 
 barrels per year. These several amounts make 725 barrels to add to the 4,280 barrels 
 shipped, which gives an aggregate of 5,°°5 barrels, or 450,45° dozen, as the annual [ 
 trade of this one house. Besides this, the annual city consumption is estimated at 
 1,213,333 dozen.” 
 
 As the railroads were extended new markets were opened for poultry 
 products. In 1851 it was reported from Elgin, Illinois, that a trader had estab- * 
 lished himself in that city, 3 
 
 “ where he carried on an extensive business this season, and perhaps made more money 
 than any of our heavy merchants. His sole business is buying poultry, eggs, butter, 
 vegetables, etc., from the farmers and sending them by railroad to the city where 
 they are quickly disposed of. We are informed that he has paid more money to the 
 company for freight this season than any other single firm doing business with the 
 
 railroad.” ___ 
 
 1 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1849, Agriculture, 98; 1850, p. 477 - 
 
 2 Ibid., 1845, P- 349 - 
 
 3 Prairie Farmer, XI (1851), p. 33 - 
 
 442 
 
Chapter XXXVIII. —Horses and Mules. 
 
 TYPES OF HORSES RAISED IN NEW ENGLAND, IN OHIO, 
 
 AND IN KENTUCKY. 
 
 Vermont, and to a less extent New Hampshire, had long been celebrated 
 for their excellent horses of the Morgan breed, distinguished by “ activity 
 and great strength in proportion to size, ability to live and labor on compara¬ 
 tively little food, with remarkable hardiness and endurance.” 1 It was reported 
 from Massachusetts in 1849 that the best and most beautiful animals of that 
 
 Fig. 110. Horses, mules, asses, and burros, 1840. Each dot represents 2,000 head. 
 Horses were uniformly distributed throughout the North. 
 
 State were from Vermont and New Hampshire. Many of the heavy horses 
 used in the East, however, were secured from Ohio and other Western States. 
 Eastern drovers were going West into Ohio or into the mining districts of 
 Pennsylvania to secure heavy draft horses to supply the eastern demand. 2 
 From Delaware County, Pennsylvania, in 1849, it was reported that about 
 one-half of the horses in the county were raised on the farm and the remainder 
 were procured from Ohio and other western states. 3 
 
 1 Cultivator, new series, II (1845), p. 256. 
 
 2 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1854, Agriculture, 27. 
 
 3 Ibid., 1849, Agriculture, 126. 
 
 443 
 
444 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Fig. hi. —Horses, mules, asses, and burros, 1850. Each dot represents 2,000 head. 
 There was a comparatively small increase in the number of horses between 1840 
 
 and 1850. 
 
HORSES AND MULES 
 
 445 
 
 During the period 1840 to i860, Kentucky was distinguished for the breed¬ 
 ing of saddle and light horses. In 1834 Mitchell reported: 4 
 
 “ A handsome horse is the highest pride of a Kentuckian, and common farmers own 
 from 10 to fifty. Great numbers are carried over the mountains to the Atlantic states; 
 and the principal supply of saddle and carriage horses in the lower country is drawn 
 from Kentucky or other western states.” 
 
 Table 62. —Horses and mules: Number in the United States. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division 
 and State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 ( thou ¬ 
 sands .). 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 ( thou ¬ 
 
 sands '). 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 
 a. S. 
 
 total. 
 
 Total 
 
 ( thou ¬ 
 
 sands ). 
 
 Per 
 
 1000 
 
 popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 U. S. 
 total. 
 
 United States . k . 
 
 4,336 
 
 254 
 
 100.0 
 
 4,896 
 
 211 
 
 100.0 
 
 7,400 
 
 235 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England . 
 
 270 
 
 121 
 
 6.2 
 
 213 
 
 78 
 
 4-3 
 
 259 
 
 83 
 
 3-5 
 
 Middle Atlantic .... 
 
 910 
 
 201 
 
 21.0 
 
 869 
 
 147 
 
 17.7 
 
 1,038 
 
 139 
 
 I4.O 
 
 East North Central. 
 
 907 
 
 310 
 
 20.9 
 
 1,155 
 
 255 
 
 23.6 
 
 2,039 
 
 294 
 
 27.6 
 
 West North Central 
 
 20 7 
 
 485 
 
 4.8 
 
 307 
 
 349 
 
 6.3 
 
 668 
 
 308 
 
 9.0 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 226 
 
 • 3 
 
 27 
 
 157 
 
 •4 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 
 
 
 32 
 
 301 
 
 .7 
 
 207 
 
 466 
 
 2.8 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 59 
 
 118 
 
 1.4 
 
 42 
 
 72 
 
 • 9 
 
 61 
 
 97 
 
 . 8 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 44 
 
 154 
 
 1.0 
 
 34 
 
 108 
 
 •7 
 
 4 i 
 
 126 
 
 .6 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 62 
 
 214 
 
 1.4 
 
 62 
 
 195 
 
 1.2 
 
 69 
 
 219 
 
 • 9 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 62 
 
 83 
 
 1.4 
 
 42 
 
 42 
 
 •9 
 
 48 
 
 39 
 
 .6 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 8 
 
 74 
 
 .2 
 
 6 
 
 42 
 
 . 1 
 
 7 
 
 4 i 
 
 . 1 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 35 
 
 112 
 
 .8 
 
 27 
 
 73 
 
 •5 
 
 33 
 
 72 
 
 • 5 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York. 
 
 475 
 
 195 
 
 11.0 
 
 448 
 
 145 
 
 9.1 
 
 505 
 
 130 
 
 6.8 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 70 
 
 189 
 
 1.6 
 
 68 
 
 139 
 
 1.4 
 
 86 
 
 128 
 
 1.2 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 365 
 
 212 
 
 8.4 
 
 353 
 
 153 
 
 7.2 
 
 447 
 
 154 
 
 6.0 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 43 i 
 
 283 
 
 9.9 
 
 467 
 
 236 
 
 9-5 
 
 633 
 
 270 
 
 8.6 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 241 
 
 35 i 
 
 5.6 
 
 321 
 
 325 
 
 6.6 
 
 550 
 
 407 
 
 7-4 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 199 
 
 418 
 
 4.6 
 
 278 
 
 327 
 
 5-7 
 
 602 
 
 352 
 
 8.1 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 30 
 
 142 
 
 • 7 
 
 59 
 
 147 
 
 1.2 
 
 137 
 
 183 
 
 1.9 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 6 
 
 185 
 
 . 1 
 
 30 
 
 99 
 
 .6 
 
 117 
 
 151 
 
 1.6 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 144 
 
 
 17 
 
 101 
 
 0 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 11 
 
 250 
 
 • 3 
 
 39 
 
 204 
 
 .8 
 
 181 
 
 268 
 
 2.4 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 196 
 
 5ii 
 
 4-5 
 
 267 
 
 39 i 
 
 5-5 
 
 443 
 
 375 
 
 6.0 
 
 Dakota Territorv . . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 171 
 
 . 1 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 204 
 
 • 3 
 
 Mountain : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 223 
 
 .3 
 
 21 
 
 228 
 
 . 3 
 
 Utah . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H4 
 
 . 1 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 242 
 
 
 1 
 
 98 
 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 K 
 
 425 
 
 . 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 637 
 
 .2 
 
 38 
 
 720 
 
 • 5 
 
 California . 
 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 253 
 
 • 5 
 
 164 
 
 432 
 
 2.2 
 
 a Less than 500. 
 
 4 United States, 296. 
 
446 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 But few heavy horses were bred in Kentucky; these were obtained chiefly 
 from Ohio and Indiana. 5 
 
 The wheat region of western New York, eastern Ohio, and, during the 
 last half of the period, Michigan, were horse-raising districts. It was re¬ 
 ported in 1849 ^at 2,500 horses were annually exported from Ashland County, 
 Ohio. 6 The expense of driving horses from Harrison County, Ohio, to mar¬ 
 kets on the Atlantic seaboard in 1854 was said to be about $10 a head. 7 Before 
 1849 the market for western horses had been largely in the East and South, 
 supplemented by the ever-present demand of western immigrants. But 
 migration to California after 1849 increased the demand for horses in that 
 direction. It was estimated that during the year 1852 at least 6,000 horses 
 left the State of Michigan for the California gold mines. 8 
 
 CONFLICTING STANDARDS IN BREEDING—SPEED VS. 
 
 STRENGTH. 
 
 In the agitation for improved breeds of farm animals, horses attracted 
 their share of attention. It was regarded as a question, especially in the 
 Eastern States, what direction the improvement might best take. Should the 
 farmer breed for a race horse, a trotter, a coach, or a plough horse? 9 The 
 time had been when “ an awkward, a dull, or even an unsound animal, pro¬ 
 vided he was good for draught, would find his way to some of the numerous 
 teams that traversed the country, and bring a fair price ”; but now, since 
 railroads were doing an increased amount of the long hauling, the demand for 
 such horses was less. 10 The same reasons which were doing away with oxen 
 were causing an increased demand for better horses. Improved English draft 
 horses were introduced to a considerable extent, but too frequently improve¬ 
 ment aimed at the breeding of fast horses rather than draft animals. 
 
 In the Eastern States there seemed to be a mania for speed, an ambition to 
 keep up with the railroads. 11 One observer writes: 
 
 Fifty years ago, when there were no railways in the country and not very good 
 highways, before the building and using of light wagons and other vehicles, when the 
 principal uses of the horse were to drag a lumbering coach six miles an hour—as fast 
 as it was safe to go—to haul before cattle, to draw the farmer’s family to meeting 
 once a week and his grist to mill twice a week, there was small occasion for endeavoring 
 to improve the breeds of horses in this country. Now the times have changed and we 
 have changed with them; railway travelling makes us seek railway speed, or the nearest 
 approach that we can get, with horseflesh; horses with speed are indispensable as 
 roadsters, and in horses for all work at the present day good travelling qualities are 
 sought.” 
 
 Horse racing at the agricultural fairs was introduced during this period. 
 
 5 Western Farmer, II (1841), pp. 249, 251; Indiana State Board of Agric., 2d Annual 
 
 Report (1852), pp. 121. 298. 
 
 6 Ohio State Board of Agric., 4th Annual Report (1849), P- 48. 
 
 7 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1854, Agriculture, 26. 
 
 8 Ibid., 1852, Agriculture, 277. 
 
 9 N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions, I (1841), p. 303. 
 
 10 Massachusetts, Transactions of the Agricultural Societies 1849, p. 221. 
 
 11 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1861, Agriculture, 255. 
 
HORSES AND MULES 
 
 447 
 
 RAISING HORSES ON THE ILLINOIS PRAIRIE. 
 
 It was said that good horses could be raised on the wild prairie of Illinois 
 for $10 a year. 12 Large droves were taken from southern Illinois and Missouri 
 to St. Louis, New Orleans, and other southern markets. There was much 
 objection to their small size, the result of a large mixture of Spanish blood. 
 On the Pacific Coast the horses were largely the Spanish breed, numerous 
 bands of which roamed the country. The breed was slowly improved by 
 crossing with horses brought in by easterners. 13 
 
 Higher prices after 1847 tended to promote the raising of horses in the 
 Eastern States. The movement from the West to the East and to the South 
 continued, supplemented by an increased demand from the Pacific Coast. 
 Before 1850 but few determined attempts had been made to improve the 
 draft horse, but after that date the importation and improvement of draft 
 horses attracted greater attention, particularly in Ohio. 14 
 
 MULE BREEDING IN KENTUCKY AND MISSOURI. 
 
 Kentucky, Missouri, and the region around the city of Columbus, in Ohio, 
 were the chief mule-breeding districts of the northern States in 1850. 15 Fol¬ 
 lowing the importation by Henry Clay of a jack from Spain in 1832, the mule 
 had been much improved in Kentucky. 16 In 1853 mules were considered the 
 most profitable stock raised in the bluegrass region. 17 The mule-raisers on 
 the good grazing lands of Kentucky were in the habit of sending jacks into 
 the farming districts of Ohio, Indiana, and other sections of Kentucky. The 
 mule colts which were raised there in small numbers by individual farmers 
 were purchased by the grazier at the age of about 6 months, and taken back 
 and grazed in Kentucky. At maturity they were sold to the plantations 
 of the South 18 or to the coal mines of the East. So common was this practice 
 that prices were commonly quoted for a 6-months-old colt, and then for a 2 
 or 3 year old mule. 19 
 
 The region around Columbus, Ohio, was famous for the fine quality of its 
 mules. It was reported in 1844 that one breeder in Columbus sold annually 
 from his farm 200 to 300 mules, most of which went to the Baltimore market. 
 Missouri mules were chiefly marketed in the South, and, after 1849, i n Cali¬ 
 fornia and Oregon. 20 Throughout southern Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa a few 
 mules were raised, for farm use and for sale in the South. 21 
 
 12 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1854, Agriculture, 23. 
 
 13 Ibid., 1861, p. 164. 
 
 14 Plumb, Types and Breeds of Farm Animals, 106. 
 
 15 Country Gentleman, IV (1854), P- 2 97 ) Cultivator, new series, I (1844), p. 149. 
 
 16 Plumb, Types and Breeds of Farm Animals, 162. 
 
 17 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1853, Agriculture, 29. 
 
 18 Ibid., 1849, p. 179. 
 
 19 Ibid., 1854, p. 24; (1853), p. 30. 
 
 20 Cultivator, new series, IX (1852), p. 370. 
 
 21 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1854, Agriculture, p. 24. 
 
Chapter XXXIX. — Northern Agriculture in 
 
 1860—A Summary. 
 
 The prominent feature in the history of northern agriculture from 1840 to 
 i860 was its dynamic nature. It was a period of expansion and reorganization. 
 In the West, expansion was stimulated by the presence of prairie lands. The 
 development of commercial agriculture in the prairies was stimulated by, 
 and partly responsible for, the invention of farm machinery and the construc¬ 
 tion of railways to carry the surplus products of the farms to the eastern mar¬ 
 kets. In the East it was a period of reorganization, made necessary because 
 of (1) the competition of the factories and of western farms for the rural 
 population; (2) the competition from the western farmers in the production 
 of agricultural staples such as wheat, wool, beef, and pork; (3) the increased 
 demand of the eastern cities for dairy products, garden truck, and hay, articles 
 which, either because of their bulk or perishable character, were not shipped 
 from the West in competition with the eastern farmer; and (4) the improve¬ 
 ment in farm machinery and transportation. 
 
 THE CAUSES OF WESTWARD MIGRATION. 
 
 In the East the frontier of agricultural production was still being slowly 
 pushed north into northern New England and New York, and into the unoc¬ 
 cupied lands of Pennsylvania. But the movement was slow and was entirely 
 overshadowed in importance by the movement of eastern people to the prairie 
 lands of the West. To hew a farm from the remaining untilled lands of the 
 East was a long and arduous task, and to purchase a farm already cleared and 
 improved required not a small investment. It was not strange, therefore, that 
 the hardships and pleasures of a pioneer life in the West seemed more desir¬ 
 able than the labor and saving necessary to acquire a farm in the East. While 
 settlement, in its progress westward, was moving through a rough and wooded 
 region, the task of clearing a farm in the West was perhaps as difficult as 
 buying a farm in the East. But now that prairie land was open to settlement, 
 the attraction of the West greatly increased and some of the best farmers of 
 the East moved to the prairie regions. Migration from eastern farms was tak¬ 
 ing place not only to the prairies of the West, but also to the rapidly develop¬ 
 ing manufacturing centers. 
 
 Settlement and agricultural production had expanded rapidly into the prairie 
 region of the Mississippi River and beyond. By i860, settlement extended 
 over southeastern Minnesota, Iowa, and Missouri, and the eastern counties 
 of Kansas and Nebraska. California on the Pacific Coast was being rapidly 
 developed. The population of Illinois alone in i860 was greater than the com¬ 
 bined population of Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, and Minne¬ 
 sota in 1840. The total population living in Ohio and the States to the west, 
 which had been 4,401,000 in 1840, had increased to 10,112,000 by i860. There 
 were more settlers in Kansas and Nebraska in i860 than there were in Wis¬ 
 consin and Iowa in 1840. 
 
 448 
 
NORTHERN AGRICULTURE IN i860 449 
 
 TENANCY IN THE EASTERN STATES. 
 
 Favorable land laws made it easy to secure a farm in the West. High 
 wages, together with low land values and the possibility of taking up new land, 
 made it relatively easy in the West for the poor man to rise to the position 
 of landowning farmer, provided he were willing to endure the hardship of a 
 pioneer life. There are no statistics relating to tenancy and landownership 
 in the United States prior to 1880. Yet it is evident that there was a consider¬ 
 able amount of tenancy in the Northern States from 1840 to i860. This was 
 especially true in the older settled sections of the East. It was reported from 
 Warren County, New Jersey, in 1843, that one-fourth to one-third of the 
 farms in that vicinity were rented, mostly on a share basis. 1 In the Genesee 
 Valley, New York, the Wadsworth estate, comprising about 40 square miles, 
 was entirely operated by tenant farmers. Numerous references are made 
 in the agricultural literature of the period to rented farms in the Eastern 
 States. In Ohio, Nicholas Longworth was reported to have 91 acres of land 
 in vineyard in 1844* nearly all of which had been planted and was cared for 
 by German tenants on the share system. 2 In the valleys of the Scioto and the 
 Wabash Rivers large areas of land were rented out on the share system. 3 As 
 far west as Iowa, farm land was rented to tenants in 1858. 4 In Illinois in 
 1859, when land could be purchased for $2.50 per acre, farms were let to 
 tenants for a share of the grain. 5 Thus it would seem that more or less ten¬ 
 ancy prevailed throughout the Northern States during the two decades. Share 
 renting was the prevailing system. The number of large farms was not great. 
 Exclusive of the border States, there were in i860 only 787 farms over 1,000 
 acres in size, and of these 262 were in California. Table 63 shows the size of 
 farms in several states of the North in 1850 and i860. 
 
 Table 63.— Average size of farms. 
 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 Connecticut .. 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 98.5 
 
 106.2 
 
 125 
 
 158 
 
 184.8 
 
 93-8 
 
 99-5 
 
 113-8 
 
 145-9 
 
 164.6 
 
 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF WESTERN FARMING IN 1860 . 
 
 By i860, new centers of agricultural production had developed in the West. 
 Corn, hogs, and cattle were the most important products of the new agricul¬ 
 tural territory, with wheat as the most important crop in southern Wis¬ 
 consin and Michigan and northern Illinois. From central Ohio, west to 
 central Iowa and western Missouri, com was the leading grain crop and 
 hogs and cattle were the dominating livestock, though sheep and horses 
 
 1 Cultivator, X (1843), p. 113. 
 
 2 U. S. Patent Office, Annual Report 1845, p. 311. 
 
 3 Cultivator, new series, VII (1850), p. 358. 
 
 4 Country Gentleman, XI (1858), p. 33. 
 
 6 Caird, Prairie Farming in America, 93. 
 
 30 
 
450 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 were also widely distributed. Southern Michigan and eastern Ohio were 
 the wool-growing centers of the West. Milch cows and butter produc¬ 
 tion were as widely distributed as the population of the West, but the cheese 
 industry was scarcely known West of northeastern Ohio. The agriculture of 
 the West was characterized by the exploitation of the soil and by the produc¬ 
 tion of those crops and classes of livestock which could be most successfully 
 marketed. Beyond the limits of railway and water transportation, livestock 
 production predominated and in a large measure a self-sufficing agriculture 
 was practiced. Wheat enough for bread and wool enough for clothing were 
 commonly raised, and the pioneer housewife of this period usually knew how 
 to spin the yarn and weave the cloth worn by her family. 
 
 THE TRANSFORMATION OF EASTERN AGRICULTURE. 
 
 The agriculture of the East had been transformed. Hay was the leading 
 farm crop in i860. Wheat, corn, hogs, beef cattle, and sheep had been gener¬ 
 ally found unprofitable under conditions of western competition, though the 
 
 Fig. 113.—Improved land, 1850. Each dot represents 25,000 acres. 
 
 sheep industry was still important in the Berkshire hills of New England and 
 in western New York. Northeastern Ohio and southern Michigan had become 
 the most important sheep regions by i860. Wheat was still a leading crop 
 in southeastern Pennsylvania and in northwestern New York. Potatoes were 
 grown throughout the country, with the most concentrated area of production 
 on Long Island. The production of tobacco was developing in the Connecticut 
 Valley. Hops were a leading crop in the vicinity of Otsego County, New 
 York. Dairying based upon hay and pasture dominated the agriculture of the 
 East in i860, with whole milk, butter, and cheese as the sources of income. 
 
NORTHERN AGRICULTURE IN i860 
 
 451 
 
 In both the East and the West agricultural production had been greatly 
 facilitated during the two decades by the introduction of improved machin¬ 
 ery. The rapid development of the prairie region would have been impos¬ 
 sible without the simultaneous development of agricultural machinery. The 
 reaper, the mower, and the corn cultivator contributed largely to the more 
 efficient use of agricultural labor. The development of railroads and other 
 means of transportation, and in the East the rise of an urban population, were 
 
 Fig. i 14.— Improved land, i860. Each dot represents 25,000 acres. 
 
 During the fifties the acreage of improved land in the states east of Ohio 
 increased but little; in the West there was a rapid increase. In Wisconsin, 
 Iowa and Illinois the improved acreage nearly trebled. It was comparatively 
 easy to convert wild prairie land into improved land. 
 
 constantly developing new markets, and as markets widened there was a 
 tendency for agriculture to become more commercial in nature. Increasing 
 attention was given in the East to the production of those products for which 
 a market was available and in the West to those which would stand shipment 
 to a distant market. The prairies were well adapted to commercial agricul¬ 
 ture. In the East much work which had formerly been done upon the farm 
 was now being done in the cities. More time was given to the production of 
 crops and livestock for market. The question of what was the most profitable 
 enterprise was therefore prominent. 
 
 CHANGES IN SELECTION OF FARM ENTERPRISES MORE 
 IMPORTANT THAN CHANGES IN CUL¬ 
 TURAL METHODS. 
 
 There was little change in the thoroughness of culture practised in the 
 West during the 20 years 1840 to i860. The development of prairie lands and 
 of harvesting machinery was conducive to extensive rather than to intensive 
 
452 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 agriculture. In this new region crop yields depended largely on the caprices 
 of nature. The pioneer farmer with small means and much land depended 
 more on season and less on culture than the farmer of the older agricultural 
 regions. 
 
 In the East there was considerable agitation, and something was accom¬ 
 plished in the way of improved methods of culture. The teachings of Jesse 
 Buel and John Johnson were being slowly taken up. Farm buildings were 
 being made more substantial. The quality of livestock was steadily improving. 
 A more or less definite cropping system with the use of clover and manure had 
 become rather generally adopted in the Northeastern States before i860. In 
 southeastern Pennsylvania, where the improved method of cropping had be¬ 
 come well established by 1840, there was little change from 1840 to i860 in 
 the type of agriculture followed. The use of commercial fertilizer was steadily 
 increasing, especially in the border States. The reorganization of agriculture 
 in the East, however, was brought about by a change in the crops produced 
 rather than by changes in thoroughness of culture. 
 
 The 20 years from 1840 to i860 were a period of great uncertainty in 
 the selection of farm enterprises in the older settled districts as well as in 
 the new. The farmers who occupied the new territory had to experiment for 
 themselves. The Vermont farmer who moved into Wisconsin or Illinois in 
 the early forties frequently brought with him the nucleus for a flock of sheep. 
 The Connecticut farmer brought with him the knowledge of cheese-making, 
 and the Orange County farmer his churn. But the markets for these prod¬ 
 ucts were limited during the forties and fifties and nearly all western farmers 
 turned their energies in the main to wheat or corn, hogs or cattle, whichever 
 seemed for a time to be the most profitable. Wool-growing was tried on the 
 prairies but did not prove successful. The production of fruit, hemp, and 
 silk were all tried and abandoned. 
 
 Natural conditions of soil and climate, as well as economic conditions, such 
 as the want of capital, scarcity of labor, and want of markets, were influen¬ 
 tial in determining the choice of enterprises. But whenever a branch of agri¬ 
 cultural production, such as wheat, wool or beef, proved profitable in the West 
 and poured its supplies into the eastern markets, it became necessary for 
 the eastern farmer to find some other line of production, and, fortunately 
 for the eastern farmer, the development of an urban population made this 
 possible. The uncertainty in the choice of farm enterprises was stimulating 
 to thought. It tended to make the agriculture of the period rational rather 
 than traditional. It stimulated the development of the agricultural press 
 and paved the way for the establishment of agricultural education. 
 
NORTHERN AGRICULTURE IN i860 
 
 453 
 
 1 able 64 .—Improved land: Area in the United States. 
 [Source: U. S. Censuses of 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division and 
 State. 
 
 United States . 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 New England . 
 
 Middle Atlantic . 
 
 East North Central... 
 West North Central.. 
 
 Mountain . 
 
 Pacific . 
 
 New England: 
 
 Maine . 
 
 New Hampshire .... 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 New York . 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 Dakota Territory 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 Mountain: 
 
 New Mexico . 
 
 Utah . 
 
 Nevada . 
 
 Pacific: 
 
 Washington . 
 
 Oregon . 
 
 California . 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 1000 
 acres. 
 
 * Per 
 capita 
 acres. 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 Total 1000 
 acres. 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 acres. 
 
 113,033 
 
 4.9 
 
 100.0 
 
 163,111 
 
 5-2 
 
 11,151 
 
 4.1 
 
 9.9 
 
 12,216 
 
 3-9 
 
 22,8o6 
 
 3 9 
 
 20.2 
 
 26,766 
 
 3-6 
 
 22,912 
 
 5 -i 
 
 20.3 
 
 41,186 
 
 5-9 
 
 3,768 
 
 4-3 
 
 3-3 
 
 11,122 
 
 5 -i 
 
 183 
 
 2.5 
 
 .2 
 
 241 
 
 1.4 
 
 165 
 
 1.6 
 
 .1 
 
 3,446 
 
 7-8 
 
 2,040 
 
 3-5 
 
 1.8 
 
 2,704 
 
 4-3 
 
 2,252 
 
 7-1 
 
 2.0 
 
 2,367 
 
 7-3 
 
 2,601 
 
 8-3 
 
 2.3 
 
 2,823 
 
 9.0 
 
 2,133 
 
 2.1 
 
 1.9 
 
 2,156 
 
 1.8 
 
 357 
 
 2.4 
 
 •3 
 
 335 
 
 1.9 
 
 1,768 
 
 4.8 
 
 1.6 
 
 1,831 
 
 4.0 
 
 12,409 
 
 4.0 
 
 11.0 
 
 14,358 
 
 3-7 
 
 1.768 
 
 3-6 
 
 1.6 
 
 i ,945 
 
 2.9 
 
 8,629 
 
 3-7 
 
 7.6 
 
 10463 
 
 3-6 
 
 9,851 
 
 5-0 
 
 8-7 
 
 12,626 
 
 54 
 
 5,047 
 
 5 -i 
 
 4-5 
 
 8,242 
 
 6.1 
 
 5,040 
 
 5-9 
 
 4-5 
 
 13,096 
 
 7.6 
 
 1,929 
 
 4-9 
 
 1.7 
 
 3,476 
 
 4.6 
 
 1,045 
 
 34 
 
 •9 
 
 3,746 
 
 4.8 
 
 5 
 
 .8 
 
 - - - T T 
 
 556 
 
 3-2 
 
 825 
 
 4-3 
 
 •7 
 
 3,793 
 
 5-6 
 
 2,938 
 
 4-3 
 
 2.6 
 
 6,247 
 
 5-3 
 
 . 
 
 
 . 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 . 
 
 ... 
 
 
 119 
 
 4.1 
 
 
 • • • 
 
 . 
 
 405 
 
 3-8 
 
 166 
 
 2.7 
 
 # 2 
 
 150 
 
 1.6 
 
 17 
 
 1.4 
 
 
 77 
 
 1.9 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 14 
 
 2.1 
 
 
 
 
 82 
 
 7 .i 
 
 133 
 
 10.0 
 
 .1 
 
 896 
 
 17.1 
 
 32 
 
 4 
 
 
 2,468 
 
 6-5 
 
 Per cent 
 of U. S. 
 total. 
 
 100.0 
 
 7-5 
 
 16.4 
 
 25.2 
 
 6.8 
 
 .1 
 
 2.1 
 
 i -7 
 
 14 
 
 i -7 
 
 C3 
 
 .2 
 
 1.2 
 
 8.8 
 
 1.2 
 6.4 
 
 7-7 
 
 5 -i 
 
 8.0 
 
 2.1 
 
 2.3 
 
 3 
 
 23 
 
 3-8 
 
 .1 
 
 •3 
 
 .1 
 
 .1 
 
 ITj IT) 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHICAL AIDS. 
 
 Two bibliographies of agricultural history prepared in connection with the 
 teaching of college courses on the subject have recently been published. Pro¬ 
 fessor Schmidt’s Topical Studies and References on the Economic History 
 of American Agriculture , has a classified list of monographs and general 
 secondary works, but is of little assistance in discovering the widely scattered 
 source materials. Part III of Professor Trimble s Introductory Manual for 
 the Study and Reading of Agrarian History is devoted to the United States. 
 It is of the same character as Schmidt’s work, but with less attention to tech¬ 
 nical bibliographical details. From Miss Hasse’s monumental Index of Eco¬ 
 nomic Material in the Docmnents of the States of the United States references 
 may be obtained on the early history of agricultural societies and on early 
 experiments in State aid to farmers. In general, however, State documents 
 contain but little information on agricultural afifairs before 1840. The general 
 historical bibliography of Channing, Hart, and Turner can be used to advan¬ 
 tage, particularly their lists of travels and of local history. The local history 
 of Massachusetts is given more extended treatment in Flagg’s Guide to Massa¬ 
 chusetts Local History . An excellent bibliography of Maine covering its 
 history to 1870 is the Descriptive Catalogue of Willis. Griffin’s Bibliography 
 of Historical Publications of the New England States and Bibliography of 
 American Historical Societies save a vast amount of labor in gleaning the rare 
 articles of agricultural interest from these voluminous publications. In Win- 
 sor’s America, , vols. Ill, IV, and V are excellent critical essays on general 
 historical sources for New England and the Middle Colonies in the Seven¬ 
 teenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Tuckerman’s America and her Commen¬ 
 tators provides critical material on travelers’ accounts. A partial and not 
 altogether accurate bibliography of early agricultural journals is contained in 
 a monograph by Gilbert M. Tucker, American Agricultural Periodicals. 
 
 GENERAL COLLECTIONS OF SOURCES. 
 
 PUBLIC RECORDS AND STATUTES. 
 
 The source material for the early history of American agriculture is not of 
 a specialized nature, but is scattered widely in the source materials of our 
 general and political history. Consequently, the worker in the narrower field 
 finds the general collections of sources indispensable. In the seventeenth and 
 eighteenth centuries colonial official records contain a wide variety of material 
 of importance to the student of agricultural history, such as the provisions 
 of early legislation regarding land tenure, the regulation of wages and prices, 
 restrictions on imports and exports of grain and other products, the regula¬ 
 tion of common pastures, etc. In addition, the colonial records contain reports 
 from governors and investigating commissions, which, although generally 
 
 454 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 455 
 
 chiefly concerned with commerce and manufactures, yet throw much light 
 incidentally on the kinds of crops and livestock raised and the extent to 
 which farm products entered into colonial trade. The colonial records of 
 Massachusetts Bay and the Plymouth Colonies, of Rhode Island, New Haven, 
 Connecticut, and New York have been found particularly valuable. For New 
 York we have not only the Colonial Laws, but the two collections edited by 
 O Callaghan, Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of 
 New York and Documentary History of New York, in which official records 
 of all kinds are accessible in convenient arrangement. In the latter work the 
 tax lists of a number of Long Island towns for 1675 an d 1676 are a unique 
 source for the study of seventeenth century farming. 
 
 The Documents Relating to the Colonial History of New Jersey are in 
 general disappointing. For the latter State Learning and Spicer’s Grants and 
 Concessions of New Jersey presents the conditions of land settlement. In the 
 Pennsylvania Archives there is little material of agricultural interest, except 
 the volumes of series 3 (vols. XI-XXII) containing tax lists of a number 
 of counties for various dates between 1765 and 1786. The great English 
 collection of colonial material, the Calender of State Papers, Colonial Series, 
 contains many items not found in our colonial papers, especially documents 
 dealing with the exchange of agricultural products between the West Indian 
 and the continental colonies. 
 
 In New England, town records, containing principally the minutes of town 
 meetings, have in many cases been preserved and published. The Records 
 Relating to the Early History of Boston, which contain the records of a num¬ 
 ber of formerly independent townships are a particularly good example of this 
 type of source material. Land distribution and the regulation of common 
 lands are the chief topics of agricultural interest. 
 
 PRIVATE COLLECTIONS OF SOURCES. 
 
 A general view of the problems of American agriculture, 1765-1865, and 
 its relation to our economic development is presented in the source materials 
 reprinted by Callender in his Selections and in his masterly introductory 
 essays. Thwaites’s Early Western Travels brings together in well-edited form 
 the more important narratives describing pioneer life west of the Alleghenies 
 in the early national period. For the study of the seventeenth century, the 
 collections of Myers and of Jameson covering the earliest settlements in the 
 Middle Colonies are indispensable. Of almost equal value for New England 
 is Young’s Chronicles of Massachusetts. 
 
 PUBLICATIONS OF HISTORICAL SOCIETIES. 
 
 In the Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society is contained 
 much source material on early New England which would otherwise be 
 difficult or impossible of access, such as letters and reprints of rare pamphlets 
 dealing with the history of the first settlements. The short historical sketches 
 and descriptions of towns which are found in this collection, and in those of 
 the Maine and New Hampshire societies, often contain valuable facts regard¬ 
 ing agricultural conditions, particularly of the later eighteenth and early 
 nineteenth centuries. The New York Historical Society’s Collections, the 
 
456 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Memoirs of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, and the Pennsylvania 
 Magazine of History and Biography contain personal papers, journals, and 
 diaries, mostly of political significance, but among them occasionally a first¬ 
 hand description of economic conditions. In winnowing the grain of agricul¬ 
 tural material from the chaff of political and military history, the machinery 
 of Griffin’s bibliography is of great assistance. 
 
 Among the newer societies, the Colonial Society of Massachusetts and the 
 Ohio State Archselogical and Historical Society have not only reprinted rare 
 material, but have published a number of monographs in economic history 
 which include considerable agricultural data. 
 
 GENERAL SECONDARY WORKS. 
 
 There are no sketches of agricultural progress in the general histories of our 
 country, although a few historians, notably McMaster, have given attention 
 to agricultural affairs in the north in their discussions of economic conditions. 
 A general orientation in the subject of our agricultural history before the 
 Civil War is furnished by Flint, in his article Progress in Agriculture pub¬ 
 lished in Kettell’s Eighty Years’ Progress. More extended and systematic 
 treatment of the changes in American farming from earliest times to the 
 beginning of the twentieth century is found in Professor T. N. Carver’s 
 Historical Sketch of American Agriculture, in volume IV of Bailey’s Cyclo¬ 
 pedia of American Agriculture. The introduction to the volume on agricul¬ 
 ture in the reports of the Census of i860 contains many valuable facts re¬ 
 garding the introduction of agricultural machinery and the development of 
 internal trade in livestock and grain. 
 
 THE AGRICULTURE OF THE EARLIEST SETTLEMENTS. 
 
 SOURCES. 
 
 NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 The agricultural information in the colonial and town records refers prin¬ 
 cipally to the distribution of land, the conditions of land tenure, and also the 
 regulatory activities of the legislative bodies in fixing wages and prices. There 
 are two valuable official reports which contain information regarding economic 
 conditions in New England colonies, the Narrative of the Commissioners 
 (1665) and Randolph’s Narrative (1676). Of a semi-official character are the 
 writings of the leading men in the Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth Colonies, 
 Johnson’s Wonder-Working Providence, Winthrop’s Journal, and Bradford’s 
 History of Plymouth Plantation. They set down from personal observation 
 the facts of the struggle of the earliest settlers with the soil. Two valuable 
 descriptions of the early settlements containing agricultural data are Wood’s 
 New England’s Prospect (1634) and Maverick’s Briefe Description of New 
 England (1660). Josselyn’s Account of Two Voyages to New England must 
 be used with care. Although not accounted as thoroughly reliable in handling 
 of historical events, Captain John Smith recorded a few valuable observations 
 in his Advertisements. Two source accounts of Indian agriculture in New 
 England are Roger Williams’s Key to the Indian Language, and Winthrop’s 
 Description of Maize. 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 457 
 
 MIDDLE COLONIES. 
 
 The earliest agricultural experiments of the Dutch settlers in New Nether¬ 
 lands are described in Jameson’s well-edited collection of source materials. 
 The best accounts are contained in the Letter of Isaak De Rasieres (1628), 
 the Letter of Rev. Jonas Michaelius (1628), and in the Representation of 
 A czv Netherland (1650). More extensive and perhaps more accurate than 
 these selections is the work of Van Tienhoven ( Information Relative to Tak¬ 
 ing up Land in New Netherland ), who in 1650 was secretary of the province. 
 An equally good source is Van der Donck’s Description of the New Nether¬ 
 land, written by the Sheriff of Rensselaerswyck in 1656. After the English 
 conquest, when settlement had expanded to Long Island and the mainland, 
 we have Denton’s Brief Description, written in 1670, after a residence of over 
 a quarter of a century. Two keen observers, Dankers and Sluyter, recorded a 
 number of significant facts regarding farming near New York in their Journal 
 of 1679-1680. 
 
 The earliest agricultural struggles of settlements on the Delaware, in the 
 colony of New Sweden, are described in official reports of two of its gov¬ 
 ernors, Johan Printz and Johan Rising. For the later English settlements in 
 New Jersey, the best source is Scot’s Model of the Government of East New 
 Jersey (1685), which contains many letters from Scotch colonists. A number 
 of pamphlets were issued by the trustees and proprietors of the provinces of 
 East and West New Jersey with the purpose of stimulating immigration. 
 Such were The Present State of the Colony of West Jersey (1681) and 
 Brief Account of East Jersey (1687). The natural bias of the authors must 
 be kept in mind in using this material. William Penn was a vigorous “ pro¬ 
 moter ” of his province and wrote a number of descriptive tracts, the most 
 valuable of which are the Letter to the Committee of the Free Society of 
 Traders (1683) an d the Further Account of the Province of Pennsylvania 
 (1685). The Letter of Thomas Paschall gives a clear picture of pioneering 
 in the first few months of the establishment of Penn’s colony. Budd, a man of 
 importance in West Jersey, describes more settled farming in his Good Order 
 Established in Pennsylvania and New Jersey (1685). A more ambitious 
 undertaking than any of the above-mentioned pamphlets was the Historical 
 and Geographical Account of Gabriel Thomas (1698). Although written to 
 incite immigration, it is reliable for statements of fact within the author’s 
 own experience. A similar observation might be made regarding the Circum¬ 
 stantial Geographical Description of Pastorius (1700). The author, an agent 
 of the Frankfort Land Company, was well versed in the agricultural science of 
 his day. 
 
 SECONDARY WORKS—MONOGRAPHS AND ARTICLES. 
 
 An excellent study of the farm practices of the American Indians is that 
 of G. K. Plolmes in Bailey’s, Cyclopedia . The agriculture of New England 
 natives is described by Willoughby in his article in the American Anthropolo¬ 
 gist. Two studies which bear on the struggles of the earliest New England 
 settlers to get a living from the soil are Goodale’s New England Plants Seen 
 by the Earliest Colonists and Goss’s The Hungry Pilgrims. On the physiog- 
 
458 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 raphy of the region, in which the first settlements were made, Shaler’s United 
 States and his Physiography of North America are valuable. Bulletin p6 of 
 the Bureau of Soils of the U. S. Department of Agriculture has a good map 
 showing the distribution of various kinds of soils. The text, however, is 
 rather too technical for any but experts in that field. 
 
 The terms on which settlers acquired land have been given thorough discus¬ 
 sion in a number of monographs. In The Germanic Origin of New England 
 Towns Professor Adams attempted to show the derivation of the common 
 fields, and other features of the New England village community, from Teu¬ 
 tonic institutions. Other studies inspired by his genius are Andrew’s River 
 Towns of Connecticut and Egleston’s Land System of the New England 
 Colonies. MacLear’s Early New England Towns has a chapter on land tenure 
 based on the study of town records of five towns near Boston. Studies of the 
 common pastures in localities where they persisted into the nineteenth century 
 are Worth’s Nantucket Lands and Land Owners, Jameson’s Nantuck and 
 Common Lands of Easthampton, and Sheldon’s The Common Field of Deer¬ 
 field. Local histories of New England often devote considerable attention to 
 the description of the laying out of the town, with maps showing the arrange¬ 
 ments of home lots and common fields. Among these are Burt’s Springfield 
 {Massachusetts ), Clark’s Sturbridge {Massachusetts) , Green’s Early Land 
 Grants of Groton, Love’s Hartford {Connecticut ) and Steiner’s Guilford 
 {Connecticut). 
 
 For the district in New Jersey where New England methods of settlement 
 prevailed we have Hatfield’s Elizabeth, Atkinson’s Newark, and Daily’s 
 Woodbridge. 
 
 The characteristic features of land tenure in New Netherland are described 
 in Elting’s Dutch Village Communities on the Hudson River. The Province 
 of New Jersey, by Edwin Tanner, has two chapters devoted to the land system 
 of a proprietary colony. Ballagh’s Introduction to Southern Economic History 
 contains a preliminary discussion of land tenure in the northern colonies. 
 Perhaps the most valuable work in this field for the student of agricultural 
 history is Osgood’s American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, which con¬ 
 tains a thorough analysis of the land systems of the New England and the 
 Middle Colonies, with contrasts, comparisons, and sound generalizations. 
 
 EIGHTEENTH CENTURY AGRICULTURE. 
 
 SOURCES. 
 
 SPECIAL WORKS. 
 
 Jared Eliot’s Essays on Field Husbandry in New England, a collection of 
 six essays published in the years 1749 to 1759, was the first American work 
 on agriculture. As the author, the minister at Killingworth, Connecticut, 
 states in his preface, the book was not “an Account of what we do in our 
 present Husbandry, but rather what we might do to our advantage.” Never¬ 
 theless, it contains many valuable comments on prevailing practices, based on 
 close acquaintance with the habits of farmers in Connecticut. 
 
 In 1775, American Husbandry , a book of two volumes, appeared anony¬ 
 mously in London. It was then and is now the best account of the economic 
 conditions in general, and agricultural affairs in particular, of the English 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 459 
 
 colonies in America. Writing with clear and vigorous directness, the author 
 describes the soil, climate, agricultural practices, and products of each colony, 
 from Nova Scotia to the West Indies. He was evidently a man of scientific 
 training, familiar from personal observation with the agriculture of Virginia 
 and Maryland, who had also visited Pennsylvania and probably New England. 
 In a recent review of American Husbandry / Mr. Lyman Carrier has claimed 
 its authorship for Dr. John Mitchell, an English physician, naturalist, and 
 historian, who spent part of his life in Virginia. 
 
 William Strickland’s Observations on the Agriculture of the United States 
 of America, a pamphlet of 74 pages published in 1801, was also the work of 
 an Englishman. Strickland traveled in this country in 1793 and 1794, collect¬ 
 ing information for the English Board of Agriculture, principally in regard 
 to land values, tenancy, and wages. Richard Peters 1 2 said of him that he paid 
 more attention to truth and accuracy than most travelers, but that he had 
 some prejudices and was occasionally misinformed. Another source of infor¬ 
 mation which we owe to English interest in American agriculture is the 
 correspondence between George Washington and Arthur Young and Sir John 
 Sinclair ( Letters on Agriculture, etc). In response to a request for detailed 
 information on American conditions, Washington in 1791 circulated a ques¬ 
 tionnaire among prominent farmers in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia, 
 the answers to which he transmitted to England. The facts thus obtained were 
 detailed, but limited to only a few farms. Dr. Tilton’s Present State of Hus¬ 
 bandry and Agriculture in the State of Delaware (1789) contains detailed 
 answers to 44 queries from Abbe Tessier of France, transmitted through the 
 Philadelphia Agricultural Society. Crevecoeur’s Letters from an American 
 Farmer (1782) supply an idealized picture of pioneer life in Pennsylvania 
 and New York. They are valuable rather for their charming literary style than 
 for the information which they supply regarding typical farm practice. 
 
 OFFICIAL RECORDS. 
 
 The published records of the various colonies afford little information on 
 eighteenth century agriculture. Facts regarding trade in agricultural produce 
 are contained in the occasional official reports of colonial governors. State aid 
 and regulation appears in statutes regarding sheep, flax, hemp, and barberries. 
 The county tax lists published in the Pennsylvania Archives are m effect a 
 partial agricultural census, showing the size of individual farms and the num¬ 
 ber of several kinds of stock kept on each. The tax lists of Massachusetts 
 for the years 1767, 1801, and 1811, preserved in conveniently accessible form 
 in the State House in Boston, show by townships the acreage of farm land 
 of various kinds, livestock kept, and crops harvested. Connecticut tax lists, 
 also unpublished, are available in an almost continuous series from 1796 to 
 1840, showing by counties the acreage of several kinds of farm land and the 
 number of horses, mules and cattle. 
 
 1 American Society of Agronomy, Journal, XI (1919), pp. 206-211. More extended 
 
 treatment of Mitchell’s life and works is given in an article by Mr. Carrier in the 
 American Historical Association’s Annual Report for 1918, pp. 219. 
 
 2 Philadelphia Society for Promoting Agriculture, Memoirs, I (1808), p. 161. 
 
460 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 PRIVATE RECORDS. 
 
 Not many farmers kept account books or diaries, but occasionally a clergy¬ 
 man’s journal of daily activities has been preserved, in which the records of 
 farming operations are interspersed with parish and personal items. Such are 
 the Journals (1725 to 1814) of Rev. Thomas Smith and Rev. Samuel Deane, 
 of Portland, Maine, the Diaries (1746 to 1780) of Rev. Timothy Walker, 
 of Concord, New Hampshire, and the Letter Book (i 743 I 75 I ) R ev * 
 
 James McSparran, of South Kingston, Rhode Island. Miss Hazard’s College 
 Tom is based on the account book (1750 to 1789) of Thomas Hazard, a 
 large-scale farmer of the Narragansett country. Occasionally a manuscript 
 account book showing farming operations comes to light. Such is the Ac¬ 
 count Book of Rev. Medad Rogers, the minister of New Fairfield, Connecticut, 
 covering the years 1789 to 1822. 
 
 BOOKS OF TRAVEL. 
 
 In the latter half of the eighteenth century, particularly after the end of 
 the Revolutionary War, a large number of European travelers visited the 
 older settlements in the North and recorded their impressions in books of 
 travel. Such books are of widely varying value to the student of agricultural 
 history. Many may be discarded as worthless because of the manifest unre¬ 
 liability of the author, or because of his lack of interest in economic condi¬ 
 tions. The works of a few are valuable, but their observations the reader must 
 use with care, discriminating between hearsay and first-hand material, and 
 between facts which were exceptional and those which were typical. Per 
 Kalm, a Swedish botanist well-qualified as an observer, visited us in 1748-1750 
 and recorded his comments on our farming, chiefly of the Middle Colonies, 
 in his Travels. Another trained scientist, a botanist and mineralogist, was 
 Johan David Schoepf, who left the record of journeys through New Jersey, 
 Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and nine southern colonies in his Travels 
 in the Confederation (1783-84). Among the French travelers of the late 
 eighteenth century, the work of La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt has by far the 
 greatest merit. His Travels Through the United States of North America 
 ( 1 795) shows a deep interest in economic conditions and painstaking accur¬ 
 acy in observation and recording of details. Weld’s Travels (i 795 _I 797 )> 
 the work of an Irish refugee looking for a suitable place for colonization, 
 contain many facts of an economic character. 
 
 Among the observers in more limited areas, Timothy Dwight has left the 
 best records. His Travels in New England and New York was compiled from 
 voluminous notes taken during horseback journeys in college vacations be¬ 
 tween 1796 and 1815. The President of Yale College and one of the best edu¬ 
 cated men of his day, Dwight not only saw truly and recorded carefully, but 
 he was also intent upon knowing the causes of the conditions he observed, as 
 witnesses his interest in the relation of the barberry to the rust in wheat. 
 Richard Smith’s Journal (1769) is a first-class source on frontier farming 
 on the Mohawk and upper Delaware Rivers. Acrelius’s New Sweden ( 1759 ) 
 gives careful treatment of the farming of the lower Delaware, based on the 
 personal observations of the author. Rush's Account of the German Inhabi¬ 
 tants of Pennsylvania (1789) contains the observations of a scientist, a close 
 observer keenly interested in agriculture. 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 461 
 
 SECONDARY MATERIAL. 
 
 SPECIAL WORKS. 
 
 A general survey of colonial farming and farm life, with particular attention 
 to the middle and southern colonies, is to be found in Eggleston’s series of 
 articles in the Century Magazine (1883 to 1885). The author has evidently 
 used a wide variety of source materials, although few are cited, and shows a 
 clear appreciation of the influence of economic factors. Hedges’s Development 
 of Agriculture in Suffolk County and Onderdonk’s Ancient Agriculture in 
 Hempstead supply much information on the farming of Long Island in this 
 period. In Rural Economy in New England at the Beginning of the Nine¬ 
 teenth Century the author has discussed the influence of economic factors, 
 particularly the lack of markets, on the types of farming and on home and 
 community life. Phillips’s Horse Raising in Colonial New England is a 
 well-reasoned study based on a wide variety of source material. 
 
 LOCAL HISTORIES-NEW ENGLAND. 
 
 State and town histories often contain significant paragraphs, even chapters, 
 on economic conditions in the eighteenth century, including data on agricul¬ 
 ture. New England, on account of the strength of local feeling in that region, 
 is particularly rich in historical material. Of the many histories of New Eng¬ 
 land written in the eighteenth century, only one, Douglass’s British Settlements 
 in North America (1749), the work of a Boston physician, contains any 
 considerable amount of economic information. The author, a Scotchman by 
 birth, is so enamored of his adopted country that he often exaggerates its 
 merits. Among recent secondary works dealing with economic affairs, 
 Weeden’s Social and Economic History of New England (1620-1789) is the 
 most ambitious undertaking. It is based on a wide variety of source material 
 and includes many agricultural facts, but its arrangement is not designed to 
 give a clear picture of agricultural progress. 
 
 For Maine we have a number of valuable short sketches in the First Series 
 of the Collections of the Maine Historical Society, particularly those of 
 William Allen. North’s Augusta , and Wheeler’s Brunswick, of all the town 
 histories, devote most attention to agricultural affairs in this period. New 
 Hampshire agriculture, chiefly timber farming, is carefully and intelligently 
 discussed in the third volume of Belknap’s New Hampshire (1792). Two 
 town histories are of exceptional value, Hayward’s Hancock and Chase’s Old 
 Chester. Considerable information regarding pioneer conditions in Vermont 
 is to be found in the Appendix gf Allen’s Natural and Political History of the 
 State of Vermont (1798). 
 
 In Massachusetts, agricultural interests have received most attention in the 
 histories of towns of the Connecticut Valley. Of first rank is Judd’s Hadley , 
 a work based on a wealth of manuscript materials. Trumbull’s NortHampton 
 is to some extent based on Judd’s manuscript sources. Farming in the region 
 about Deerfield is described in articles by George Sheldon in the Pocumtuck 
 Valley Memorial Society’s History and Proceedings. Other less valuable 
 town histories of this region are Temple’s Whately and Temple and Sheldon’s 
 Northdeld. The rural life of an interior township is exceptionally well de¬ 
 scribed in Nourse’s Harvard and also in Bolton’s Shirley. Felt’s Ipswich, 
 
462 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Essex, and Hamilton contains a number of scattered facts concerning the 
 farming in coast towns. To understand the peculiar conditions of the island 
 of Nantucket, resulting from the competition of the maritime industries and 
 agriculture, one should read Obed Macy’s History of Nantucket (1835) and 
 the articles by Zacchaeus Macy and Walter Folger, jr., in volume III, first 
 series, Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society. A. scholarly study 
 of rural life, especially in its moral aspects, will be found in Charles Francis 
 
 Adams’s Braintree. 
 
 The Connecticut local histories are disappointing. Love’s Colonial History 
 of Hartford and Steiner’s Guilford deal rather fully with the land system 
 of the seventeenth century. Larned’s Windham County and Davis’s Walling¬ 
 ford have been found useful. Rhode Island material deals principally with 
 the Narragansett country. Macsparran’s Letter Book (i 743 “ I 75 I ) g ives a 
 day-by-day account of the varied activities of a minister of the Church of 
 England, including his farming. Updike’s History of the Episcopal Church in 
 Narragansett gives an exceptionally good picture of the aristocratic rural life 
 and the large-scale grazing and dairy industry in that district in the eighteenth 
 century. Channing’s monograph, The Narragansett Planters, analyzes the 
 causes of the peculiar agricultural conditions in the locality and shows their 
 bearing 011 local politics. Weeden’s Early Rhode Island is concerned with 
 townspeople rather than with farmers. 
 
 MIDDLE COLONIES. 
 
 There is little information to be derived regarding eighteenth century agri¬ 
 culture from local histories of New York, except those dealing with Long 
 Island, a somewhat exceptional area. Source material is provided in Gardiner’s 
 Notes on East Hampton. Wood’s Sketch has valuable data regarding the 
 earliest settlements. Onderdonk s Queens County in Olden Times has a few 
 items regarding eighteenth century farming. Gabriel s Evolution . of Long 
 Island is a scholarly work, tracing the economic (principally agricultural) 
 development of the island. The general History of the Province of New York. 
 of Smith (1762) gives a few facts on agricultural affairs in the various 
 
 counties. 
 
 For New Jersey, secondary material is very poor. The agriculture of older 
 counties of Pennsylvania has received considerable attention in a number of 
 local histories. The best of these are: Ashmead’s Delaware County, Futhey 
 and Cope’s Chester County, Ellis and Evans’s Lancaster County, and Watson’s 
 Account of Buckingham and Solebury, Bucks County. 
 
 WESTWARD EXPANSION. 
 
 SOURCES—TRAVELS, JOURNALS, AND RECOLLECTIONS. 
 
 Almost our only records of pioneer farming in the West which can be 
 called source material are the books of travel and personal recollections. 
 Doddridge’s Notes (1763-1783) have a splendid account of backwoods life 
 in western Virginia and Pennsylvania. Michaux, in his Travels (1805), com¬ 
 mented intelligently on farming on either side of the Ohio. Evans, a “ queer ’ 
 New Englander, has scanty but thoughtful remarks on the farming of Western 
 New York and Ohio in his Pedestrious Tour (1818). James Flint’s Letters 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 463 
 
 from America (1818-1820) is one of the best accounts of the old Northwest 
 by a fair-minded observer with keen appreciation of economic factors. Ford- 
 hanrs Personal Narrative (1817-1818) also shows a scientific spirit and is 
 reckoned as a reliable authority. Faux, an English farmer, set down some 
 penetrating comments amid much that was sensational and prejudiced. 
 
 Enthusiastic accounts, probably somewhat exaggerated, of the merits of 
 western New York as a farming country are found in the Account of the 
 Genessee 1 ract (i 79 r )> in Imlay’s Western Territory, and in the Description 
 of the Settlement of the Genessee Country, 1792, in O’Callaghan’s Documen¬ 
 tary History of New York. Maude’s Visit to the Falls of Niagara in 1800 
 is reliable for statements of things coming under his immediate observation. 
 'I he Journal of Judah Colt (1789-1808) gives an interesting account of the 
 daily work of a pioneer farmer. William Cooper, a pioneer farmer and 
 
 founder of Cooperstown, New York, describes the early life of his settlement 
 in the Guide in the Wilderness (1810). 
 
 For Ohio, the Recollections of W. C. Howells (edited by his son, William 
 Dean Howells) contains a vivid account of the life of a farm boy in the years 
 1813 to 1840. Rural home and community life about 1830 are described in 
 detail in Welker’s Farm Life in Central Ohio. Atwater’s History of the State 
 of Ohio (1838) quotes facts and contemporary opinion regarding agriculture. 
 The Valley of the Upper Wabash, written in 1838 by Henry W. Ellsworth, the 
 son of our first head of the Patent Office, “ booms ” prairie farming. A good 
 selection of source material on pioneer life is contained in the Readings in 
 Indiana History, published by Indiana University. 
 
 For Illinois we have an excellent survey of economic conditions in Buck’s 
 Illinois in 1818, a scholarly work with many references to authorities. John 
 Reynolds, a former governor of the State, recorded agricultural facts among 
 his memories of pioneer life in My Own Times. Wood’s Two Years Residence 
 in the Illinois Country contains a concise account of agricultural practices, 
 products, soil, etc. The History of the English Settlement in Edwards County, 
 by George Flower, Richard Flower’s Letters from Lexington and the Illinois 
 and Letters from the Illinois, and Birbeck’s Letters from the Illinois tell the 
 story of an unsuccessful attempt about the year 1820 to colonize the frontier 
 with English immigrants. The Report of Gottfried Duden, which Professor 
 Bek has translated, gives a comprehensive and substantially accurate account 
 of conditions in eastern Missouri. 
 
 SECONDARY MATERIAL. 
 
 The best general survey of the westward movement is given in Professor 
 Turner’s Rise of the New West and in his article Colonization of the West 
 (1820-1830), in the American Historical Review (1905-1906). Miss Mathews 
 has traced the northern stream of emigration in her Expansion of New Eng¬ 
 land. Roosevelt’s Winning of the West describes the passing of the southern 
 frontier folk across the mountains, giving an excellent account of backwoods 
 life at the end of the eighteenth century. 
 
 SPECIAL STUDIES. 
 
 Descriptions of the physiographic features of the Ohio Valley, with discus¬ 
 sions of their influence on agriculture, are to be found in Shaler’s United 
 
464 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 States, Bowman’s Forest Physiography, and Brigham’s Geographic Influences 
 in American History. Monographic studies of the national land system are 
 Treat’s National Land System (1785-1820) and Sato’s Land Question in the 
 United States. A mass of facts, poorly arranged, regarding the public lands 
 is contained in Donaldson’s Public Domain. 
 
 On the development of internal trade in the West there is an admirable 
 chapter in Callender’s Selections. Statistics of the West, by James Hall 
 (1836), has much information on trade in agricultural products. The best 
 official source is Andrews’s Report of 1854. A good historical survey of the 
 commerce of the Mississippi and Ohio is found in the Report on the Internal 
 Commerce of the United States for 1887. Helpful monographs are Benton’s 
 Wabash Trade Route and Gephart’s Transportation and Industrial Develop¬ 
 ment in the Middle West. A particularly interesting feature of internal 
 trade, the eastward droving of western cattle, is discussed in King’s Coming 
 and Going of Ohio Droving and in Renick’s article, Cattle Trade of the Scioto 
 Valley. Lippincott’s Pioneer Industry in the West shows the importance of 
 household industries in pioneer agriculture. 
 
 A few historical sketches have been written of agriculture in Middle West¬ 
 ern States. C. W. Burkett’s History of Ohio Agriculture has but little mate¬ 
 rial on the period before 1840. Conner’s Indiana Agriculture is brief but 
 definite. Flagg’s article, Agriculture of Illinois, in the Transactions of the Illi¬ 
 nois Department of Agriculture for 1875, is a good historical sketch. Mum- 
 ford’s Century of Missouri Agriculture draws largely from Duden’s Report 
 in discussing conditions before i860. The beginnings of agriculture in Michi¬ 
 gan are summarized in Adam’s Agriculture in Michigan. A few scattered 
 bits of agricultural history are also to be found in Fuller’s Economic and 
 Social Beginnings of Michigan. 
 
 AGRICULTURAL PROGRESS IN THE EAST, 1800 - 1840 . 
 
 SOURCES. 
 
 PERIODICALS-AGRICULTURAL AND GENERAL. 
 
 Farm papers are one of the most valuable sources of information for 
 changes occurring in the years 1820 to 1840. Of especial value are the letters 
 from contributors and the market news. (A fuller discussion and list of 
 agricultural periodicals published before 1840 is found in Chapter XIV, 
 p. 193). Of the general periodicals, Niles’s Weekly Register (1811-1849) 
 seems to have given the most attention to agricultural affairs, printing contri¬ 
 butions from many widely separated localities. Semiweekly and weekly news¬ 
 papers containing prices of agricultural produce are Boston Gazette, Boston 
 Weekly Messenger, Boston Patriot, and New York Shipping and Commercial 
 List. 
 
 STATE DOCUMENTS. 
 
 The publications of the two earliest State boards of agriculture, the Memoirs 
 of the New York board and the New Hampshire Repository, help to recon¬ 
 struct a picture of farming practices of 1820 in those States. With the aid of 
 Miss Hasse’s Index a number of short articles of a historical nature may be 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 465 
 
 discovered in the Transactions of State agricultural societies and Annual Re¬ 
 ports of the State boards of agriculture and in Reports of legislative commit¬ 
 tees. The documents of Maine, Massachusetts, and New York yield most. 
 
 Reports of unique value are those of the Agricultural Survey of Massachu¬ 
 setts, prepared by Henry Colman, in the years 1838 to 1841. They deal thor¬ 
 oughly, even minutely, with farm practice and household economy in four 
 counties, Essex, Berkshire, Middlesex, and Franklin. Colman collected mate¬ 
 rial by questionnaires and by personal visits to hundreds of farms. The third 
 report is devoted to the consideration of the culture of wheat and silk. 
 
 PUBLICATIONS OF AGRICULTURAL SOCIETIES. 
 
 The publications of the “ literary ” agricultural societies—Massachusetts 
 Agricultural Repository (1798 to 1832), New York Society for the Promo¬ 
 tion of the Useful Arts, Transactions (1801 to 1819), Philadelphia Society 
 for Promoting Agriculture, Memoirs (1808 to 1826)—contain little informa¬ 
 tion regarding American methods of farming, although they shed much light 
 on the state of agricultural sciences. Volume II of the publication of the 
 Massachusetts society is exceptional, providing in the answers received to 
 the society’s questionnaire of 1807 definite material on agriculture in New 
 England. 
 
 SECONDARY MATERIAL. 
 
 SPECIAL WORKS. 
 
 A contemporary description of northern agriculture of considerable value 
 is that written about 1813 by Robert Livingston for the Edinburgh Encyclo¬ 
 pedia. Phelps’s Rural Life in Litchfield County, Connecticut, gives particular 
 attention to changes occurring since 1800. In Bidwell’s article, The Agricul¬ 
 tural Revolution in New England, the influence of the home market on farm¬ 
 ing is discussed and the readjustments made necessary by western compe¬ 
 tition. Piper and Bort’s Early Agricultural History of Timothy and Carrier 
 and Bort’s History of Kentucky Blue grass and White Clover in the United 
 States are scholarly monographs discussing the origin of these important 
 forage plants. Much assistance has been derived from Dr. Stine’s unpublished 
 Economic History of Wheat in the United States. Livingston’s Essay on 
 Sheep (1809) supplies important facts regarding the early importations of 
 the Merino sheep by one of the pioneers in the adventure. Randall’s Fine 
 Wool Sheep Husbandry (1862) has a carefully prepared historical sketch of 
 the Merino and Saxony breeds, quoting sources. The U. S. Bureau of Animal 
 Industry’s Special Report on the Sheep Industry (1892) has a large collection 
 of historical material regarding American sheep. Wright ( Wool Growing 
 and the Tariff) provides thoughtful summaries of the changes in sheep-raising, 
 relating them to the progress of the household and factory woolen industries. 
 Facts regarding the decline of rural household industries are presented in 
 Tryon’s Household Manufactures in the United States. Johnson’s History 
 of the Domestic and Foreign Commerce of the United States (Carnegie Inst. 
 Pub. No. 215A) shows the importance of farm products in our national trade. 
 Official commercial statistics are arranged in convenient form in Pitkin’s 
 Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States of America. 
 
 31 
 
466 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 TREATISES AND HANDBOOKS ON FARMING. 
 
 Almost a generation elapsed after the publication of Eliot’s Field Hus¬ 
 bandry in New England before other books of its type appeared. But the 
 interest of public-spirited and educated men turned to agriculture after the 
 Revolutionary War, and the numerous treatises brought out in the final decades 
 of the century may be said to mark the beginning of a distinctive literature of 
 agriculture in this country. For the most part, the new treatises were merely 
 parapharases of standard English works. Such were Bowler’s Treatise on 
 Agriculture aiid Practical Husbandry (1786), Spurrier’s Practical Farmer 
 ( I 793 )> and Robert’s Pennsylvania Farmer (1804). In Bordley’s Essays and 
 Notes (1791) and in Deane’s New England Farmer (1st ed., 1790) we find, in 
 addition to the exposition of the best English practice, significant comments on 
 farming in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and New England. A modest volume 
 containing much common sense advice is John Dabney’s Address to Farmers 
 (Salem, Mass., 1796). A small pamphlet by Hon. Charles Thompson, printed 
 anonymously in New York in 1787 under the title Notes on Farming, contains 
 facts regarding farm practice in Pennsylvania. Lorain’s Nature and Reason 
 Harmonized in the Practice of Husbandry (1825) is the work of an iconoclast 
 bent upon upsetting the traditional theories of plant growth and nutrition, 
 but lacking adequate knowledge to correct them. 
 
 LOCAL HISTORIES, GAZETTEERS, AND STATISTICAL ACCOUNTS. 
 
 The agricultural material in the town and county histories relates for the 
 most part to eighteenth century conditions. (See p. 461.) Only a few 
 local historians have grasped the significance of changes in progress between 
 1800 and 1840. Thompson’s History of Long Island contains a short account 
 of improved farming near New York, which may be supplemented from Cob- 
 bett’s Year’s Residence in the United States of America. New York agriculture 
 was critically examined and discussed by John Fowler, an English farmer, in 
 his Journal of a Tour in New York. He spent two months in the State in 
 1830. A local history which devotes an unusual amount of attention to agricul¬ 
 tural changes is Miller and Wells’s Ryegate, Vermont. 
 
 The first two or three decades of the nineteenth century witnessed great 
 enthusiasm for the collection and publication of geographical, historical, and 
 statistical material of a local character, in the form of gazetteers. The Amer¬ 
 ican Geography and American Gazetteer of Rev. Jedidiah Morse contain 
 paragraphs describing the chief agricultural interests of the various States. 
 The Collections of the historical societies of Maine, Massachusetts, and New 
 Hampshire contain a large number of descriptions of towns written in gazet¬ 
 teer style. An attempt on the part of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and 
 Sciences to obtain descriptions of towns in that State resulted in the prepara¬ 
 tion about 1810 of Dwight’s Statistical Account of New Haven, Morris’s 
 Statistical Account of ... . Litchfield, Field’s Statistical Account of 
 . . . . Middlesex and Goodrich’s Statistical Account of Ridgefield, all of 
 which contain first-hand material on agriculture. Pease and Niles’s Gazetteer 
 of Connecticut and Rhode Island (1819) is one of the best specimens of this 
 kind of work. For Massachusetts we have Greenleaf’s incomplete Geographi¬ 
 cal Gazetteer (1784), Dickinson’s Geographical and Statistical View (1813), 
 and the same author’s Description of Deerfield (1817). 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 467 
 
 The discussions leading to the separation from Massachusetts of the District 
 of Maine resulted in the publication of two investigations of land tenure and 
 general agricultural conditions in that region, Whipple’s Geographical and. 
 Statistical Viezv of the District of Maine (1816), and Greenleaf’s Statistical 
 View (1816). The latter, the more careful work, was based on personal 
 observation and has statistics compiled from valuation returns of 1810. A 
 revised and enlarged edition ( Survey of the State of Maine, 1829) used the 
 1820 valuation returns. For Vermont and New Hampshire the Gazetteers 
 of George, Thompson, Merrill, and Moore afford scattered bits of information 
 regarding agricultural affairs. The gazetteers of the Middle Atlantic States 
 which have here been found most useful for the study of local conditions are 
 those of Spafford, Gordon, and French for New York, of Gordon for New 
 Jersey (part II of his History of New Jersey), Scot’s Geographical Descrip¬ 
 tion of Pennsylvania, Gordon’s Gazetteer of Pennsylvania, and Trego’s 
 Geography of Pennsylvania. 
 
 THE PERIOD OF TRANSFORMATION, 1840 TO 1860 . 
 
 SOURCES. 
 
 UNITED STATES CENSUSES, 1840, 1850, i860. 
 
 The census of 1840 was the first in which an attempt was made to collect 
 statistics of agricultural production. Returns were made by counties for 26 
 items, including the number of livestock (classified as horses and mules, neat 
 cattle, swine, and sheep), the crops of wheat, corn, rye, and other cereals, 
 potatoes, hay, cotton, wool, hemp and flax, tobacco, rice and hops. The prod¬ 
 ucts of the dairy, the orchard, and market gardens were reported in values. 
 In 1850 the scope of the agricultural inquiry was enlarged and greater care 
 was taken to insure accuracy and to correct inaccuracies. The census of i860 
 was taken with the same schedule used in 1850. The data in the three censuses 
 are, with a few exceptions, comparable. But few changes in classification 
 were made. The date of enumeration for 1850 and i860 was June 1. In 1840 
 the enumeration began June 1, but the returns were not finally complete until 
 January 1, 1842. In accuracy these early censuses compare favorably with 
 later enumerations. Many complaints were made of inaccuracies after the 
 publication of the 1840 data, but these were confined to the population figures. 
 In the preparation of the dot maps serious omissions or overcounting in any 
 census year would have appeared when compared with the figures of the 
 succeeding or the preceding census. No such anomalous results were 
 discovered. 
 
 In the Introduction to the volume devoted to agriculture (vol. 1) of the 
 Census of i860 there are 164 folio pages devoted to analysis of the i860 figures 
 and to their comparison in tabular form with the census returns for 1840 
 and 1850. In addition, the Introduction contains several first-rate historical 
 articles based on information supplied by experts in various fields. Particu¬ 
 larly valuable are the articles on agricultural implements, the grain trade and 
 the cattle trade. 
 
 In the Census of 1880 (vol. Ill, pp. 133-141) there is a brief outline of our 
 agricultural history, by William H. Brewer. 
 
468 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE REPORTS. 
 
 The annual reports of the Commissioner of Patents for the years 1839 to 
 1861 afford source material of extraordinary importance. Beginning in modest 
 fashion with remarks on agricultural machinery, the portion of the report 
 devoted to agriculture steadily expanded until in 1845 it included over 1,000 
 pages. After that year the agricultural section was contracted, but remained 
 a substantial volume. The material in the reports may be roughly divided 
 into two classes, the economic and the technical. In the earlier volumes of the 
 series a keen interest is evident in the business side of farming and in the 
 economic relations of agriculture to manufacturers and commerce. In the 
 years 1841 to 1848 efforts were made to measure statistically the principal 
 crops of each State. The estimates were based on the census of 1840. The 
 figures of that year were revised according to reports of crop conditions and 
 yield in agricultural periodicals and in newspapers, and from the reports of 
 volunteer correspondents in a number of States. 
 
 The movement of farm products in internal and foreign trade is shown by 
 statistics of shipments and receipts at important canal, lake, river, and ocean 
 ports. In a number of the earlier issues extended discussion is given to the 
 relative importance of home and foreign markets. Attempts were made to com¬ 
 pare domestic and foreign prices of our staple products. The estimates of 
 the cost of producing wheat, corn, and other crops which were occasionally 
 published, as for example in the volume for 1847, are a still further indication 
 of the emphasis placed on the study of the farmers’ business problems. 
 
 The science and practice of agriculture receive relatively greater attention 
 in the later volumes of the series. Excerpts from foreign and domestic agri¬ 
 cultural journals were freely reprinted in the attempt to diffuse and popularize 
 the revolutionary discoveries of the age. New crops and new methods were 
 advocated with little or no regard to cost and profit on the average farm. 
 Material of this character duplicates the agricultural periodicals and is of little 
 value to the economic historian. On the other hand, the voluminous corre¬ 
 spondence from farmers in all parts of the country, describing their actual 
 farm practice, is a mine of information. In 1851 and 1852 attempts were made 
 to systematize this information by the use of a questionnaire. The replies 
 reprinted in the volumes for those years are numerous and valuable. 
 
 A combination of economic and technical information is to be found in 
 the special articles describing the development and status of branches of the 
 agricultural industry. Such are Randall’s Sheep Husbandry and Wool Group¬ 
 ing (1850, pp. 129-144) and Cist’s Article on The Hog Crop (1847, pp. 
 524-533). Agricultural education and the activities of agricultural societies 
 are frequently discussed. Of especial value in this regard are the volumes for 
 1857 (PP- !- 5 °) and i8 5 8 (PP- 9 2_2I 3 )- 
 
 PUBLICATIONS OF STATE AGRICULTURAL SOCIETIES AND OF STATE 
 
 BOARDS OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Supplementing the national point of view of the Patent Office Reports, 
 the annual reports of the State organizations enable the historian to see the 
 agriculture of the period from the local standpoint and to get a firmer grasp 
 of local conditions. Established rather for educational than for administrative 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 469 
 
 purposes, the State societies and boards devoted their attention chiefly to the 
 collection and diffusion of information which they thought valuable to farmers. 
 The New York society ambitiously attempted in its first year (1841) an 
 agricultural survey of the State by counties. Circular letters containing a 
 wide variety of questions on crops and cultural practice, livestock, and its 
 management were addressed to representative farmers in each county. The 
 replies, piinted in the Transactions (I and II, 1841, 1842) do not cover every 
 county and are often fragmentary, but nevertheless they supply source mate¬ 
 rial of great value. 
 
 The New York survey was regarded as so successful that similar projects 
 were set on foot by the societies in other States soon after their organization. 
 The results are to be found in the following volumes of the State reports: 
 Ohio, 1846-1850; Wisconsin, 1851-1853; New Hampshire, 1855; Maine, 
 1856; Illinois, 1857; Indiana, 1851-1857; Iowa, 1857. 
 
 The addresses delivered at the annual fairs of the State societies and some 
 of those given at county fairs were printed in the State reports. Most of them 
 are valueless, but occasionally the temptation to empty oratory was resisted 
 and the speaker gave a meaty summary of local farming which is of great 
 assistance in the interpretation of the multitude of scattered facts presented 
 in the county surveys and elsewhere in these reports. The “ original essays ” 
 which appeared regularly in the reports of Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin 
 allowed opportunity for extended discussion of particular phases of farming, 
 such as the use of machinery, the breeding of horses, or wool growing. The 
 best of these essays were based on practical experience and are not to be 
 confused nor compared with the paraphrases or quotations from text books 
 to which the state secretary sometimes had recourse to fill his annual volume. 
 
 The talents and tastes of the editor, the State secretary, determined largely 
 the character of the reports. The work of Henry S. Randall on the early 
 volumes of the New York reports set a high standard for his successors. The 
 works of Ezekiel Holmes and S. L. Goodale in Maine, and of Charles L. Flint 
 in Massachusetts, were equally notable. In the reports of other States bad ar¬ 
 rangement and careless indexing make difficult the use of many of the earlier, 
 often the more valuable volumes. Massachusetts and Maine have published 
 indexes to their series. 1 For other states, Miss Hasse’s Index of Economic 
 Material is of great assistance. 
 
 AGRICULTURAL PERIODICALS. 
 
 The most important unofficial sources for this period are the farm papers. 
 In general, the material which they contain is similar to that found in the 
 reports of the State boards and societies. Articles of a scientific or pseudo¬ 
 scientific character dealing with the theories of soil fertility, with plant nutri¬ 
 tion, etc., are of interest chiefly to the student of the development of agricul¬ 
 tural science. For the economic historian the letters from correspondents are 
 of outstanding importance. They show the condition of farming at a specific 
 time and place, and often are of great assistance in revealing the forces which 
 were operating to make agricultural history. The material which they present 
 
 1 Mass. Board of Agric., 25th Annual Report, 1877-78; Maine Dept, of Agric., 35th 
 
 Annual Report, 1892. 
 
470 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 is of course scattered and fragmentary and can be utilized, even with the aid 
 of the detailed index published each year, only by such students as have 
 inclination and leisure for painstaking research. 
 
 The Cultivator, a monthly journal founded by Jesse Buel in 1834, was 
 published continuously at Albany until 1853. Although it changed hands with 
 the founder’s death in 1839, the new owner, Luther Tucker, the proprietor 
 of the Genesee Farmer, did not substantially modify its form or contents. 
 Throughout the period The Cultivator was probably the best agricultural 
 periodical published in the East. In 1853, Tucker began to issue in connection 
 with The Cultivator a weekly which he called The Country Gentleman. Its 
 purpose was to furnish the farmer, in addition to what was supplied by papers 
 like The Cultivator, reading matter of a more general literary and news inter¬ 
 est. The editors wrote in a prospectus: 2 
 
 “ We were led to its publication from the conviction that a large class of farmers 
 and others interested in rural life wished something more in an agricultural journal 
 than it was possible to furnish in the columns of a monthly. Horticulture and matters 
 of rural taste, demanded more attention than the limits of the Cultivator would allow. 
 The home education of farmers and their families, the social aspects of country life, 
 the pleasures that slumber too often at the fire-sides of country residents, all present 
 themselves as most desirable topics for discussion in an agricultural paper. A growing 
 literary taste demands articles of a higher order than usually find their way into such 
 journals. In a weekly journal all these subjects may be combined with strictly agricul¬ 
 tural matter, in such way as to fit it for general perusal, and the improvement of the 
 family circle, while the paper will be none the less valuable to the farmer. This com¬ 
 bination, together with a concise summary of news, will supply a want that is felt to a 
 considerable extent by country gentlemen and their families.” 
 
 The new weekly was divided into four departments. The Farm, Domestic 
 Economy, The Grazier, Horticultural Department, and Fireside Department, 
 an arrangement which, in addition to the yearly index, greatly facilitates its use 
 for historical purposes. A weekly feature, Farm Products Markets, gave a 
 review of market conditions in a number of the larger domestic and foreign 
 markets, with price quotations on staples such as flour, grain, provisions, cattle, 
 and wool. In The Cultivator, whose monthly publication was continued in 
 reduced form, selected articles of specialized agricultural interest were re¬ 
 printed from The Country Gentleman. 
 
 Among a large number of western agricultural journals appearing in this 
 period The Prairie Farmer is the best historical source. It was distinguished 
 among its short-lived contemporaries for continuous publication under the 
 same editorship for 16 years. Founded at Chicago as a monthly in 1840, it 
 was published for two years by the Union Agricultural Society, an organiza¬ 
 tion with members in several Western States. In 1843 the enterprise was 
 taken over by John S. Wright and J. Ambrose Wight and a new name, The 
 Prairie Farmer, was adopted. While following in general the plan of the 
 older eastern journals, The Prairie Farmer has distinctive local color. Its 
 style is less academic; it has a breezy quality designed, as was its low price, 
 to appeal to “ dirt farmers.” In the prospectus for volume IV (1844) we read : 
 
 “ Its character has become established as being an eminently practical paper, owing 
 chiefly to the large proportion of matter supplied by its able correspondents, most of 
 whom are themselves farmers, nearly three hundred in number, and residing in all 
 
 2 The Cultivator, 3d series, I (1853), p. 9. 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 471 
 
 parts of the West Almost the entire western press pronounce it, for a farmer in the 
 West, the best agricultural paper published. 
 
 “ The contents in general are as follows: Original correspondence; Editorial articles; 
 Reviews of leading agricultural papers, presenting their more important parts; Me¬ 
 chanical department of two pages; Educational department of about two pages' de¬ 
 partments entitled Household Affairs,’ ‘Orchard and Garden,’ ‘Veterinary’; and the 
 last two pages will be occupied with prices current, reviews of the Chicago eastern 
 southern, and foreign markets, and with miscellany.” 
 
 In 1857 the Prairie Farmer was made a weekly, but the experiment was 
 evidently not successful, and in 1858 it was absorbed by Emery’s Journal of 
 
 Agriculture. In its new form the older publication retained its name and was 
 enlarged and improved. 
 
 COMMERCIAL PERIODICALS. 
 
 Two monthly periodicals afford information regarding commerce in agri¬ 
 cultural products. Hunts Merchants’ Magazine (New York, 1839-1870) 
 treated agricultural conditions from the business man’s point of view. It fre¬ 
 quently reprinted short articles from daily and weekly newspapers discussing 
 farming conditions in widely separated sections. Price quotations of staples 
 such as cotton, wheat, hogs, etc., in the chief markets were given sporadically. 
 
 De Bow s Review, although modeled after Hunt’s publication, was more 
 general in its material. Besides commercial affairs, it was designed as a 
 “ journal of agriculture, manufactures, internal improvements, and general 
 literatuie. It was frankly a sectional journal, devoted to the interests of the 
 South and the West. With two interruptions, from January to July 1849 and 
 from 1862 to 1865, the Review covers the years 1846 to 1870. It is particularly 
 valuable to the historian of western agriculture for the facts it furnishes re¬ 
 garding the close commercial relations between the western producers of grain 
 and h\estock and the southern cotton planters. Both of these publications are 
 well indexed. 
 
 REPORTS OF BOARDS OF TRADE. 
 
 For the facts regarding the market distribution of staple farm products, 
 especially in internal trade, the best sources are the annual reports of boards 
 of trade and chambers of commerce. In addition to a review of the year’s 
 trade in the principal commodities, each issue usually contains statistics of 
 receipts and shipments, and price quotations by yearly, monthly, or weekly 
 averages. Particular attention was of course given in each city to the branches 
 of trade in which its business men were especially interested. The reports 
 of the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce contain many valuable facts on pork 
 packing, and on the shift from river to railroad transportation of the western 
 surplus. In the Chicago reports the wheat-trade statistics are particularly 
 important. The Buffalo Board of Trade was keenly interested in the eastward 
 shipments of grain by canal and railroad. In its 1869 report there is a compila¬ 
 tion of statistics for this trade covering the years 1836 to 1869. The Boston 
 reports reflect the interest of merchants and manufacturers in the increasing 
 dependence of New England on western breadstuffs. The wool trade, also, 
 is given much attention in the Boston reports. 
 
472 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL MATERIAL. 
 
 R. S. Elliott, in his Notes Taken in Sixty Years (St. Louis, 1883), has 
 recorded, in the midst of a helter-skelter of anecdotal material, a number of 
 valuable facts regarding farm life and farm practice. Chapter VII contains 
 his recollections of farming in central Pennsylvania about 1840. Of particu¬ 
 lar interest are his comments on the introduction of agricultural machinery. 
 Later chapters describe pioneering in Iowa and the development of the 
 grain trade in the West. C. W. Marsh, the inventor of the Marsh reaper, has 
 told in his Recollections (1837 to 1900) ) the story of his boyhood experiences 
 on a pioneer farm in Illinois. Chapter II gives a remarkably clear picture of 
 prairie farm life, implements, food, housing, etc. Chapters XI and XII are 
 devoted to the discussion of the introduction of reapers and to the events 
 surrounding the invention of the Marsh machine. 
 
 SECONDARY MATERIAL. 
 
 TRAVELS, GAZETTEERS, AND STATISTICAL COMPILATIONS. 
 
 Owing to the greater abundance of source material in this period and its 
 accessibility in collected form, less reliance has been placed on secondary 
 accounts than in earlier periods. Gerhard’s Illinois as It Is furnishes an ex¬ 
 ample of the best type of gazetteer, a combined history, geography, and statis¬ 
 tical description. It includes two chapters (pp. 271-351), dealing specifically 
 with farming. The author was the editor of a Gorman newspaper published in 
 New York. His statements are based partly upon his own observations during 
 a tour through Illinois in 1855, and were verified and supplemented by. the 
 opinions and experience of a large number of resident farmers. He utilized 
 all the available literature, including not only books and pamphlets, but also 
 secondary material, the files of agricultural journals, and of local newspapers. 
 The book is well written and well arranged. The keen interest of the author 
 in the economic aspects of farming is shown by his discussion of costs and 
 prices. He devotes a chapter (pp. 372 - 375 ) h> market prices, in which he 
 tabulates the prices of 20 or more farm products for January 1856, as quoted 
 in the local newspapers of about 40 Illinois towns. 
 
 The Gazetteer of Michigan, compiled by John T. Blois in 1838, follows the 
 standard form, giving a description of local subdivisions in alphabetical order. 
 The information on the means of communication and transportation, roads, 
 canals, and steamships, is more valuable than the brief description of agricul¬ 
 ture. In the appendix there are the fragmentary results of an attempted 
 agricultural census of 1837. 
 
 Hall’s Notes on the Western States (Philadelphia, 1838) is an enlarged 
 edition of his Statistics of the West (Cincinnati, 1836). It is particularly valu¬ 
 able for its discussion of the commerce of Western cities. Chapters V to 
 VIII (pp. 69-109) are devoted to a description of the prairies and to the 
 discussion of theories of their origin. 
 
 James Caird, member of the English House of Commons and the author 
 of several works on agricultural topics, traveled extensively in Illinois in 
 1858 and published his observations in Prairie Farming in America, (1859). 
 It seems probable that he was engaged by the Illinois Central Railroad to 
 
CLASSIFIED AND CRITICAL BIBLIOGRAPHY 473 
 
 assist in exploiting its lands by familiarizing prospective English emigrants 
 with agricultural conditions in Illinois. 3 
 
 TREATISES AND HANDBOOKS ON FARMING. 
 
 Judge Jesse Buel, the author of The Fanner* s Comp anion, was doubly 
 qualified for his work, having been both the editor of an agricultural journal 
 (The Cultivator) and a successful practical farmer as well. The volume, 
 which was designed as a text-book, is laid out in methodical fashion. It is 
 composed largely of quotations and paraphrases from the best English works, 
 supplemented by material from the files of The Cultivator. In this, as in 
 almost all works of its kind, the description of what is, i. e., of existing condi¬ 
 tions of farming, is subordinated to the discussion of what ought to be. 
 
 Beatty’s Essays on Practical Agriculture presents a marked contrast to 
 Buel’s work. It is composed of a series of essays on the cultivation of various 
 crops, with particular reference to farming in Kentucky, the author’s native 
 State. The historical sketch of Kentucky agriculture, the first of the essays, 
 is well done. Beatty’s work shows a wide reading of the best English and 
 American agricultural literature. His keen interest in the economic aspects 
 of farming, in markets, prices and transportation costs, is evident in his chapter 
 on the Advantages of Manufactures to Agriculture. 
 
 MONOGRAPHS. 
 
 Hibbard s History of Agriculture in Dane County, Wisconsin, deals in 
 chapters I to VI with pioneer conditions and the one-crop period which ended 
 in i860. This is a scholarly work compiled from source material, chiefly from 
 local newspapers. It gives a clear picture of the farming of the period with 
 emphasis on its social and economic aspects. The Wheat Plant, by John H. 
 Klippart, secretary of the Ohio State Board of Agriculture, is an exhaustive 
 treatise of international repute, in which the author has included a vast 
 amount of information regarding the origin, history, and botany of wheat. 
 Chapter XIX, Wheat in Ohio, discusses the varieties grown in that State in 
 i860 and gives facts regarding their introduction. 
 
 The history of one of the most important kinds of agricultural machines 
 is traced by M. F. Miller in his The Evolution of Reaping Machines. He 
 shows clearly the European origin of several of the most important features 
 of the American reaper. His monograph, compiled from secondary material, 
 is well arranged. Its value is enhanced by a number of fine illustrations of the 
 machines described. The perennial controversy between the adherents of Hus¬ 
 sey and McCormick regarding the claims to the invention of the reaper is 
 renewed in Greene’s Obed Hussey (Rochester, 1912). The book is a com¬ 
 pilation of original documents, such as contemporary newspaper articles, 
 personal correspondence, and copies of Patent Office records which tend to 
 support Hussey’s claim. 
 
 3 Buck, Travel and Description, 1765-1865, in Illinois Hist. Soc., Collections, IX, 233. 
 
1. 
 
 2 . 
 
 3 - 
 
 4 - 
 
 5 - 
 
 6. 
 
 7 - 
 
 8 . 
 
 9 - 
 
 10 
 
 11. 
 
 12. 
 
 13. 
 
 14 
 
 IS- 
 
 16. 
 
 17. 
 
 18. 
 
 19. 
 
 20. 
 
 21. 
 
 22. 
 
 23. 
 
 24. 
 
 25. 
 
 26. 
 
 27. 
 
 28. 
 
 29. 
 
 30. 
 
 3 1. 
 
 32. 
 
 33- 
 
 ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF AUTHORS. 
 
 Account of the Genessee Tract (179 1 ) (' n Inilay, Western Territory of North 
 
 America, 458-481). , f _ , ~ .... r 
 
 Acrelius, Israel. Description of the Former and Present Condition oj . . . . 
 
 New Sweden (Stockholm, 1759 - Translation published in Memoirs ot 
 
 Pennsylvania Hist. Soc., XI, 1874). , . , 
 
 Adams, Charles Francis. History of Braintree, Massachusetts and the Town of 
 
 Quincy (Cambridge, 1891). _ 0 * 
 
 _ Three Episodes in Massachusetts History (2 vols., Boston, 1892;. # 
 
 Adams, Herbert B. The Fisher Plantation at Cape Ann (Essex Institute Historical 
 
 Collections, XIX, (1882) pp. 81-90). . 
 
 _. The Germanic Origin of New England Tozvns (in /. H. U. Studies in His¬ 
 torical and Political Science, I, No. 2 (1882) ). # 
 
 -. Origin of Salem Plantation (in Essex Institute Historical Collections, XIX, 
 
 Adams, Romanzo. Agriculture in Michigan (in Michigan Pol. Sci. Assn. Publica¬ 
 tions, III (1899), No. 7, pp. 1-40).. . , 
 
 Agnew, Daniel, L.L.D. History of Pennsylvania North of the Ohio and IVest of 
 The Allegheny River (Philadelphia, 1887). ... 
 
 Allen Charles E. Some Huguenot and other Early Settlers on the Kennebec in the 
 
 . Town of Dresden (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 2nd 
 
 Series, III, 351 - 379 ).- rr . , , _ , T . . /T < 
 
 Allen, Ira. Natural and Political History of the State of Vermont (London, 
 1798. Reprinted in Vermont Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 327-499). 
 
 Allen, William. Bingham Land (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, 
 "yj j 3 S 3 _360) 
 
 _. Now and Then (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, VII, 269-287). 
 
 -. Sandy River Settlement (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, 
 
 IV, 31-40). 
 
 Alton (Illinois) Telegraph (May 11, 1849). . 
 
 American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Memoirs (1st Series, 4 vols., Boston, 
 1785-1818). 
 
 American Farmer (weekly, Baltimore, 1819-1833). 
 
 American Husbandry (2 vols., London, 1775). 
 
 American Journal of Science (192 vols., 1819-1916). 
 
 American Museum (12 vols., Philadelphia 1787-179 2 ). 
 
 American Statistical Annual (2 vols., New York, 1854-1855). 
 
 Ames, Azel. The Mayflower and Her Log . (Boston, 1901). 
 
 Amherst, First Church. Historical Review, 1889. 
 
 Andrews, Charles M. Colonial Folkways (New Haven, 1919). 
 
 —-. The River Towns of Connecticut (in /. HI U. Studies in Historical and 
 
 Political Science, VII, Nos. 7-9). 
 
 - Theory of the Village Community (in American Hist. Assn. Papers, 
 
 XLVII). 
 
 Andrews, Israel D. Report on the Trade and Commerce of the British North 
 American Colonies and upon the Trade of the Great Lakes and Rivers 
 (Washington, 1854). 
 
 Answers of Governor Andros to Enquiries About New York, 1678 (in O’Calla¬ 
 ghan, Documentary History of New York, I, 88-92). 
 
 Answers to Queries Sent from the .... Lords of Trade, 1730 (in N. H. 
 Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 227-230). 
 
 Answers to the Several Queries Relating to the Planters in the Territories 
 of His R. H. S. the Duke of Yorke in America (ca 1669, in O’Calla¬ 
 ghan, Documentary History of New York, I, 87). 
 
 Ash mead, H. G. History of Delaware County, Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1884). 
 Assessment Rolls of the Five Dutch Towns in King’s County, L. I., 1675 
 (in O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New _ York, IV, 139-161). 
 Atwater, Caleb. History of the State of Ohio (2d ed., Cincinnati, 1838). 
 
 474 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF AUTHORS 
 
 475 
 
 34. Bacon, William. History of the Agricultural Associations of New York 1791- 
 
 1862 Xl? N * Y ‘ State A S ric - Soc. Transactions, XXIII, (1863), no. 
 143-168). 
 
 35- Bailey, Liberty Hyde (editor). Cyclopedia of American Agriculture (4 vols 
 N. Y., 1907-1909). 
 
 36 . . Education by Means of Agriculture in Bailey, Cyclopedia of American 
 
 Agriculture, IV, 355 - 477 - 
 
 37 - allagh, James Curtis. Introduction to Southern Economic History — The Land 
 O A System (in American Hist. Assn. Report, (1897), pp. 101-129). 
 
 3«. Ballou, Adin. History of Milford, Massachusetts (Boston, 1882). 
 
 39. Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company 33d Annual Report (1859). 
 
 40. Barbour, James. Agricultural Associations and Agricultural Schools (in N. Y. 
 
 Bd. of Agric. Memoirs, III (1826), pp. 506-511). 
 
 41. Barry, William. History of Framingham, Massachusetts (Boston, 1847). 
 
 42. Bartram, John. Observations in Travels from Pennsylvania to Onondaiqo etc 
 
 (London, 1751. Reprinted Geneva, N. Y., 1895). 
 
 43 - Beatty, Adam. Essays on Practical Agriculture (Maysville, Ky., 1844). 
 
 44. Beckley, Hosea. History of Vermont (Brattleboro, Vt., 1846). 
 
 45 - Beers, W. H. & Co. (publishers). History of Montgomery County, Ohio (Chicago, 
 1882). 
 
 46. Bek, W. G. Followers of Duden (in Mo. Hist. Review, XVI (1922), pp. 522-550). 
 47 - • (1 ranslator). Gottfried Duden’s “Report,” 1824—1827. Bericht ueber eine 
 
 Reise nach den Westlichen Staaten Nord Amerikas (1829) (in Mo 
 Hist. Review, XII, 1-21; 81-89; 163-179; 258-270; XIII, 44-56; 157- 
 181; 251-281. 
 
 48. Belknap, Jeremy. The History of New Hampshire (3 vols., Boston, 1792). 
 
 49. Belknap Papers (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 5th Series, II and III). 
 
 50. Bell, Charles. History of Chester, New Hampshire (in N. H. Hist. Soc Collec- 
 
 tions, VI, 343-413). 
 
 51. Benton, Elbert Jay. The Wabash Trade Route in the Development of the Old 
 
 Northwest (in I. H. U. Studies in Historical and Political Science, 
 XXI (1903), Nos. 1-2. 
 
 52. Berkeley, George. Life and Letters (Edited by A. C. Fraser, Oxford, 1871). 
 
 53 - Bidwell, Percy Wells. The Agricultural Revolution in New England (in Am. 
 
 Hist. Review, XXVI (1920-21), pp. 683-702). 
 
 54 - -• Population Growth in Southern New England, 1810-1860 (in Am. Statis¬ 
 
 tical Assn. Quarterly Publications, XV (1916-17), New Series No. 
 120, pp. 813-839). 
 
 55 - • Rural Economy in New England at the Beginning of Nineteenth Century 
 
 (in Conn. Academy of Arts and Sciences, Transactions, XX (1916), 
 
 . „ PP- 241-399). 
 
 56. Birkbeck, Morris. Letters from Illinois (London, 1818). 
 
 57 - -- Notes on a Journey in America from the Coast of Virginia to the Terri¬ 
 
 tory of Illinois (Dublin, 1818). 
 
 58. Bliss, George. Address (containing Sketches in Early History of Springfield, 
 
 Mass., Springfield, 1828). 
 
 59. Blois, John T. Gazetteer of Michigan (Detroit, 1838). 
 
 60. Boardman, Samuel L. Agricultural Bibliography of Maine (in Maine Dept, of 
 
 Agric. 35th Annual Report (1892)). 
 
 6i- -- The Climate, Soil, Physical Resources, and Agricultural Capabilities of the 
 
 State of Maine (in U. S. Dept, of Agric. Miscellaneous Special Report 
 No. 4, Washington, 1884). 
 
 62. Bolton, Charles K. Brookline, Massachusetts (Brookline, 1897). 
 
 63. Bolton, Ethel S. Shirley Uplands and Intervales (Boston, 1914). 
 
 64. Bond, Phineas. Letters (1787-1794) (in Am. Hist. Assn. Annual Reports, 1896, 
 
 , _ I, PP- 513 - 659 ; 1897, PP- 454 - 568 ). 
 
 65. Bonham, Lazarus N. American Live Stock (in Depew, One Hundred Years of 
 
 American Commerce, I, 220-230). 
 
 66. Bordley, John Beale. Essays and Notes on Husbandry and Rural Affairs (2d 
 
 ed., Philadelphia, 1801). 
 
 67. Boston, Registry Department. Records Relating to the Early History of Boston 
 
 (40 vols., 1876-1909). 
 
 68. Boston Board of Trade. Annual Reports (1855-1876). 
 
 69. Bouton, Nathaniel. History of Concord, New Hampshire (Concord, 1856). 
 
 70. Bowler, Metcalf. Treatise on Agriculture and Practical Husbandry (Providence, 
 
 1786). 
 
 71. Bowman, Isaiah. Forest Physiography (N. Y., 1911). 
 
476 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 72. 
 
 73 - 
 
 74 - 
 
 75 - 
 76 . 
 
 77 - 
 
 78. 
 
 79 - 
 
 80. 
 
 81. 
 
 82. 
 
 83. 
 
 84. 
 
 85. 
 
 86 . 
 
 87. 
 
 88 . 
 
 89. 
 
 90. 
 
 91. 
 
 92. 
 
 93 . 
 
 94. 
 
 95 . 
 
 96. 
 
 97 . 
 
 98. 
 
 99. 
 
 100. 
 
 101. 
 
 102. 
 
 103. 
 
 104. 
 
 105. 
 
 106. 
 
 107. 
 
 108. 
 
 109. 
 
 no. 
 
 111. 
 
 112 . 
 
 Bradford, William. History of Plymouth Plantation (edited by W. T. Davis, 
 
 New York, 1908). . .. . 
 
 Bradley, Dan. Soil and Agriculture of Onondaiga County (in N. Y. Ba. Agric. 
 
 Memoirs, III (1826), pp. 86-95). . , . 
 
 Bradbury, John. Travels in the Interior of America (1809-1811) (in 1 hwaites, 
 Early Western Travels, V, 42-309). # . 
 
 Brigham, Albert Perry. Geographic Influences in American History (Boston, 
 
 Brissott de Warville, J. P. New Travels in the United States of America, 1788 
 (English trans. Dublin, 1792). A Q Q 
 
 Brookline, Massachusetts. Muddy River and Brookline Records, 1034-1030 
 
 Brown, Rev!" Clark. op0graphical Description of Catskill in the State of New 
 York (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, IX (1804), pp. 
 
 111-120. , 
 
 _ Topographical Description of Newtown (Tioga County) New 1 ork (in 
 
 Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, IX (1804), pp. 120-126). 
 Brown, John M. Brief Sketch of the County of Schoharie ( N . P.), 1823. 
 
 Buck, Solon Justus. Illinois in 1818 (Springfield, Ill., 1917). 
 
 _ Travel and Description, 1765-1865 (in Illinois Hist. Soc. Collections , IX). 
 
 Buck, William J. History of Buck’s County, Pennsylvania (Willow Grove, 
 
 Penn., 1835). , . , T j 
 
 Buckingham, J. S. The Slave States of America (2 vols., London, 1842). 
 
 Budd, Thomas. Good Order Established in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 1685 
 (Shepard ed., Cleveland, 1902). 
 
 Buel, Jesse. The Farmer’s Companion (Boston, 1839). 
 
 Buffalo Board of Trade. Annual Reports (1869-1874). 
 
 Burke, Edmund. European Settlements in America (2d ed., London, 1758). 
 Burkett, C. W. History of Ohio Agriculture (Concord, N. H., 1900). 
 
 Burnaby Andrew. Travels through the Middle Settlements of North America, 
 1759-1760 (reprinted from 3d ed., of 1798, N. Y., 1904). 
 
 Burnham, C. G. Early Traffic on the Connecticut River (in New England Maga¬ 
 zine, New Series, XXIII (1900), pp. 131-149). 
 
 Burt, Henry M. First Century of the History of Springfield (Mass.), (2 vols., 
 Springfield, 1898). . . . 
 
 Bushnell, Horace. Work and Play or Literary Varieties, (N. Y., 1864). 
 
 Caird, James. Prairie Farming in America (N. Y., 1859)- . 
 
 Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series. See Great Britain. 
 
 California State Agricultural Society. Transactions (1858-1905) 
 
 Callender, Guy Stevens. Selections from the Economic History of the United 
 ’ States, 1765-1860 (N. Y., 1909). . 
 
 Campbell, Douglas. The Puritan in Holland, England and America (2 vols., N. 
 Y. 1892). 
 
 Campbell, Patrick. Travels in North America, 1791-1792 (Edinburgh, 1793 )- 
 Carey, H. C. Principles of Social Science (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1858-60). 
 Carpenter and Morehouse (Editors and Publishers). History of Amherst, Massa¬ 
 chusetts (Amherst, 1896). < 
 
 Carrier Lyman and Katherine S. Bort. History of Kentucky Bluegrass and 
 White Clover in the United States (in American Society of Agronomy, 
 Journal, VIII (1916), pp. 256-266). . 
 
 Carrier, Lyman. Beginnings of Agriculture in America (N. Y., 1923). 
 
 Carter, James G. Geography of New Hampshire (Boston, 1831). 
 
 Carver, T. N. Historical Sketch of American Agriculture (in Bailey, Cyclopedia ot 
 American Agriculture, IV, 39-70).. 
 
 Cary, M. and J. Bioren. Laws of Pennsylvania (6 vols., Philadelphia, 1803). 
 Chamberlain, Mellen. Documentary History of Chelsea, Massachusetts (2 vols., 
 Boston, 1908). 
 
 Channing, Edward. A History of the United States (5 vols., N. Y., 1905—21). 
 
 _ The Narragansett Planters (in J. H. U. Studies in Hist, and Pol. Science, 
 
 IV (1886), No. 3)- 
 
 - . Hart, A. B., and F. J. Turner. Guide to the Study and Reading of Amer¬ 
 ican History (Rev. ed., Boston, 1912). 
 
 Charlestown (Mass.), Early Records. (In Young’s Chronicles of Massachu¬ 
 setts, pp. 371-387)- 
 
 Chase, Benjamin. History of Old Chester (N. H.) (Auburn, N. H., 1869). 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF AUTHORS 
 
 477 
 
 1 13. Chastellux, Francois Jean. Travels in North America in the Years 1780. 17S1 
 
 and 1782 (N. Y., 1827). 
 
 1 14. Cheney, Edward P. Manor of East Greenwich (in Am. Hist. Review, XI 1905- 
 
 06, pp. 29-35). 
 
 11 5 - Chicago Board of Trade. Annual Reports (1858-1921). 
 
 116. Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce. Annual Reports (1850-1921). 
 
 117. Clap, Roger. Memoirs (in Young’s Chronicles of Massachusetts, 343-368). 
 
 115. Clark, Joseph S. Historical Sketch of Sturbridge, Massachusetts, (Brookfield, 
 
 1838). 
 
 119. Clark, J. V. H. Onondaga (2 vols., N. Y., 1849). 
 
 120. Clark, Victor S. History of Manufactures in the United States, 1607-1860 (Car¬ 
 
 negie Institution of Washington, Publication No. 215B, Washington, 
 J 9 i 6 ). 
 
 121. Clarke, Samuel. Four Chiefest Plantations of the English in America (London, 
 
 1670). 
 
 122. Cluny, Alexander. The American Traveller (London, 1769). 
 
 123. Cobbett, William. A Years Residence in the United States of America (2d ed., 
 
 London, 1819). 
 
 124. Coburn, Foster Dwight. Swine Husbandry (N. Y., 1897). 
 
 125. Cockrum, William M. Pioneer History of Indiana (1907). 
 
 126. Coffin, Charles. The Narragansett Townships (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 
 
 1st Series, II, 131-150). 
 
 127 . Coffin, Paul. Journals (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, IV, 239-385). 
 
 128. Collinson , Read. Abridgement of the Laws of Pennsylvania (2 vols., Philadel¬ 
 
 phia, 1801). 
 
 129. Colman, Henry. Agricultural Addresses at Norwich, New Haven and Hartford, 
 
 Connecticut, at the County Cattle Shows in the Year 1840 (Boston,’ 
 1840). 
 
 130. Colonial Society of Massachusetts. Publications (22 vols., 1894-1920). 
 
 131. Journal of Judah Colt (1789-1808) (in Buffalo Hist. Soc., Publications, VII, 
 
 (1904), pp. 331 - 359 ). 
 
 132. Commerce of Rhode Island (1725-1800) (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 7th 
 
 Series, IX-X. 
 
 133. Congressional Globe (46 vols., Washington, 1834-1873). 
 
 134. Connecticut. Public Records (15 vols., Hartford, 1850-1890). 
 
 ! 35 --• Resolves and Private Laws, 1789-1836 (2 vols., Hartford, 1837). 
 
 136. Connecticut Historical Society. Collections (26 vols., Hartford, 1860-1916). 
 
 137. Connecticut State Agricultural Society. Transactions, 1854-1859 (Hartford 
 
 1855-1859). 
 
 138. Conner, John B. Indiana Agriculture (Indianapolis, 1893). 
 
 139. Connor, L. G. Brief Llistory of the Sheep Industry in the United States (in Am. 
 
 Hist. Assn. Annual Report, 1918, pp. 89-198). 
 
 140. Cooper, I homas. Some Information Respecting America (London, 1794). 
 
 141. Cooper, William. Guide in the Wilderness, 1810. (Reprinted Rochester, N. Y 
 
 1897). 
 
 142. Cope, Gilbert. Historical Sketch of Chester County Agriculture (in Penn. Bd. 
 
 Agric. Annual Report 1880, pp. 208-225). 
 
 143. The Country Gentleman (weekly, Albany, N. Y., 1853- ). 
 
 144. Coxe, Tench. View of the United States of America (London, 1794). 
 
 145. Crevecoeur, J. Hector St. John de. Letters from an American Farmer (1782) 
 
 (reprinted in Everyman’s Library, N. Y., 1916?). 
 
 146. The Cultivator (monthly, Albany, N. Y., 1834-1865; First edition, published as 
 
 monthly edition of The Country Gentleman, 1853-1865). 
 
 147. Cuming, F. Sketches of a Tour to the Western Country 1807-1809 (in Thwaites, 
 
 Early Western Travels, IV). 
 
 148. Cutler, Manasseh. Description of the Soil etc., of Ohio 1788. (Tnans. of a 
 
 French edition, reprinted in Ohio State Arch, and Hist. Soc. Publica¬ 
 tions, III (1891), pp. 82-108). 
 
 149. Cutler, V . P. and J. P. (editors). Life, Journals and Correspondence of Rev. 
 
 Manasseh Cutler, L.L.D. (2 vols., Cincinnati, 1888). 
 
 150. Dabney, John. An Address to Farmers (Salem, Mass., 1796). 
 
 151. Dally, Joseph. Woodbridge {Lew Jersey ) and Vicinity (New Brunswick N J, 
 
 1873). 
 
 152. Danckaerts. See Dankers, Jaspar and Peter Sluyter. 
 
 153. Dankers, Jaspar, and Peter Sluyter. Journal of a Voyage to New York, 1679- 
 
 1680 (in Long Island Hist. Soc. Memoirs, I, 1-428). 
 
478 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 154. Davidson, J. B m and L. W. Chase. Farm Machinery and Farm Motors (N. Y., 
 
 1909). 
 
 155. Davis, Andrew MacFarland. Barberry Bushes and Wheat (in Col. Soc. Mass. 
 
 Publications, XI (1907), pp. 73-95). 
 
 156. Davis, Charles Henry Stanley. History of Wallingford, Meriden and Cheshire, 
 
 Connecticut (Meriden, Conn., 1870). 
 
 157. Davis, William Watts Hart. History of Bucks County, Pennsylvania (Doyles- 
 
 town, 1876). 
 
 158. Dean, James. Alphabetical Atlas or Gazetteer of Vermont (Montpelier, Vt., 1808). 
 
 159. Dean, John Ward (editor). Capt. John Mason (Boston, 1887). 
 
 160. Deane, Samuel. Journal (in Smith’s and Deane’s Journals, Portland, 1849). 
 
 161. -. The New England Farmer (1st ed., Worcester, 179° > 2 d ed., 1797 ) 3 d 
 
 ed., 1822). 
 
 162. De Bow’s Review (J. D. B. De Bow, editor) (39 vols., New Orleans, 1846-1870). 
 
 163. Dedham, Massachusetts. Early Records (1636-1706) (5 vols., Dedham, 1886-99). 
 
 164. Pet, a ft, Johan. New World (Translated in Jameson’s Narratives, 31-60). 
 
 165. Denton, Daniel. A Brief Description of New York, 1670 (Furman ed., N. Y., 
 
 1845 ). 
 
 166. De Rasieres, Isaak. Letter to Samuel Blomaert, 1628 (?) (in Jameson’s Narra¬ 
 
 tives, 99-115). 
 
 167. Description of the Settlement of the Genesee Country (i 79 2 ) (in O’Calla¬ 
 
 ghan’s Documentary History of New York, II, 1129-1168). 
 
 168. Description of the Towne of Mannadens (1661) (in Jameson’s Narratives, 
 
 419-424). 
 
 169. De Voe, Thomas F. The Market Book (N. Y., 1862). 
 
 170. De Vries, David Pietersz. Korte Historiael Ende Journaels Aenteyckeninge 
 
 (1655) (in Jameson’s Narratives, 183-234, and Myers’s Narratives, 
 1-29). 
 
 171. Dewitt, Benjamin. A Sketch of the Turnpike Roads in the State of New York 
 
 (in N. Y. Soc. for Promoting the Useful Arts, Transactions, II, 
 
 190-204). 
 
 172. Dickinson, Rodolphus. Description of Deerfield (Mass.) (Deerfield, 1817). 
 
 173. -• Geographical and Statistical View of Massachusetts (Greenfield, Mass., 
 
 1813). 
 
 174. Documents Relating to the Colonial History of New Jersey (30 vols., 
 
 Newark, N. J., 1880-1918). 
 
 175. Doddridge, Joseph. Notes on the .... Western Parts of Virginia and Penn¬ 
 
 sylvania, 1763-1783 (in Kercheval, History of the Valley of Virginia, 
 2d ed., Woodstock, 1850, pp. 164-263). 
 
 176. Donaldson, Thomas Corwin. The Public Domain (Washington, 1884). 
 
 177. Dorchester (Mass.). Town Records (in Boston Record Commissioners, 4th 
 
 Report, 1880). 
 
 178 . Dorr, Henry C. The Narragansetts (in R. I. Hist. Soc. Collections, VII, 1 37 - 2 37). 
 
 179. -• The Planting of Rhode Island (in R. I. Hist. Tracts, No. 15 , Providence, 
 
 !882). 
 
 180. —*-. The Proprietors of Providence (in R. I. Hist. Soc. Collections, IX (1897)). 
 
 181. Douglass, William, M.D. British Settlements in North America (2 vols., 2d 
 
 ed., Boston, 1749 ). 
 
 182. Draper, James. History of Spencer, Massachusetts (2d ed., Worcester, i860). ^ 
 
 183. Drown, William & Solomon. Compendium of Agriculture, or the Farmer’s 
 
 Guide (Providence, 1824). 
 
 184. Duden’s Report —See Bek, 'William G. 
 
 185. Dudley, Paul. An Account of ... . making Sugar from the Juice of < the 
 
 Maple Trees (in Royal Society of London, Philosophical Transactions, 
 XXXI (1720), pp. 27-28). 
 
 186. Dudley, Thomas. Letter to Lady Bridget, Countess of Lincoln, 1630. 
 
 187. Dunham, D. M. The History of Agricultural Implements (in 18th Annual Re¬ 
 
 port, Maine Bd. Agric., 1873, pp. 363-371). 
 
 188. Dwight, Theodore, jr. History of Connecticut (N. Y., 1841). 
 
 189. Dwight, Rev. Timothy. Statistical Account of New Haven (New Haven, 1811). 
 
 190. -. Travels in New England and New York (4 vols., New Haven, 1821; Eng. 
 
 ed., London, 1823). 
 
 191. Earle, Alice Morse. Home Life in Colonial Days (N. Y., 1898). 
 
 192. Eaton, Amos. Geological and Agricultural Survey of Rensselaer County (New 
 
 York ) (in N. Y. Bd. Agric. Memoirs, ll 1823). 
 
 193. Eaton, Peter. Address before Essex Agricultural Society (1822) (Salem, Mass., 
 
 1823). 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF AUTHORS 
 
 479 
 
 194. Eby, Simon P. Agriculture (in Ellis and Evans, History of Lancaster County, 
 
 Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1883). 
 
 195. Edwards, Bryan. History of the British Colonies in the West Indies (2d ed., 
 
 2 vols., London, 1794; 3d ed., 1801). 
 
 196. Eggleston, Edward. The Colonists at Home (in Century Magazine, XXIX (1884- 
 
 1885), pp. 873-892). 
 
 ] 97 - -. Husbandry in Colony Times (Ibid., XXVII (1883-1884), pp. 431-449). 
 
 108. -. Social Conditions in the Colonies (Ibid., XXVIII (1884), PP- 848-871). 
 
 * 99 - -• Social Life in the Colonies (Ibid., XXX (1885), pp. 387-407). 
 
 200. Egleston, Melville. The Land System of the New England Colonies (in J. H. 
 
 U. Studies in Hist, and Pol. Science, IV, Nos. 11-12 (1886), pp. 545- 
 600). 
 
 201. Eliot, Jared. Essays on Field Husbandry in New England (Boston, 1760). 
 
 202. Elliott, Richard Smith. Notes Taken in Sixty Years (St. Louis, 1883). 
 
 203. Ellis, Franklin, and Samuel Evans. History of Lancaster County, Pennsyl¬ 
 
 vania. (Philadelphia, 1883). 
 
 204. Ellsworth, Henry W. Valley of the Upper Wabash, Indiana (N. Y., 1838). 
 
 205. Elting, Irving. Dutch Village Communities on the Hudson River (in J. H. U. 
 
 Studies in Hist, and Pol. Science, IV, No. 1 (1886), pp. 1-68). 
 
 206. Esarey, Logan. History of Indiana from its Exploration to 1850 (2d ed., Indian¬ 
 
 apolis, 1918). 
 
 207. Essex County, Massachusetts. Records and Files of the Quarterly Courts, 
 
 I (1636-1656) (Salem, 1911). 
 
 208. Essex Institute (Salem, Mass.), Historical Collections (40 vols., 1859-1904). 
 
 209. Evans, Estwick. Pedestrious Tour (1818) (in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, 
 
 VIII, 90-364). 
 
 210. Farmer, John. Historical Sketch of Amherst, New Hampshire (in N. H. Hist. 
 
 Soc. Collections, IV, 79-128). 
 
 211. Farmer, John, and Moore, Jacob B. Collections—relating to New Hampshire 
 
 (3 vols., 1822-1824). 
 
 212. -. -, Gazetteer of New Hampshire (Concord, 1823). 
 
 213. Faust, Albert B. German Element in the United States (2 vols., N. Y., 1909). 
 
 214. Faux, W. Memorable Days in America (in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, 
 
 XI and XII, 1-138, London, 1823). 
 
 215. Fearon, H. B. Sketches of America (London, 1818). 
 
 216. Felt, Joseph B. History of Ipswich, Essex, and Hamilton (Mass.) (Cambridge, 
 
 1834). 
 
 2I 7 - -*—• Population of Massachusetts (in Am. Statistical Assn. Collections, I, 
 
 121-216) (Boston, 1845). 
 
 218. -■. Statistics of Towns in Massachusetts (in Am. Statistical Assn. Collec¬ 
 
 tions, I, 9-99). 
 
 219. Fernow, Berthold. Few Netherland, or the Dutch in North America (in Winsor, 
 
 History of America, IV, 395-409). 
 
 220. Ferree, Barr. Pennsylvania: a Primer (N. Y., 1904). 
 
 221. Field, David Dudley. A History of the County of Berkshire, Massachusetts 
 
 (Pittsfield, Mass., 1829). 
 
 222. Filson, John. Discovery, Settlement, and Present State of Kentucky (1784) 
 
 (in Imlay, Western Territory, 3d ed., 306-337). 
 
 22 3 - -• Statistical Account of the County of Middlesex in Connecticut (Middle- 
 
 town, Conn., 1819). 
 
 224. Fiske, John. The Beginnings of New England (Boston, 1899). 
 
 225. Fitch, Asa. The Hessian Fly (in N. Y. State Agric. Soc. Transactions (1846), 
 
 PP, 316-373). 
 
 226. Plagg, Charles. Guide to Massachusetts Local History (Salem, Mass., 1907). 
 
 227. Flagg, W. C. Agriculture of Illinois (1683-1876) (in Ill. Dept. Agric.,’ Trans¬ 
 
 actions, XIII (1875) ). 
 
 228. Flint, Charles L. A Hundred Years’ Progress of American Agriculture (in 
 
 igth Annual Report, Maine Bd. Agric. (1874), pp. 105-153). 
 
 229. Flint, Charles L. Progress in Agriculture (in Kettell, Eighty Years’ Progress 
 
 I, 19-102). 
 
 230. Flint, Rev. Jacob. History and Description of Cohasset, Norfolk County, Massa¬ 
 
 chusetts (1822) (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d Series, II, 89- 
 
 I0 9). 
 
 231. I lint, James. Letters from /.Imerica (1818—1820) (in T-hwaites, Early Western 
 
 Travels, IX). 
 
 232. Flint, Martha B. Early Long Island (N. Y., 1896). 
 
480 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 233. Flint, Timothy. A Condensed Geography and History of the Western States, 
 
 or the Mississippi Valley (2 vols., Cincinnati, 1828). 
 
 234. -• Recollections of the Last Ten Years (Boston, 1826). 
 
 233. Flower George. History of the English Settlement in Edwards County fill.) 
 
 (1817-1849) (in Chicago Hist. Soc. Collections, l (1882) ). 
 
 236. Flower. Richard. Letters from Lexington and the Illinois 1819. Letters from 
 
 the Illinois 1820,1821 (in Thwaites, Early Western Travels , X, 89-169). 
 
 237. Folger, Walter jr. Topographical Description of A antucket (in Mass. Hist. 
 
 Soc. Collections, 1st Series, III, 153 —^tSS) • , 
 
 238. Force, Peter. Tracts .... Relating to the Origin, Settlement, and Progress of 
 
 the Colonies in North America (4 vols., Washington, 1846). . e 
 230. Ford, A. C. Colonial Precedents of our National Land System as it Existed m 
 
 1800 (Wis. Univ. Bulletin, History Series, II, No. 2 (1910), Whole 
 No. 352). 
 
 240. Ford, Governor Thomas. History of Illinois (1818-1847) (Chicago, 1854). 
 
 241. Foster, A. and P. P. Woodbury. Topographical Sketch of Bedford, New Hamp¬ 
 
 shire (in N. H. Hist. Soc. Collections , I, 288-296). 
 
 242. Fowler, Frederick H. Early Agricultural Education in Massachusetts (in 54th 
 
 Annual Report, Mass. State Bd. Agriculture (1906), pp. 33 I ~ 392 ). 
 
 243. Flower, John. Journal of a Tour in New York (London, 1831). , 
 
 244. Frame, Richard. A Short Description of Pennsylvania (1692) (in Myers s Aarra- 
 
 tives, 295-305). , . o < o \ 
 
 245. Franklin, Benjamin. Works (Sparks, ed., 10 vols., 1836-1840). 
 
 246. Freeman, Charles. An Account of Limerick (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 
 
 1st Series, I, 245-253). 
 
 247. French, J. H,. Gazetteer of the State of New York (8th ed., N. \., i860). 
 
 248. Fry, W. H. New Hampshire as a Royal Province (in Columbia Univ. Studies 
 
 in History, Economics and Public Law, XXIX (1908), No. 2. 
 
 240. Fuller, George. Economic and Social Beginnings of Michigan, 1805-1837 (Lans- 
 
 250. Furman, Gabriel. Antiquities of Long Island (ed., by Frank Moore, N. Y., 
 
 251. Futhey, J. 1 IP and Gilbert Cope. History of Chester County, Pennsylvania 
 
 (Philadelphia, 1881). . . 
 
 252. Gabriel, Ralph Henry. The Evolution of Long Island (in Yale Hist. Publica¬ 
 
 tions, Miscellany, IX, New Haven, 1921). . 
 
 253. Gardiner, John Lyon. Notes on East Hampton (L. I.) (1798) (in N. Y. Hist. 
 
 Soc. Collections, Publication Fund Series, II, 225-271).. 
 
 254. Gardiner, Robert H. History of the Kennebec Purchase (in Maine Hist. Soc. 
 
 Collections, 1st Series, II, 269-294). 
 
 255. The Genessee Farmer (weekly, Rochester, N. Y., 1831-39). 
 
 256. George, N. J. T. Gazetteer of Vermont (Haverhill (N. H.), 1823). 
 
 257. Gephart, William P. Transportation and Industrial Development in the Middle 
 
 West (in Columbia Univ. Studies in History, Economics and Pub¬ 
 lic Law, XXXIV, No. 1, N. Y., 1909). 
 
 258. Gerhard, Fred. Illinois as It Is (Chicago and Philadelphia, 1857). 
 
 259. Gilbert, Frank. Jethro Wood (Chicago,. 1882). 
 
 260. Gist, Christopher. Journal (1750) (in Filson Club Publications , No. 13). 
 
 261. Gleanings from the Most Celebrated Book on Husbandry (Philadelphia, 30, 
 
 1803). 
 
 262. Goodale, George Lincoln. New England Plants Seen by the Earliest Colonists 
 
 (in Col. Soc. of Mass., Publications, III (1895-97), 189-194). . 
 
 263. Goodwin, F. P. Building a Commercial System (in Ohio State Arch. & Hist. Soc. 
 
 Quarterly, XVI (1907), 316-339)* 
 
 264. Gordon, Thomas F. History of New Jersey (Trenton, 1834). 
 
 265. -. Gazetteer of the State of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1832). 
 
 266. -. Gazetteer of the State of New York (Philadelphia, 1836). 
 
 267. Goss, E. H. The Hungry Pilgrims (in Magazine of American History, XIII 
 
 (1885), PP. 477-48o). 
 
 268. Graham, J. A. Descriptive Sketch of ... . Vermont (London, 1797 )- 
 
 269. Graves, Thomas. Letter sent from New England (1629) (in Young’s Chronicles, 
 
 264-267). 
 
 270. Great Britain. Public Record Office, Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series 
 
 (23 vols., London, 1860-1916). 
 
 271. Green, John Richard. Short History of the English People (2 vols., N. \ 
 
 1898). 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF AUTHORS 481 
 
 272. Green, Samuel A. Early Land Grants of Groton, Massachusetts (Groton, 1870). 
 273 - -• Historical Address (Groton, 1876). 
 
 274. . s\n Historical Sketch of Groton, Massachusetts (Groton, 1894). 
 
 2 75 - -. Groton Historical Series (4 vols., Groton, 1887-1899). 
 
 276. . Scotch Irish in America (in Am. Antiq. Soc. Proceedings, New Series, X 
 
 _ (1895), pp. 32-70). 
 
 -77- Greenleaf, Moses. Statistical I iew of the District of Maine (Boston, 1816). 
 
 278. -. Survey of the State of Maine (Portland, 1829). 
 
 279. Greenleaf, 1 homas. Geographical Gazetteer of Towns in Massachusetts (Boston 
 
 o ^ U84). 
 
 280. Greeno, Follet L. (ed.). Obed Hussey (Rochester, N. Y., 1912). 
 
 281. Griffin, A. P. C. Bibliography of American Historical Societies (in American 
 
 Hist. Assn. Annual Report, II (1905), 2d ed., Washington, 1907). 
 
 282 - -• Bibliography of Hist. Publications of the New England States (in Col. 
 
 Soc. of Mass. Publications, III (1895-97), PP- 94-139). 
 
 283. Hall, Frederick. Statistical Account of the Town of Middlebury .... Ver¬ 
 
 mont (1820) (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d Series, IX, 123-158). 
 
 284. Hall, James. Notes on the Western States (Philadelphia, 1838). 
 
 285. -. Statistics of the West (Cincinnati, 1836). 
 
 286. Hansen, AiVin H. Wholesale Prices in the United States, 1801-1840 (in Am. 
 
 Statistical Assn. Quarterly Publications, XIV (1914-15), pp. 804-812). 
 
 287. Hardie, James. Description of th& City of New York (N. Y., 1827). 
 
 288. Harlow, Ralph V. Economic Conditions in Massachusetts during the American 
 
 Revolution (in Publications, Col. Soc. Mass., XX (1917-19), pp. 
 163-190). 
 
 289. Harriott, John. Struggles through Life (2 vols., London, 1808). 
 
 290. Harris, Thaddeus Mason. Journal of a Tour into the Territory Northwest of 
 
 the Allegheny Mountains (1803 ) (Boston, 1805). 
 
 291. Hasse, Adelaide R. Index of Economic Material in Documents of the States of 
 
 the United States, (1789—1904), Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, New 
 Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, 
 Vermont (Washington, 1907-1921). 
 
 292. Hawley, Zerah. Tour and Residence in Western Reserve (1822). 
 
 293. Hawthorne, Nathaniel. American Note Books (nth ed., 1887/ in Complete 
 
 Works, Riverside ed., Vol. IX, Boston, 1886-89). 
 
 294* Hayes, Lyman S. Navigation of the Connecticut River (in Vermont Hist. Soc. 
 
 Proceedings (1915-1916), pp. 51-86). 
 
 295. Hayward, John. Gazetteer of Maine (1843). 
 
 296. -. Gazetteer of Massachusetts (Rev. ed., Boston, 1849). 
 
 297* -• Gazetteer of New Hampshire (Boston, 1849). 
 
 298. Hayward, William Welles. History of Hancock, New Hampshire (1764-1889) 
 
 (Lowell, Mass., 1889). 
 
 299. Hazard, Caroline. College Tom (Boston, 1893). 
 
 300. Hazard, Samuel. Annals of Pennsylvania 1609-1682 (Philadelphia, 1850). 
 
 30 i- - (editor). Register of Pennsylvania (weekly) (16 vols., 1828-1835). 
 
 302. Hazen, Henry A. History of Billerica, Mass. (Boston, 1883). 
 
 303. Hedges, Henry P. Development of Agriculture in Suffolk County (New York ) 
 
 (in Bicentennial History of Suffolk County, (1885))/ 
 
 304. Hempstead, Joshua. Diary (1711-1758) (in New London County Hist. Soc. 
 
 Collections, I (1901), New London (Conn.), 1901). 
 
 305. Hibbard, B. H. History of Agriculture in Dane County, Wisconsin (Univ. of Wis. 
 
 Bulletin No. 101, 1904). 
 
 306. Higginson, Francis. Journal (1629) (in Young’s Chronicles of Mass., 213-238). 
 
 307. -. New England’s Plantation (3d ed., London, 1630, reprinted in Young’s 
 
 Chronicles of Mass., 239-268). 
 
 308. Holmes, G. K. Aboriginal Agriculture—The American Indians (in Bailey’s 
 
 Cyclopedia of American Agriculture, IV, 24-38). 
 
 309. -. Progress of Agriculture in the United States (U. S. Dept, of Agric. 
 
 Yearbook, 1899, pp. 307 - 334 ) • 
 
 310. Hood, John. Index of Colonial ami State Laws of New Jersey (1663-1877) 
 
 (Trenton, 1877). 
 
 311. Hoskins, Nathan. History of the State of Vermont (Vergennes, Vt., 1831). 
 
 312. Hotchkin, J. H. History of Western New York (N. Y., 1848). 
 
 313. Howells, William C. Recollections of Life in Ohio (1830-1840) (Cincinnati, 
 
 1895). 
 
 314. Hubbard, Mary Ann. Family Memories (1820-1909) (Chicago, 1912). 
 
 32 
 
482 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Hubbard, William. General History of Hew England (1680) (in Mass. I List. 
 Soc. Collections, 2d Series, V and VI). 
 
 316. Hulbert, Archer B. Historic Highways of America (16 vols., 1902-1905). 
 
 317. Hulme, Thomas. Journal Made During a Tour in the Western Countries of 
 
 America (in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, X, 19-84). 
 
 318. Hunt, Thomas F. The Cereals in America (N. Y., 1904). 
 
 3™. Hutchins, Thomas. Topographical Description of Virginia, Pennsylvania, Mary¬ 
 land and North Carolina (in Imiay, Western Territory, 3d ed., 
 
 320 Hutchinson, ^Thomas (editor). Collection of Original Papers Relative to the 
 
 History of the Colony of the Massachusetts Bay (2 vols., Boston, 
 
 1769). _ . 
 
 321. -. History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay (3 vols., Boston, 1764, 1707). 
 
 322'. Illinois State Agricultural Society. Transactions (biennial, 1853-1870). 
 
 323. Imlay, Gilbert. Topographical Description of the Western Territory of North 
 
 America (3d ed., London (i 797 ) )• 
 
 324. Indiana State Board of Agriculture. Annual Reports (1851-1910). 
 
 325. Indiana University: Extension Section. Readings in Indiana History (Pub¬ 
 
 lished by the University 1914)- . 
 
 326. Ingle, Edward. Southern Sidelights (Library of Economics and Politics, No. 
 
 10, 1896). 
 
 327. Innes, J. H. New Amsterdam and Its People (N. Y., 1902). 
 
 328. Iowa State Agricultural Society. Annual Reports (1854-1899). 
 
 329. Jackson, Charles T. Geological and Agricultural Survey of Rhode Island (Provi¬ 
 
 dence, 1839). 
 
 330. Jameson, J. Franklin. Nantuck and Common Lands of Easthampton (in Maga¬ 
 
 zine of American History, IX (1883), pp. 225-239). 
 
 331. - (editor). Narratives of New Netherland (1609-1664) (N. Y., I 9 ° 9 )- 
 
 332. Jefferson, Thomas. Description of a Mould-board of the Least Resistance, and 
 
 of the Easiest and Most Certain Construction (in American Philo¬ 
 sophical Society, Transactions, IV (i 799 )> PP- 3 I 3 ~ 3 22 )- 
 
 333. -. Writings (Library ed., 20 vols., Washington, D. C., 1903-1904). 
 
 334. Jogues, Father Isaac. Novum Belgium (1646) (In Jameson’s Narratives, 25 7 ~ 
 
 263). 
 
 335 - Johnson* Amandus. Swedish Settlements on the Delaware (1638-1664) (2 vols., 
 
 Philadelphia, 1911). 
 
 336. Johnson, C. B. (pseudonym of R. H,. Rose q. v.) . 
 
 337. Johnson, Edward. Wonder Working Providence of Sions Saviour in New Eng¬ 
 
 land (1628-1651) (J. F. Jameson, ed., N. Y., 1910). 
 
 338. Johnson, Emory Richard, et al. History of Domestic and Foreign Commerce 
 
 of the United States (Carnegie Institution of Washington Pub., No. 
 215A, 2 vols., Washington, 1915). . 
 
 339 - Jones, Charles. The Broom Corn Industry in the Counties of Franklin and 
 Hampshire (Mass.) (in Pocumtuck Valley Memorial Assn. Hist, and 
 Proceedings, III, 105-m). 
 
 340. Jones, John. Letter (1725) (in Myers’s Narratives, 449-459). 
 
 341. Jones, Samuel and Richard Varick. Laws of the State of New York 1778-1786 
 
 (2 vols., N. Y., 1789). 
 
 342. Josselyn, John. Account of Two Voyages to New England (in Mass. Hist. Soc. 
 
 Collections, 3d Series, III, 3 i i~ 354 )- 
 
 343. Judd, Sylvester. History of Hadley (Mass.) (New ed., Springfield, Mass., 1905). 
 
 344. J uekgens, Carl H. Movement of Wholesale Prices in New York 1825-1863 (in 
 
 Am. Statistical Assn. Quarterly Publications, XII (1911-12), pp. 544- 
 
 557 ) • 
 
 345. Kalm, Per. Travels into North America (1748-175°) (Trans, by J. R. Forster, 
 
 3 vols., Warrington and London, 1770-1771). 
 
 346. Keen, Gregory B. New Sweden, or the Swedes on the Delaware (in Winsor, 
 
 America, IV, 443-488). 
 
 347. Kelly, John. Historical Sketch of Hampstead (N. H.) (in N. H. Hist. Soc. 
 
 Collections, V (1835), PP- I 79 ~i 99 )- 
 
 348. Kendall, Edward Augustus. Travels Through the Northern Parts of the 
 
 United States (1807-1809) (3 vols., N. Y., 1809). 
 
 349. Kettell, Thomas P. (editor). Eighty Years' Progress of the United States 
 
 (2 vols., N. Y., 1861). 
 
 350. Kilbourn, John. Ohio Gazetteer (11 eds., 1816-1833). 
 
 351. King, I. F. The Coming and Going of Ohio Droving (in Ohio State Arch, and 
 
 Hist. Soc. Quarterly, XVII (1908), pp. 247-253). 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF AUTHORS 483 
 
 352. Kittery Memorial (1751) (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, IV, 199- 
 
 205). 
 
 353. Klippart, John H. The Wheat Plant (N. Y., i860). 
 
 354. Knight, Madam. Journals (1704) (Winship ed., Boston, 1920). 
 
 355. Kuhns, Oscar. German and Swiss Settlements of Colonial Pennsylvania (N. 
 
 Y., 1901). 
 
 356. Lambert, John. Travels in Lower Canada and New Hampshire in the Years 
 
 1806, 1807 & 1808 (London, 1810). 
 
 357. Lamson-Scribner, Frank. Economic Grasses (in U. S. Dept, of Agric., Division 
 
 of Agrostology, Bulletin, No. 14). 
 
 358. Lanman, James H. History of Michigan (N. Y., 1839). 
 
 359. Larned, Ellen Douglas. History of Windham County, Connecticut (2 vols., 
 
 Worcester, Mass., 1874). 
 
 360. La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt. Travels through the United States of North 
 
 America (2 vols., London, 1799). 
 
 361. Leaming, Aaron and Jacob Spicer. Grants and Concessions of Nezv Jersey, 
 
 (1664-1702) (2d ed.. Somerville, N. J., 1881). 
 
 362. Lechford, Thomas. Note Book (in Am. Antiquarian Soc. Transactions, VII 
 
 (1885). 
 
 363. Lees, John. Journal (1768) (reprinted N. Y., 1911). 
 
 364. Leonard, Rev. Levi 'W. History of Dublin, Nezo Hampshire (Boston, 1855). 
 
 365. Liberties of the Massachusetts Colonie in New England (in Mass. Hist. 
 
 Soc. Collections, 3d Series, VIII, 191-237). 
 
 366. Lincklaen, Joh,n. Journals (N. Y., 1897). 
 
 367. Lippincott, Isaac. Pioneer Industry in the West (in Journal of Political Economy, 
 
 XVIII (1910), pp. 269-293). 
 
 368. Livingston, Robert R. American Agriculture (in Edinburgh Encyclopedia, 1st 
 
 Ani. ed., 18 vols., Philadelphia, 1832). 
 
 369. -. Essay on Sheep (N. Y., 1809). 
 
 370. Loddington, William. Plantation Work (London, 1682). 
 
 371. Lodge, Henry Cabot. Short History of the English Colonies (N. Y., 1881). 
 
 372. Lodowick, Charles. New York in 1692 (in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d 
 
 Series, I, 243). 
 
 373. Logan, George. Fourteen Agricultural Experiments to Ascertain the Best Rotation 
 
 of Crops (Philadelphia, 1797). 
 
 374. Long, Moses. Historical Sketches of Warner, New Hampshire (in N. H. Hist. 
 
 Soc. Collections, III, 179-206). 
 
 375. Lorain, John. Nature and Reason Harmonized in the Practice of Husbandry 
 
 (Philadelphia, 1825). 
 
 376. Lord, Eleanor Louisa. Industrial Experiments in the British Colonies of North 
 
 America (in J. PI. U. Studies in Hist, and Pol. Sci., Extra vol. 
 XVII (1898). 
 
 377. Love, Rev. William de Loss. Colonial History of Hartford, (Conn.) (Hartford, 
 
 ^ 914 ) • 
 
 378. -. Nazngation of the Connecticut River (in Am. Antiq. Soc. Proceedings, 
 
 New Series, XV (1902-3), pp. 385-441). 
 
 379. Lyman, Payson W. History of Easthampton (Mass.) (Northampton, 1866). 
 
 380. Macauley, James. Natural, Statistical and Civil History of the State of New 
 
 York (3 vols., N. Y., 1829). 
 
 381. Maclear, Anne B. Early New England Towns (in Columbia University Studies 
 
 in Political Science, XXIX (1908), No. 1). 
 
 382. McMaster, John Bach. History of the People of the United States (8 vols., N. 
 
 Y., 1885-1913). 
 
 383. Macsparran, James. America Dissected (1753) (reprinted in Updike’s Narragan- 
 
 sett Church, III). 
 
 384. -. Letter Book (1743-1751) (Boston, 1899). 
 
 385. Macy, Obed. History of Nantucket (Boston, 1835). 
 
 386. Macy, Zacchaeus. A Short Journal of the First Settlement of ... . Nan¬ 
 
 tucket (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, III, 155-161). 
 
 387. Maine. State Board of Agriculture, Annual Reports, 1855-1901. 
 
 388. -. State Board of Agriculture, Transactions of the Agricultural Societies 
 
 (1850-1852, Part I (1853). 
 
 389. -. Report of the State Treasurer, 1843. 
 
 390. Maine Farmer (weekly) (Winthrop, Me., 1833-1922). 
 
 391. Maine Historical Society. Collections (Series 1-3, 22 vols., Portland, 1831-1906). 
 
 392. Mainwaring, Charles W. Digest of Early Connecticut Probate Records, Hart¬ 
 
 ford District (3 vols., Hartford 1904). 
 
484 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 393. Marquis, J. C. Changes in Fanning in an Old Community (in Bailey’s Cyclopedia, 
 
 IV, pp. 97-101). 
 
 394. Marsh, Charles W. Recollections 1837-1910 (Chicago, 1910). 
 
 395. Martin, John Hill. Chester, (Penn.), and its Vicinity (Philadelphia, 1877). 
 
 396. Martindale, Joseph C. History of the Townships of Byberry and Moreland in 
 
 Philadelphia County (Philadelphia, 1867). 
 
 397. Massachusetts (Colony). Probate Court (Essex County), Probate Records, 
 
 1635-1681 (3 vols., Salem, 1916-1920). 
 
 398. -. Acts and Resolves of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, 1692-1780 (21 
 
 vols., Boston, 1869-1922). 
 
 399. -. Records of the Governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay in New 
 
 England (1628-1686) (5 vols., Boston (1853-54). 
 
 400. Massachusetts Board of Agriculture. Annual Reports (1851-1917). 
 
 401. -. Commissioner for the Agricultural Survey. Agriculture of Massachusetts, 
 
 1st to 4th Reports (1837-1841) (Boston, 1838-1841). 
 
 402. -. Laws of Massachusetts (1780-1800) (2 vols., Boston, 1801). 
 
 403. - . Legislative Documents. House of Representatives Document No. < 12 
 
 (1838); Senate Document No. 77 (1838) ; House of Representatives 
 Document No. 40 (1839) I Senate Document No. 2 (1841). 
 
 404. -. Returns of the Agricultural Societies (1845-46). 
 
 405. -. Statistics of Certain Branches of Industry (1837). 
 
 405a. -. Transactions of the Agricultural So'deties (1847-1852). After 1852 the 
 
 Transactions are found in the Annual Reports. 
 
 406. Massachusetts Agricultural Repository and Journae. (10 vols., 1798-1832). 
 
 407. Massachusetts Historical Society. Collections (74 vols., 1794-1918). 
 
 408. Massachusetts Society for Promoting Agriculture. Laws and Regulations 
 
 (Boston, 1793). 
 
 409. Mathews, A. The Topographical Terms “Interval” and “Intervale” (in Col. 
 
 Soc. Mass. Publications, ¥1(1899), pp. 137-151). 
 
 410. Mathews, Lois Kimball. The Expansion of New England (Boston, 1909). 
 
 411. Maude, John. Visit to the Falls of Niagara (1800) (London, 1826). 
 
 412. Maverick, Samuel. A Briefe Description of New England (1660) (in New Eng¬ 
 
 land Historical and Genealogical Register, XXXIX, 1885, pp. 33-48). 
 
 413. Mease, James. Geological Account of the United States (Philadelphia, 1807). 
 
 414. Mechanics’ Magazine (9 vols., N. Y., 1833-37). 
 
 415. Megapolensis, Johannes jr. A Short Account of the Mohawk Indians (1644) (in 
 
 Jameson’s Narratives, 165-180). 
 
 416. Melish, John. Travels Through the United States of America, 1806-1811 (2 vols., 
 
 Philadelphia, 1815). 
 
 417. Merchants’ Magazine and Commercial Review (Freeman Hunt, ed.) (monthly, 
 
 N. Y., 1840-70). 
 
 418. Meyer, Balthasar Henry. History of Transportation in the United States before 
 
 i860 (Washington, 1917) (Carnegie Institute of Washington, Pub. 
 No. 215 C). 
 
 419. Michaelius, Jonas. Letter (1628) in Jameson’s Narratives, 119-133). 
 
 420. Michaux, Andre. Journal of Travels into Kentucky (1793-1796) (in Thwaites, 
 
 Early Western Travels, III, 25-104), 
 
 421. Michaux, F. A. Travels to the West of the Allegheny Mountains (in Thwaites, 
 
 Early Western Travels, III, 105-306). 
 
 422. -. Voyage a V ouest des mont Alleghanys (Paris, 1804). 
 
 423. Miller, Edward and Frederick P. Wells. History of Ryegate, Vermont (St. 
 
 Johnsbury, Vt., 1913). 
 
 424. Miller, Merritt Finley. The Evolution of Reaping Machines (U. S. Dept, of 
 
 Agric. Office of Experiment Stations, Bulletin No. 103, 1902). 
 
 425. Mitchell, Samuel Augustus. An Accompaniment to Mitchell’s Reference and 
 
 Distance Map of the United States (Philadelphia, 1834). 
 
 426. Mittleberger, Gottlieb. Journey to Pennsylvania (I 750 -I 754 ) (reprinted in Eng¬ 
 
 lish translation, Philadelphia, 1898). 
 
 427. Moore, Jacob B. Historical Sketch of Concord (N. H.) (in N. H. Hist. Soc. 
 
 Collections, I, I 53 - I 59 ). 
 
 428. Moore, Thomas. Great Error of American Agriculture Exposed (Baltimore, 1801). 
 
 429. More, Dr. Nicholas. Letter (1686) (in Myers’s Narratives, 279-293). 
 
 430. Morris, James A. Statistical Account of Several Towns in the County of Litch¬ 
 
 field (Conn.) (New Haven, 1811). 
 
 431. Morse, Rev. Jedidiah. The American Gazetteer (3d ed., Boston, 1810). 
 
 432. Morse, Jedidiah. The American Geography (3d ed., Dublin, 1792). 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF AUTHORS 
 
 485 
 
 433 - 
 
 434 - 
 
 435 - 
 
 436 . 
 
 437 . 
 
 438 . 
 439 - 
 
 440 . 
 
 441. 
 
 442 . 
 
 443 - 
 
 444 - 
 
 445 - 
 
 446 . 
 
 447 . 
 
 448 . 
 449 - 
 
 450 . 
 
 451 . 
 
 452 . 
 
 453 - 
 
 454 - 
 
 455 - 
 456 . 
 457 - 
 
 458 . 
 
 459 - 
 
 460. 
 
 461. 
 
 462. 
 
 463. 
 
 464. 
 
 465. 
 
 466. 
 
 467. 
 
 468 . 
 
 469. 
 
 470 . 
 
 471 . 
 
 472 . 
 
 473 . 
 
 474 - 
 
 475 - 
 476 . 
 
 Morton, ^Nathaniel. New England's Memorial (1669) (5th eel., Boston, 1826). 
 
 ——. Muddy River and Brookline Records, 1634-1838 (Boston, 1875). 
 
 Munro, Robert. Description of the Genessee Country (1804) (in O’Callaghan 
 
 . a Documentary History of New York, II, 1171-1188). 
 
 Myers, Albert Cook (editor). Narratives of Early Pennsylvania West New 
 Jersey and Delaware 1630-1707 (N. Y., 1912). 
 arrati\ e About New England (1665) (in Hutchinson Papers, II, 140-153). 
 
 Nason, Elias. Billerica (Mass .), Centennial Oration (Lowell 1876). 
 
 —- . History of Dunstable (Mass.) (Boston, 1877). 
 
 Neal, Daniel. History of New England (2 vols., 1st ed., 1720; 2d ed., London. 
 
 _ J 747 ). 
 
 New England Farmer (weekly), T. G. Fessenden, editor (24 vols., Boston, 
 1822-1846). 
 
 New England Historical and Genealogical Register (67 vols., 1847—1913) 
 
 Pse\v Hampshire. Provincial and State Papers (30 vols., 1867-1914). 
 
 - . Board of Agriculture, Annual Reports (1871-1913). 
 
 —♦- . State Agricultural Society Transactions, 1850-1859. 
 
 . State Board of Agriculture. The New Hampshire Repository, I (Concord 
 1822). ’ 
 
 Few Hampshire Historical Society. Collections (11 vols., 1824-1915, Concord 
 N. H., 1824-1915). 
 
 New Haven (Colony). Records of the Colony and Plantation of New Haven 
 (1638-1649) (Hartford, 1857). 
 
 New Jersey Archives. See Documents Relating to the Colonial History of New 
 Jersey. 
 
 New Jersey Historical Society. Collections (9 vols., 1846-1900). 
 
 New Plymouth Colony. Records (1620-1692) (12 vols., Boston, 1855-1861). 
 
 New York (Province). Duke of York’s Laws, 1664 (in N. Y. Hist. Soc., Collec¬ 
 tions, 1st Series, I, 307-428). 
 
 New York. Assembly Journal (49th Session, January 1826). 
 
 - . Board of Agriculture, Memoirs (3 vols., Albany, 1821-1826). 
 
 -. Census of 1823 (in Assembly Journal, 49th Session (1826), App. C.). 
 
 -. Colonial Laws, I (1664-1719). 
 
 -. Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York 
 
 (See O'Callaghan, E. B., editor). 
 
 -. Laws (1777-1801) (Cook edition, 5 vols., Albany, 1886). 
 
 -. Revised Statutes (3 vols., Albany, 1829). 
 
 New Y'ork Farmer (monthly) (N. Y., 1826-1837). 
 
 New York Historical Society. Collections (vols. I-V; Second Series, vols. 
 I-IV, N. Y., 1811-1859). 
 
 New York Shipping and Commercial List and New York Price Current 
 (semi-weekly) (73 vols., N. Y., 1815-1897). 
 
 New York Society for the Promotion of the Useful Arts. Transactions (4 
 vols., N. Y., 1792-1819) (vol. I 2d ed., 1801). 
 
 New York State Agricultural Society. Transactions (1841-1897). 
 
 Nicholas, Andrew. Address to the Essex Agricultural Society, 1820 (Salem, 
 1821). 
 
 Niles, Hezekiah (editor). Niles Weekly Register (75 vols., Baltimore, 1811- 
 1849). 
 
 North, James W. History of Augusta, Maine (Augusta, 1870). 
 
 North, S. N. D. A Century of American Wool Manufacture (in Nat. Assn, of 
 Wool Manufacturers, Bulletin, XXIV (1894), pp. 219-251; 329-350; 
 XXV (1895), pp. 40-63). 
 
 Nourse, Henry S. History of Harvard, Massachusetts (Harvard, 1894). 
 
 O’Callaghan, E. B. (editor). Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the 
 State of New York (15 vols., Albany, 1853-87). 
 
 -. Documentary History of the State of New York (4 vols., Albany, 1849- 
 
 1851)• 
 
 Ogg, F. A. (editor). Personal Narrative of Travels in Virginia, Maryland, Penn¬ 
 sylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, and of a Residence in the Illinois 
 Territory; (1817-1818), by E. L. Fordham (Cleveland, 1906). 
 
 Ohio State Board of Agriculture, Annual Reports (1846-1886). 
 
 -. Brief History of the Ohio State Board of Agriculture .... and Agri¬ 
 cultural Societies (Columbus, 1899). 
 
 Ohio State Archeological and Historical Society. Publications (13 vols , 1900- 
 1909). 
 
 Onderdonk, Henry. Ancient Agriculture in Hempstead (Queens County, N. Y.) 
 (Jamaica, N. Y., 1867). 
 
486 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 477 - 
 478. 
 
 479 - 
 
 480. 
 
 481. 
 
 482. 
 
 483. 
 
 484. 
 
 485. 
 
 486. 
 
 487. 
 
 488. 
 
 489. 
 
 490. 
 
 491. 
 
 492. 
 
 493 - 
 
 494 - 
 
 495 - 
 496. 
 
 497 - 
 
 498. 
 
 499 - 
 
 500. 
 
 501. 
 
 502. 
 
 503 . 
 
 504. 
 
 505 . 
 
 506. 
 
 507 . 
 
 508. 
 
 509. 
 
 510. 
 
 511. 
 
 512. 
 
 513. 
 
 514. 
 
 515. 
 
 516. 
 
 517. 
 
 518. 
 
 519. 
 
 _:- Queen's County in Olden Times (Jamaica, N. Y., 1865). 
 
 Orleans County (Vermont) Historical Society. Proceedings ( 1887-1891). 
 Osgood, Herbert L. The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century (3 vols., 
 N Y 1904_7)• 
 
 Paige Lucius R.’ History of Cambridge, Massachusetts (1630-1877) (Boston, 
 t877) 
 
 Palmer Dr Edward. Food Products of the North American Indians (in U. S. 
 
 Dept, of Agric. Annual Report (1870), pp. 404-428)- f . . , 
 
 Palmer, John. Journal of Travels in the United States of North America and 
 in Lower Canada (1817) (London, 1818). . , 
 
 Papers Relating to Long Island (in O’Callaghan, Documentary History of 
 New York, I, 627-686). 
 
 Papers Relating to the Trade and Manufactures of the Province of New 
 York (1705-1757) (in O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New 
 
 York I 709—736). 
 
 Parkinson, Richard. A Tour in America (1798-1800) (2 vols., London, 1805). 
 Parsons, Isaac. An Account of New Gloucester (Maine) (1824) (in Maine Hist. 
 
 Soc. Collections, 1st Series, II, 150-164). 
 
 Paschall, Thomas. Letter (1683) (in Myers’s Narratives, 245-254). 
 
 Pastorius, Francis Daniel. Circumstantial Geographical Description of L enn - 
 sylvania (1700) (in Myers’s Narratives, 353 - 448 ). 
 
 Pease John C., and John M 1 . Niles. Gazetteer of the States of Connecticut and 
 Rhode Island (Hartford, 1819). 
 
 Peck, J. M. New Guide for Emigrants to the West (Boston, 1836). . 
 
 Penn, William. A Further Account of the Province of Pennsylvania (1685) (m 
 Myers’s Narratives, 255-278). . , _ , , . r 
 
 _. Letters to the Committee of the Free Society of Traders (1683) (in 
 
 Myers’s Narratives, 217-244). , AT 
 
 _. Some Account of the Province of Pennsylvania (1681) (in Myers Narra¬ 
 tives, 197-215). 7T , . -r,, , 1 
 
 Pennsylvania, (Province). Charters and Acts of Assembly (2 vols., Philadel- 
 
 phici 1762) • 
 
 Pennsylvania. Abridgement of the Laws of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1801). 
 
 -. Archives (Series 1-7, 101 vols., 1874-1914)-. . . . „ . . 
 
 _. Dept, of Internal Affairs, Bureau of Industrial Statistics, Annual Reports 
 
 (41 vols., i 874 -I 9 i 5 )- 
 -. Laws (Philadelphia, 1728). 
 
 -State Board of Agriculture Annual Reports, 1877-1894. 
 
 -. Statutes at Large (1682-1801). 
 
 Pennsylvania Agricultural Society. Memoirs (1 vol., 1824). 
 
 Pennsylvania Historical Society. Memoirs (13 vols., 1826-1891). 
 Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography (27 vols., 1877-1904). 
 Pennsylvania Railroad Company. 13th Annual Report (i860). . 
 
 Perry, A. L. Scotch-Irish in New England (The Scotch-Irish in America, Second 
 Congress, 1890, Proceedings and Addresses, 107-144). 
 
 Phelps, Charles Shepherd. Rural Life in Litchfield County (Norfolk, Conn., 
 
 Philadelphia 1 Society for Promoting Agriculture. Memoirs (5 vols., 1808- 
 
 Phillips, Deane. Horse Raising in Colonial New England (Cornell Agric. Expt. 
 Sta. Memoirs, 54 (May, 1922)). 
 
 Phillips, Ulrich Bonnell. American Negro Slavery (N. Y., 1918). 
 
 Piper, Charles V. Forage Plants and their Culture (N. Y., 1914). 
 
 Piper, Charles V., and Katherine S. Bort. Early Agricultural History of 
 Timothy (in Journal of Am. Soc. of Agronomy, VII (1915). PP- I_I 4 )- 
 Pitkin, Timothy. Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States of 
 America (Hartford, Conn., 1816, 2d ed., 1817; 3d ed., 1835). 
 
 The Ploughboy (weekly) (Albany, 1819-1823). 
 
 Plumb, Charles S. Types and Breeds of Farm Animals (Boston, 1906). 
 Plymouth, Massachusetts. Records of the Town of Plymouth (Plymouth, 
 1889). 
 
 Plymouth Colony. See New Plymouth Colony. 
 
 Pooley, W. V. The Early Settlement of Illinois 1830-1850 (Univ. of Wisconsin 
 Bulletin No. 220, History Series, I, No. 4, Madison, Wis., 1908). 
 Porter, Rev. Noah. Historical Discourse .... Farmington (Conn.) (Hartford, 
 1841). 
 
 Potter, C. E. Native Cattle of New Hampshire (in N. H. State Agric. Soc. 
 Transactions (1854), pp. 226-237). 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF AUTHORS 487 
 
 520. Potter, Elisha R. French Settlements in Rhode Island (in R. I. Historical 
 
 Tracts, No. 5, Providence, 1879). 
 
 521. Powell, J. W. Physiographic Regions of the United States (in The Physiography 
 
 of the United States, published by the National Geographic Society, 
 N. Y., 1896). 
 
 522. Pownall, Thomas, M.P. Topographical Description of the Middle British Colo¬ 
 
 nies (London, 1776). 
 
 523. Prairie Farmer (Established as Union Agriculturist, monthly, Chicago, 1840. 
 
 Continued as The Prairie Farmer, 1843-1856. Weekly, 1857. Combined 
 with Emery’s Journal of Agriculture, 1858. Continued as The Prairie 
 Farmer, 1859- ). 
 
 524. Present State of the Colony of West-Jersey (1681) (in Myers’s Narratives, 
 
 187-195). 
 
 525. Prince, Thomas, M. A. Annals of New England (3d ed., Boston, 1826). 
 
 526. Printz, Governor Johan. Reports (1644, 1653) (in Myers’s Narratives, 91-129). 
 
 527. Prothero, R. E. English Farming, Past and Present (London, 1921). 
 
 528. Proud, Robert. History of Pennsylvania (1681-1742) (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1798). 
 
 529. Putnam, Henry. Touches on Agriculture (Portland, Maine, 1824). 
 
 530. Quincy, Edmund. Life of Josiah Quincy (Boston, 1867). 
 
 531. Randall, Henry S., L.L.D. Fine Wool Sheep Husbaridry (Albany, 1862). 
 
 53 2 - Randolph, Edward. Narrative or Report on the Colonies (1676) (in Hutchinson 
 
 Papers, II, 210-251). 
 
 533 - Renick, William. Cattle Trade of the Scioto Valley (in Ohio State Bd. Agric. 
 
 3d Annual Report (1848), pp. 162-164). 
 
 534. -. Early Cattle Trade in Ohio (in Farmers’ Chronicle, I (1868), pp. 230-231). 
 
 535. Report of a French Protestant Refugee in Boston (1687) (Trans, by E. T. 
 
 Fisher, Brooklyn, 1868). 
 
 536. Representation of New Netherland (1650) (in Jameson’s Narratives, 287-354). 
 
 537. Reynolds, John. My Own Times (Chicago, 1879). 
 
 538. Rhode Island (Colony). Records of the Colony and of the State of Rhode 
 
 Island 1636-1792 (10 vols., Providence, 1856-65). 
 
 539 - Rhode Island Historical Society. Collections (10 vols., Providence, 1827-1902). 
 
 540. -. Publications (New Series, 8 vols., 1893-1901). 
 
 541. Rhode Island Historical Tracts (1st Series, Nos. 1-20; 2d Series, Nos. 1-5, 
 
 Providence, 1877-1896). 
 
 54 2 - Ripley, Lincoln. Description and History of Waterford in the County of York 
 
 {Maine) (1803) (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, IX, 137- 
 147 ). 
 
 543. Rising, Johan. Reports (1654-1655) (in Myers’s Narratives, 131-165). 
 
 544. Roberts, Ellis H. New York (in American Commonwealth Series, 2 vols., N. 
 
 Y., 1887). 
 
 545. Roberts, Isaac Phillips. The Fertility of the Land (10th ed., N. Y., 1907). 
 
 546. Roberts, Job. The Pennsylvania Farmer (Philadelphia, 1804). 
 
 547. Rogers, Edward D. Four Southern Magazines (Dissertation U. of Va., 1902, Rich¬ 
 
 mond, Va., 1902). 
 
 548. Rogers, Henry D. Report on the Geological Survey of New Jersey (Philadel¬ 
 
 phia, 1836). 
 
 549. Rogers, James E. Thorold. A History of Agriculture and Prices in England 
 
 (7 vols., Oxford, 1866-1902). 
 
 550. -. Six Centuries of Labour and Wages (2 vols., London, 1884). 
 
 551. Roosevelt, Theodore. Winning of the West (4 vols., N. Y., 1904). 
 
 552. Rose, Robert Hutchinson (C. B. Johnson, M.D., pseudonym). Letters from the 
 
 British Settlement in Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1819). 
 
 553. Rowley, Massachusetts. Town Records, 1 (1639-1672) (Rowley, 1894). 
 
 554. Ruggles, Thomas. History of Guilford (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st 
 
 Series, X, 90-101). 
 
 555. Runnels, M. T. History of Sanbornton, New Hampshire (2 vols., Boston, 1882). 
 
 556. Rush, Benjamin. Account of ... . the German Inhabitants of Pennsylvania 
 
 (1789) (reprinted in Penn.-German Soc., Proceedings and Addresses, 
 XIX (1910), pp. 1-121). 
 
 557. Russell, Edward. History of North Yarmouth (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 
 
 1st Series, II, 165-188). 
 
 558. Salem, Massachusetts. Town Records (2 vols., Salem, Mass., 1868, 1913). 
 
 559 * Sanborn, Edwin D. History of New Hampshire (Manchester, 1875). 
 
 560. Sato, Shosuke. The Land Question in the United States (in /. H. U. Studies in 
 
 Historical and Political Science, IV, Nos. 7-9 (1886) ). 
 
488 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 561. Savage, James. Genealogical Dictionary of First Settlers of New England (4 vols., 
 
 Boston, i860). 
 
 562. Scharf, John Thomas, and Thompson Westcott. History of Philadelphia (3 
 
 vols., Philadelphia, 1884). 
 
 563. Schmidt, Louis Bernard. Topical Studies and References on the Economic His¬ 
 
 tory of American Agriculture (Philadelphia, 1919). 
 
 564. Schoepf, Johann David. Travels in the Confederation, 1783-1784 (Trans, and 
 
 edited by Alfred J. Morrison, 2 vols., Philadelphia, 1911). 
 
 565. Schoolcraft, Henry R. Travels in the Central Portions of the Mississippi Valley 
 
 (N. Y., 1825). 
 
 566. Scot, George. Model of the Government of East New Jersey (1685) (reprinted in 
 
 N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections, I, 239-333). 
 
 567. Scott, Joseph. Geographical Description of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1806). 
 
 568. Sears, Robert (editor). Pictorial Description of the United States (N. Y., 1848). 
 
 569. Semple, Ellen Churchill. American History and its Geographic Conditions (N. 
 
 Y., 1903). . . . . , 
 
 570. Shaler, Nathaniel Southgate. Physiography of North America (in Winsor’s 
 
 History of America, IV, pp. i-xxx). 
 
 571. -. Man and Nature in America (N. Y., 1891). 
 
 572. -. The United States of America (2 vols., N. Y., 1894). 
 
 573. Shattuck, Lemuel. History of Concord (inc. Bedford, Acton, Lincoln, Carlisle, 
 
 Boston, 1835). 
 
 574. Sheffield, John Baker Holroyd, 1st Earl of. Observations in the Commerce of 
 
 the American States (2d ed., London, 1783). 
 
 575. Sheldon, George. The Common Field of Deerfield (in Pocumtuck Valley Memo¬ 
 
 rial Assn. History and Proceedings V, 238-254). 
 
 576. -. Forty Years of Frontier Life in the Pocumtuck Valley (in New England 
 
 Magazine, IV (1886), pp. 236-249). 
 
 577. -. History of Deerfield (2 vols., Deerfield, 1896). 
 
 578. -. Old Time Travel and Traffic on the Connecticut (in Pocumtuck Valley 
 
 Memorial Assn. Ill, 117-129). 
 
 579. Shepherd, William R. Historical Atlas (2d ed., N. Y., 1921). 
 
 580. Sketches of Northwood (New Hampshire) (in N. H. Hist. Soc. Collections, 
 
 111 , 67 - 95 ). . . 
 
 581. Smith, George, M. D. History of Delaware County, Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 
 
 1862). 
 
 582. Smith, Rev. James. Tours into Kentucky and the Northwest Territory, 1783, 
 
 1795, 1797 (in Ohio State Arch. & Hist. Soc. Quarterly, XVI, 348-401). 
 
 583. Smith, John. Advertisements for the Unexperienced Planters of New England 
 
 or Anywhere (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d Series, III, 1 - 53 ). 
 
 584. —-. Description of New England (1616) (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d 
 
 Series, VI). 
 
 585. -. Generali Historic of Virginia (reprinted in part in Levermore’s Forerun¬ 
 
 ners of the Pilgrims, II, 643-753). 
 
 586. Smith, Richard. Journal (1769) (ed. by F. W. Halsey, N. Y., 1906). 
 
 587. Smith, Samuel. History of the Colony of New Jersey (Burlington, 1765). 
 
 588. Smith, Thomas. Journal (in Smith’s and Deane’s Journals, Portland, 1849). 
 
 589. Smith, Thomas and Samuel Deane. Journals (with Summary History of Port¬ 
 
 land (Wm. Willis, ed.,) Portland, 1849). 
 
 590. Smith, William. History of the Province of New York (2 vols., N. Y., 1829). 
 
 591. Smith, William Henry. History of the State of Indiana (2 vols., 1903). 
 
 592. Snow, Caleb H. A History of Boston (Boston, 1825). 
 
 593. Some Letters .... from Pennsylvania (1691) (in Penn. Mag. of History, 
 
 IV (1880), pp. 189-201). 
 
 594. Some Observations Relating to ... . Massachusetts Bay (Boston, 1750). 
 
 595. Spafford, H. G. Gazetteer of New York (Albany, 1813). 
 
 596. Spurrier, John. The Practical Farmer (Wilmington, 1793). 
 
 597. Stakman, E. C. The Black Stem Rust and the Barberry (in U. S. Dept. Agric. 
 
 Yearbook (1918), pp. 75-100). 
 
 598. Steiner, Bernard Christian. History of Guilford and Madison, Connecticut 
 
 (Baltimore, 1897). 
 
 599. Stevens, Lewis T. History of Cape May County, New Jersey (1887). 
 
 600. Stevens, Neil E. America’s First Agricultural School (in The Scientific Monthly, 
 
 XIII, No. 6 (1921), pp. 531 - 540 ). 
 
 601. Stewart, Frank H. Notes on Old Gloucester County, New Jersey (2 vols., 1917). 
 
 602. Stiles, Henry. History of Ancient Windsor, Connecticut (Rev. ed. 2 vols., Hart¬ 
 
 ford, 1891). 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF AUTHORS 489 
 
 603. Stone, Frederick D. The Founding of Pennsylvania (in Winsor’s History of 
 
 America, III, 461-516). 
 
 604. Strickland, William. Observations on the Agriculture of the United States of 
 
 America (1801). 
 
 605. Sullivan, James. History of the District of Maine (Boston, 1795). 
 
 606. Summer, W. G. History of American Currency (N. Y., 1874). 
 
 607. Talbot, George Foster. Temperance and the Drink Question in the Old Time 
 
 (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d Series, VI, 357-392). 
 
 608. Tanner, Edwin P. The Province of New Jersey 1664-1738 (in Columbia Univ. 
 
 Studies in History, Economics and Public Law, XXX (1908). 
 
 609. Taylor, John. Journal on a Mission through the Mohawk and Black River 
 
 Country (1802) (in O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New York, 
 III, 1107-1150). 
 
 610. Temple, J. H. History of Whately, Massachusetts (Boston, 1872). 
 
 611. Temple and Sheldon. History of the Town of Northheld, Massachusetts (Al¬ 
 
 bany, 1875). 
 
 612. Ten Days in Ohio (in Am. Journal of Science, XXV (1834), pp. 216-257). 
 
 613. Thomas, Gabriel. An Historical and Geographical Account of Pensilvania and of 
 
 West-New-Jersey (1698) (in Myers’s Narratives, 307-352). 
 
 614. Thompson, Benjamin Franklin. History of Long Island (2 vols., 2d ed., N. 
 
 Y., 1843). 
 
 615. Thompson, Francis M. History of Greenfield, Massachusetts (2 vols., Greenfield, 
 
 1904). 
 
 616. Thompson, Zadock. Gazetteer of the State of Vermont (Montpelier (Vt.), 1824). 
 
 617. -. History of Vermont (Burlington (Vt.), 1842). 
 
 618. Thomson, Peter G. Bibliography of the State of Ohio (Cincinnati, 1880). 
 
 619. Thwaites, R. G. Early Western Travels (32 vols., Cleveland, 1904-1907). 
 
 620. Tibbitts, George. Home Market for the Sale of Agricultural Productions (in N. 
 
 Y. Bd. of Agric. Memoirs, III (1826), pp. 289-325). 
 
 621. Tilton, James, M. D. Present State of Husbandry and Agriculture in the State of 
 
 Delaware (in American Museum, V (1789), pp. 375-382). 
 
 622. de Tocqueville, Alexis. Democracy in America (trans. by Henry Reeve, 4 vols., 
 
 London, 1835-1840). 
 
 623. Tooke, Thomas. Thoughts and Details on the High and Low Prices of the Last 
 
 Thirty Years (2d ed., London, 1824). 
 
 624. Treat, Payson Jackson. The National Land System, 1785-1820 (N. Y., 1910). 
 
 625. Trego, Charles B. Geography of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1843). 
 
 626. Trimble, William. Introductory Manual for the Study and Reading of Agrarian 
 
 History (printed for the Dept, of History and Social Science in the 
 North Dakota Agric. College, Fargo, N. D., 1917). 
 
 627. True, A. C. Agricultural Education in the United States (in U. S. Dept. Agric. 
 
 Yearbook (1899), pp. 157-190). 
 
 628. True, P. A. The Salisbury Commoners (in Amesbury (Mass.) Hist. Soc. Trans¬ 
 
 actions, I (1901). 
 
 629. True Relation Concerning the Estate of New England (1634) (in New En¬ 
 
 gland Hist. & Genealogical Register, XI (1886), pp. 68-73). 
 
 630. Trumbull, J. Hammond. Memorial History of Hartford County, Connecticut 
 
 (2 vols., Boston, 1886). 
 
 631. Trumbull, James Russell. History of Northampton, Massachusetts (2 vols., 
 
 Northampton, 1898). 
 
 632. Tryon, Rolla Milton. Household Manufactures in the United States 1640-1860 
 
 (Chicago, 1917). 
 
 633. Tryon, William. Report on the State of the Province of New York (1774) (in 
 
 O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New York, I, 737-769). 
 
 634. Tucker, Gilbert M. American Agricultural Periodicals (Privately printed, Al¬ 
 
 bany, 1909). 
 
 635. Tuckerman, H. T. America and her Commentators with a Critical Sketch of 
 
 Travel in the United States (N. Y., 1864). 
 
 636. Turner, Frederick Jackson. Colonization of the West (in Am. Hist. Review, 
 
 XI (1905-6), PP- 303-327); 
 
 637. -. The Frontier in American History (N. Y., 1920). 
 
 638. -. The Old West (in Wisconsin Hist. Soc. Proceedings (1908), pp. 212-216). 
 
 639. —--. The Rise of the New West, i8ig-i82g (N. Y., 1906). 
 
 640. Turner, Orsamus. History of the Phelps and Gorham Purchase (Rochester, 
 
 1852). < 
 
 641. -. Pioneer History of the Holland Purchase of Western Nezv York (Buffalo, 
 
 1849). 
 
490 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 642. United States. American State Papers: Commerce and Navigation (2 vols., I 
 
 (1789-1815) ; II (1815-1823), Washington, 1832-1834). 
 
 643. -. Bureau of Animal Industry, (Dept, of Agriculture). Special Report on 
 
 the Sheep Industry of the United States (Washington, 1892). 
 
 644. -. Bureau of Soils (Dept, of Agriculture). Soils of the United States, Bulle¬ 
 
 tin, No. 96. 
 
 645. -. Bureau of Statistics (Treasury Department). Report on the Internal 
 
 Commerce of the United States (1887) (Washington, 1888). 
 
 646. -. Census of 1840 (Washington, 1841). 
 
 647. -. Census of 1850 (Washington, 1853). 
 
 648. -. Census of i860, Agriculture ( Washington, 1864). 
 
 649. -. Census of 1880, vol. I, Population; vol. Ill, Agriculture (Washington, 
 
 1883). 
 
 650. -. Census of 1910, vol. I, Population (Washington, 1913). 
 
 651. -. Department of Agriculture. Annual Report 1867. 
 
 652. -. Documents Relative to Manufactures in the United States (Ex. Doc. 308, 
 
 22d Cong. 1st Sess., 2 vols., 1832). 
 
 653. -. Office of Farm Management. (Dept, of Agriculture) Atlas of American 
 
 Agriculture (Washington, 1919). 
 
 654. -. Patent Office, Annual Reports of the Commissioner of Patents ^1839- 
 
 1862). 
 
 655. -. Senate Committee of Finance. Rates of Duty on Imports 1789-1890 (51st 
 
 Cong. 2d Session, Senate Report, No. 2130). 
 
 656. -. Wholesale Prices, Wages and Transportation (1840-1891) 52nd Cong. 2d 
 
 Sess. Senate Report No. 1394 (Aldrich Report) (3 vols., Washington, 
 
 1893). 
 
 657. -. Register of the Treasury. Commerce and Navigation of the United States, 
 
 (32 vols., Washington, 1822-1866). 
 
 658. -. Treasury Department. Statistics of the Foreign and Domestic Commerce 
 
 of the United States (1863) (Washington, 1864). 
 
 659. Updike, Wilkins. History of the Episcopal Church in Narragansett, Rhode 
 
 Island (3 vols., 2d ed., Boston, 1907). 
 
 660. Uring, Nathaniel. History of the Voyages and Travels of Capt. Nathaniel Uring 
 
 (London, 1745). 
 
 661. Usher, Roland G. The Pilgrims and their History (N. Y., 1918). 
 
 662. Van der Donck, Adriaen. Description of the New Netherlands (1656) (in N. Y. 
 
 Hist. Soc. Collections, 2d Series, I, 125-242). 
 
 663. Vanderkemp Papers (in Buffalo Hist. Soc. Publications, II (1880), pp. 33-116). 
 
 664. Van Tienhoven, Cornelis. Information Relative to Taking up Land in New 
 
 Netherland (1650) (in O’Callaghan, Documentary History of New 
 York, IV, 25-36). 
 
 665. Van Wassenaer, Nicolaes. Historisch Verhael (1624-1630) (trans. in Jameson’s 
 
 Narratives, 63-96). 
 
 666. Vermont. Laws of Vermont (Windsor, Vt., 1825). 
 
 667. Viles, Dr. J Population and Extent of Settlement in Missouri before 1804 (in 
 
 Mo. Hist., Review, V (1910-11), pp. 189-207). 
 
 668. Violette, E. M. Early Settlements in Missouri (in Mo. Hist. Review, I (1906-07), 
 
 pp. 38-52). 
 
 669. Virginia Gazette (weekly) (Williamsburg, Va., 1736-1780). 
 
 670. Walker, Charles. Sketch of New Ipswich (N. H.) (in N. H. Hist. Soc. Collec¬ 
 
 tions, v, 155-175). 
 
 671. Walker, Joseph B. House and Farm of the First Minister of Concord, New 
 
 Hampshire (Concord, 1906). 
 
 672. -. Semi-Centennial Address before the Merrimack County (New Hampshire) 
 
 Agricultural Society, 1874 (in N. H. Bd. Agric. 4th Annual Report, 
 
 1874). 
 
 673. Walker, Timothy. Diaries (1746-1780) (ed. by Joseph B. Walker in N. H. Hist. 
 
 Soc. Collections, IX, 123-191). 
 
 674. Waller, Elbert. Illinois Pioneer Days (Litchfield, Ill., 1918). 
 
 675* Washington, George. Letters on Agriculture to Arthur Young and Sir John 
 Sinclair (Franklin Knight, ed., Washington, 1847). 
 
 676. Waters, Thomas Franklin. 7 he Early Homes of the Puritans (in Essex Insti¬ 
 
 tute Hist. Collections, XXXIII (1897), pp. 45-79). 
 
 677. Watertown, Massachusetts. Watertown Records (Watertown Mass., 4 vols., 
 
 1894-1906). 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF AUTHORS 
 
 491 
 
 678. Watson, Elkanah. History of Agricultural Societies on the Modern Berkshire 
 
 System from .... 1807 to ... . 1820 (printed in History of the 
 Rise, progress and existing conditions of the western Canals in the 
 State of Hew York, Albany, 1820). 
 
 679. -. Men and Times of the Revolution (N. Y., 1856). 
 
 680. Watson, John. Account of Buckingham and Solebury, Bucks County, Pennsyl¬ 
 
 vania (1804) (in Hist. Soc. of Pennsylvania Memoirs, I (1826), pp. 
 
 279-311). 
 
 681. Watson, John F. Annals of Philadelphia (Philadelphia, 1830; 2d ed., 2 vols., 1844). 
 
 682. Watson, Winslow C. Military and Civil History of the County of Essex, New 
 
 York (N. Y., 1869). 
 
 683. Weeden, W. B. Early Rhode Island (N. Y., 1910). 
 
 684. -. Social and Economic History of New England 1620-1789 (2 vols., Boston, 
 
 1890). 
 
 685. Welby, Adlard. Visit to North America (in Thwaites, Early Western Travels, 
 
 xii, 139-341). 
 
 686. Weld, Isaac jr. Travels Through the States of North America, I795~ I 797 (4th 
 
 ed., 2 vols., London, 1807). 
 
 687. Welker, Martin. Farm Life in Central Ohio Sixty Years Ago (in Western 
 
 Reserve Hist. Soc. Tracts, IV, No. 86). 
 
 688. Western Farmer (monthly) (Cincinnati, 1839-1845). 
 
 689. Wheeler, George A., and Henry W. History of Brunszvick, Top sham, and Harps- 
 
 well, Maine (Boston, 1878). 
 
 690. Whipple, Joseph. Geographical and Statistical View of the District of Maine 
 
 (Bangor, 1816). 
 
 691. Wilder, David. History of Leominster (Mass.) (Fitchburg, Mass., 1853). 
 
 692. Williams, Roger. Key to the Indian Language (in R. I. Hist. Soc. Collections, 
 
 I, Providence, 1827). 
 
 693. Williams, Samuel, L.L.D. Natural and Civil History of Vermont (2 vols., 2d 
 
 ed., Burlington, 1809). 
 
 694. Willich, A. F. M. Domestic Encyclopedia, 1st Am. Ed., by James Mease, 5 vols., 
 
 Philadelphia, 1804). 
 
 695. Willis, Hon. William. Descriptive Catalogue of Books and Pamphlets Relating 
 
 to the History of Statistics of Maine (in Historical Magazine, 2d 
 Series, VII, March, 1870). 
 
 696. -. Scotch Irish Immigration (in Maine Hist. Soc. Collections, 1st Series, 
 
 VI, pp. 1-37). 
 
 697. —*-. Summary History of Portland (Maine) (in Journals of Rev. Thomas 
 
 Smith and Rev. Samuel Deane). 
 
 698. Willoughby, Charles C. Houses and Gardens of the New England Indians (in 
 
 Am. Anthropologist, New Series, VIII (1906), pp. 115-132). 
 
 699. Winfield, Charles H. History of Hudson County (N. J.) (N. Y., 1874). 
 
 700. Winslow, E. Good News from New England (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 
 
 1st Series, VIII, 239-277). 
 
 701. Winsor, Justin (editor). Memorial History of Boston (4 vols., Boston, 1880-81). 
 
 702. -. Narrative and Critical History of America (8 vols., Boston, 1884-89). 
 
 703. Winthrop, John. Conclusions for the Plantation in New England (Old South 
 
 Leaflets, II, No. 50, Boston, 1894). 
 
 704. -. Journal (1630-1649) (also known as History of New England, 2d ed., 2 
 
 vols., Boston, 1853). 
 
 705. -. Life and Letters (ed. by Robert C. Winthrop, 2 vols. (1864-1867) ). 
 
 706. Winthrop, John jr. (Governor of Connecticut Colony.) The Description, Culture 
 
 and Use of Maize (in Philosophical Transactions, Royal Society of 
 London, XII (1678), No. 142, pp. 1065-1069. Quoted partly in Neal, 
 History of New England, II, 198). 
 
 707. Winthrop Papers (in Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 3d Series, IX, 226-301; X, 
 
 1-26; 5th Series, VIII). 
 
 708. Wisconsin State Agricultural Society. Transactions (1851-1896). 
 
 709. Wood, Frederic J. The Turnpikes of New England (Boston, 1919). 
 
 710. Wood, Silas. Sketch of Long Island (Brooklyn, 1828). 
 
 711. Wood, William. New-England 's Prospect (1634) (Prince Society edition, Bos¬ 
 
 ton, 1865). 
 
 712. Woods, John. Two Years’ Residence in the Illinois Country (London, 1822). 
 
 713. Worcester Magazine and Historical Journal (monthly) (2 vols., 1825-1826, 
 
 Worcester, Mass.). 
 
 714. Worth, Henry Barnard. Nantucket Lands and Land Owners (in Nantucket Hist. 
 
 Assn. II, Bulletin No. 1 (1901)). 
 
492 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 7 i 5 - Wright, Carroll D. Wages and Prices: 1752-1860 (in Mass. Bureau of Statistics 
 
 of Labor, 16th Annual Report (1885), Parts III and IV). 
 
 716. Wright, Chester Whitney. Wool-Grozving and the Tariff (Harvard Economic 
 
 Studies, V, Boston, 1910). 
 
 717. Young, Alexander. Chronicles of the First Planters of the Colony of Massachu¬ 
 
 setts Bay (1623-1636) (Boston, 1846). 
 
 718. Young, Andrew W. History of Chatauqua County, New York (Buffalo, 1875). 
 
 UNPUBLISHED. 
 
 719. Beddall, Marcus Melvin. Settlement and Development of the Blue-Grass Region 
 
 of Kentucky (Thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1897). 
 
 720. Connecticut. Tax Lists, 1796, 1812 (in Comptroller’s Office, Hartford, Conn.). 
 
 721. Goodrich, Samuel. Statistical Account of Ridgefield in the County of Fairfield 
 
 (Conn .) (written about 1800. MS. in Conn. Hist. Soc., Library, Hart¬ 
 ford, Conn.). 
 
 722. Massachusetts. Valuation Returns, 1767, 1801, 1811 (in Archives, State House, 
 
 Boston, Mass.). 
 
 723. Rogers, Medad (minister of New Fairfield, Conn.). Account Book (1784-1822) 
 
 (in New Haven Hist. Soc. Library, New Haven, Conn). 
 
 724. Stine, O. C. Economic History of Wheat in the United States (Ph.D. thesis, 
 
 University of Wisconsin, 1921. MS. in Bureau of Agricultural Eco¬ 
 nomics, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.). 
 
 725. Thompson, James Westfall. History of Stock-Raising in America (MS. in 
 
 Bureau of Agricultural Economics, Washington, D. C.). 
 
MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS. 
 
 Table 65.— Prices of farm products and general prices. 
 
 (1825 = 100.) 
 
 [Sources: See page 191.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Index No. 
 of general 
 prices. 
 
 Index No. 
 of farm 
 products. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Index No. 
 of general 
 prices. 
 
 Index No. 
 of farm 
 products. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Index No. 
 of general 
 prices. 
 
 Index No. 
 of farm 
 products. 
 
 l8oi 
 
 155-5 
 
 183.8 
 
 1821 
 
 IO2.3 
 
 94-7 
 
 1841 
 
 95-3 
 
 99-3 
 
 1802 
 
 127.7 
 
 130.7 
 
 1822 
 
 105.3 
 
 107.0 
 
 1842 
 
 85-3 
 
 90.1 
 
 1803 
 
 131.2 
 
 128.2 
 
 1823 
 
 100. I 
 
 IO4.O 
 
 1843 
 
 80.3 
 
 79-4 
 
 1804 
 
 140.6 
 
 139-8 
 
 1824 
 
 98.9 
 
 103.8 
 
 1844 
 
 85.8 
 
 80.1 
 
 1805 
 
 144.9 
 
 159-7 
 
 1825 
 
 100.0 
 
 100.0 
 
 1845 
 
 89.4 
 
 92.8 
 
 1806 
 
 141.6 
 
 155-4 
 
 1826 
 
 99.4 
 
 106.7 
 
 1846 
 
 91.1 
 
 98.2 
 
 1807 
 
 134-3 
 
 146.7 
 
 1827 
 
 99-6 
 
 99.6 
 
 1847 
 
 98.8 
 
 113.2 
 
 1808 
 
 131-0 
 
 I 2 S .2 
 
 1828 
 
 95-2 
 
 89.7 
 
 1848 
 
 89.4 
 
 94-4 
 
 1809 
 
 145.0 
 
 132.9 
 
 1829 
 
 94.1 
 
 90.2 
 
 1849 
 
 90.5 
 
 93-4 
 
 l8lO 
 
 150.4 
 
 153-2 
 
 1830 
 
 91.4 
 
 91.0 
 
 1850 
 
 94.6 
 
 99-3 
 
 l8ll 
 
 145-7 
 
 147-4 
 
 1831 
 
 96.7 
 
 99-6 
 
 1851 
 
 96.7 
 
 114-7 
 
 1812 
 
 148.1 
 
 136.9 
 
 1832 
 
 98.1 
 
 104.7 
 
 1852 
 
 99.6 
 
 119.7 
 
 1813 
 
 172.4 
 
 172.8 
 
 1833 
 
 96.8 
 
 no.6 
 
 1853 
 
 108.3 
 
 125.0 
 
 1814 
 
 214.8 
 
 212.4 
 
 1834 
 
 90.1 
 
 97.2 
 
 1854 
 
 120.5 
 
 140.8 
 
 1815 
 
 168.6 
 
 170. I 
 
 1835 
 
 103.8 
 
 116.2 
 
 1855 
 
 130.5 
 
 147.2 
 
 1816 
 
 143.6 
 
 180. I 
 
 1836 
 
 II5-7 
 
 136.5 
 
 1856 
 
 129.8 
 
 124.9 
 
 1817 
 
 145-4 
 
 199.9 
 
 1837 
 
 114-7 
 
 137-7 
 
 1857 
 
 135-5 
 
 139.2 
 
 1818 
 
 I 4 I -5 
 
 179-5 
 
 1838 
 
 no.2 
 
 126.1 
 
 1858 
 
 114.5 
 
 115.2 
 
 1819 
 
 124.7 
 
 137-0 
 
 1839 
 
 115.2 
 
 134-6 
 
 1859 
 
 117.2 
 
 123.7 
 
 1820 
 
 106.9 
 
 109.5 
 
 1840 
 
 98.3 
 
 113-8 
 
 i860 
 
 II5-2 
 
 II3-5 
 
 Table 66.— Exports of wheat and corn, 1791-1846 
 
 [Source: U. S. Commerce and Navigation Reports. Also found in Senate Report, 53d Congress, 
 
 2d Session, 1893-94, vol. iv, part u, pp. 12, 14.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Wheat a 
 (1000 bu.). 
 
 Corn b 
 (1000 bu.). 
 
 Year. 
 
 1 
 
 Wheat a 
 (1000 bu.). 
 
 Corn b 
 (1000 bu.). 
 
 Year. 
 
 Wheat a 
 (1000 bu.). 
 
 Corn b 
 (1000 bu.). 
 
 1791 
 
 3,807 
 
 1,995 
 
 l8lO 
 
 3,919 
 
 1,401 
 
 1829 
 
 3,772 
 
 i,593 
 
 1792 
 
 4,564 
 
 2,176 
 
 1,386 
 
 l8ll 
 
 6,719 
 
 3,38l 
 
 1830 
 
 5,569 
 
 1,025 
 
 1793 
 
 6,286 
 
 l8l2 
 
 6,550 
 
 2,403 
 
 1831 
 
 8,538 
 
 1,402 
 
 1794 
 
 4,504 
 
 1,702 
 
 1813 
 
 5,963 
 
 1,721 
 
 1832 
 
 3,980 
 
 1,038 
 
 1795 
 
 3,234 
 
 2,345 
 
 1814 
 
 870 
 
 167 
 
 1833 
 
 4,333 
 
 1,024 
 
 1796 
 
 3,295 
 
 i,79i 
 
 1815 
 
 3,900 
 
 1,120 
 
 1834 
 
 3,796 
 
 902 
 
 1797 
 
 2,336 
 
 1,096 
 
 1816 
 
 3,333 
 
 1,434 
 
 1835 
 
 3,555 
 
 1,423 
 
 1798 
 
 2,569 
 
 1,460 
 
 1817 
 
 6,753 
 
 815 
 
 1836 
 
 2,276 
 
 688 
 
 1799 
 
 2,347 
 
 1,465 
 
 l8l8 
 
 5,406 
 
 2,155 
 
 1837 
 
 i,452 
 
 789 
 
 1800 
 
 2,966 
 
 2,081 
 
 1819 
 
 3,46o 
 
 1,628 
 
 1838 
 
 2,023 
 
 860 
 
 l8oi 
 
 5,201 
 
 2,819 
 
 1820 
 
 5,319 
 
 1,119 
 
 1839 
 
 4,251 
 
 825 
 
 1802 
 
 5,483 
 
 1,938 
 
 1821 
 
 4,778 
 
 1,134 
 
 1840 
 
 10,260 
 
 i,399 
 
 1803 
 
 6,590 
 
 2,614 
 
 1822 
 
 3,730 
 
 1,102 
 
 1841 
 
 7,690 
 
 1,465 
 
 1804 
 
 3,772 
 
 2,390 
 
 1823 
 
 3,409 
 
 1,315 
 
 1842 
 
 6,594 
 
 i,437 
 
 1805 
 
 3,517 
 
 1,326 
 
 1824 
 
 4,506 
 
 1,390 
 
 1843° 
 
 5,464 
 
 1,827 
 
 1806 
 
 3,609 
 
 1,498 
 
 1825 
 
 3,68i 
 
 1,619 
 
 1844 
 
 7,033 
 
 1,817 
 
 1807 
 
 6,797 
 
 1,158 
 
 1826 
 
 3,905 
 
 1,140 
 
 1845 
 
 5,768 
 
 1,916 
 
 1808 
 
 1,274 
 
 373 
 
 1827 
 
 3-930 
 
 1,503 
 
 1846 
 
 11,916 
 
 3,021 
 
 1809 
 
 4,202 
 
 75i 
 
 1828 
 
 3,883 
 
 1,403 
 
 a Including flour, equivalent; 4H bus. wheat=i96 lbs. flour. 
 
 b Including cornmeal equivalent; 4 bus. ccrn=i bbl. cornmeal; 1 bu. cornmeal= 1.142857 or 
 1 1-7 bu. corn. 
 
 c Official figures covering only 9 months have been increased by one-third. 
 
 493 
 
494 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Table 67.— Exports of animal products. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Commerce and Navigation Reports. Also found in Senate Report, 53d Congress, 
 
 2d Session, 1893-94, vol. iv, part 11, pp. 36, 38, 4 2.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Pork, hams, 
 bacon and 
 lard 
 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Beef and 
 tallow 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Butter and 
 cheese 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Year. 
 
 Pork, hams, 
 bacon and 
 lard 
 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Beef and 
 tallow 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 Butter and 
 cheese 
 (1000 lbs.) 
 
 1791 
 
 6,145 
 
 12,791 
 
 1,054 
 
 1819 
 
 8,513 
 
 7,029 
 
 2,060 
 
 1792 
 
 8,720 
 
 15,020 
 
 785 
 
 1820 
 
 45,071 
 
 10,724 
 
 2,292 
 
 1793 
 
 8,831 
 
 15,331 
 
 66l 
 
 1821 
 
 18,933 
 
 13,459 
 
 1,835 
 
 1794 
 
 12,139 
 
 20,360 
 
 2,773 
 
 1822 
 
 18,951 
 
 19,586 
 
 1,872 
 
 1/95 
 
 20,908 
 
 19,235 
 
 3,933 
 
 1823 
 
 l8,8lO 
 
 13,019 
 
 1,763 
 
 1796 
 
 17,998 
 
 18,692 
 
 4,349 
 
 1824 
 
 19,908 
 
 I 3 , 3 H 
 
 2,319 
 
 1797 
 
 9,841 
 
 10,388 
 
 2,512 
 
 1825 
 
 24,521 
 
 18,138 
 
 2,672 
 
 1798 
 
 8,605 
 
 17,901 
 
 2,497 
 
 1826 
 
 26,867 
 
 15,001 
 
 1,912 
 
 1799 
 
 13,317 
 
 18,284 
 
 2,479 
 
 1827 
 
 23,555 
 
 18,439 
 
 1,790 
 
 1800 
 
 13,900 
 
 15,024 
 
 2,736 
 
 1828 
 
 21,098 
 
 13,750 
 
 1,873 
 
 l80I 
 
 18,567 
 
 15,103 
 
 4,505 
 
 18:29 
 
 21,368 
 
 I 0 , 7 H 
 
 1,886 
 
 1802 
 
 19,194 
 
 12,337 
 
 3,694 
 
 1830 
 
 17,285 
 
 9,902 
 
 1,588 
 
 1803 
 
 23,059 
 
 15,646 
 
 3,681 
 
 1831 
 
 18,694 
 
 12,834 
 
 2,860 
 
 1804 
 
 26,776 
 
 27,015 
 
 3,776 
 
 1832 
 
 27,293 
 
 11,724 
 
 2,894 
 
 1805 
 
 13,797 
 
 23,120 
 
 2,499 
 
 1833 
 
 30,6l6 
 
 13,541 
 
 2,559 
 
 1806 
 
 10,137 
 
 23,538 
 
 2,582 
 
 1834 
 
 27,109 
 
 10,007 
 
 1,905 
 
 1807 
 
 10,982 
 
 16,895 
 
 2,843 
 
 1835 
 
 24,495 
 
 8,097 
 
 i ,572 
 
 1808 
 
 3,939 
 
 4,025 
 
 1,211 
 
 1836 
 
 12,402 
 
 10,489 
 
 848 
 
 1809 
 
 10,984 
 
 5 , 7 i 6 
 
 1,955 
 
 1837 
 
 12,271 
 
 5,784 
 
 693 
 
 l8lO 
 
 10,026 
 
 9,551 
 
 2,362 
 
 1838 
 
 14,676 
 
 5,06l 
 
 1,160 
 
 l8ll 
 
 10,668 
 
 15,393 
 
 2,823 
 
 1839 
 
 17,430 
 
 3,356 
 
 944 
 
 l8l2 
 
 6,895 
 
 8,568 
 
 2,322 
 
 r ? 40 
 
 22,318 
 
 4,210 
 
 1,901 
 
 1813 
 
 5,159 
 
 8,749 
 
 696 
 
 1841 
 
 40,050 
 
 12,287 
 
 5,534 
 
 1814 
 
 1,460 
 
 4,062 
 
 370 
 
 1842 
 
 58,628 
 
 16,754 
 
 4.512 
 
 1815 
 
 3,556 
 
 2,664 
 
 i, 3 i 3 
 
 1843 * 
 
 57,358 
 
 20,069 
 
 9 T 3 i 
 
 1816 
 
 5,474 
 
 6,670 
 
 i ,354 
 
 1844 
 
 61,959 
 
 31,210 
 
 io ,595 
 
 1817 
 
 4,160 
 
 7,595 
 
 1,065 
 
 1845 
 
 55 T 02 
 
 30,330 
 
 11,529 
 
 I8l8 
 
 5,477 
 
 7,390 
 
 1,192 
 
 1846 
 
 62,934 
 
 40.280 
 
 12,112 
 
 a Official figures covering only 9 months have been increased by one-third. 
 
 Table 68.— Imports of animal products, 1822 to 1846. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Commerce and Navigation Reports.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Meat prod- 
 
 Butter and 
 
 Hides and 
 
 Year. 
 
 Meat 
 
 prod- 
 
 Butter and 
 
 Hides and 
 
 ucts a (lbs.). 
 
 cheese (lbs.). 
 
 skins, value. 
 
 ucts a 
 
 (lbs.). 
 
 cheese (lbs.). 
 
 skins, value. 
 
 l8 22 
 
 3 , 476,372 
 
 50,546 
 
 $2,041,463 
 
 1823 
 
 1 , 156,983 
 
 86,825 
 
 2,084,082 
 
 1824 
 
 296,307 
 
 44,6lO 
 
 2,142,168 
 
 1825 
 
 706,195 
 
 32,381 
 
 2,221,868 
 
 2,825,526 
 
 1826 
 
 1,008,921 
 
 46,141 
 
 1827 
 
 1 , 347,466 
 
 40,915 
 
 1,480,349 
 
 1828 
 
 2,158,038 
 
 102,482 
 
 1,804,202 
 
 1829 
 
 1 , 455,197 
 
 179,530 
 
 2,252,609 
 
 1830 
 
 668,948 
 
 87,338 
 
 2,409.850 
 
 1831 
 
 519,124 
 
 60,485 
 
 3 , 057,543 
 
 1832 
 
 34 T 785 
 
 202,375 
 
 4,680,128 
 
 1833 
 
 1 , 740.389 
 
 240,073 
 
 3,588,819 
 
 1834 
 
 2 , 33 TOI 9 
 
 197,285 
 
 3,296,688 
 
 1835 
 
 1 , 759,829 
 
 147,552 
 
 $3,369,888 
 
 1836 
 
 589,351 
 
 359,615 
 
 3 , 511,463 
 
 1837 
 
 732,506 
 
 272,854 
 
 3,3 06,681 
 
 1838 
 
 2 , 531,847 
 
 137,523 
 
 2,036,629 
 
 1839 
 
 i, 6 i 4,572 
 
 269,521 
 
 3,158,029 
 
 1840 
 
 1841 
 
 1842 
 i 843 b 
 
 1844 
 
 1,184,194 
 
 307,012 
 
 254,739 
 
 53 T 3 i 8 
 
 292,753 
 
 226,286 
 
 121,065 
 
 82,864 
 
 46,113 
 
 58,800 
 
 2,756,214 
 
 3,457,248 
 
 4,067,816 
 
 3 , 493 ,o 87 
 
 
 1845 
 
 227,515 
 
 68,387 
 
 
 1846 
 
 200,418 
 
 56,501 
 
 
 a Beef, pork, lard, tallow, and bacon. 
 
 b Official figures covering only 9 months have been increased by one-third. 
 
MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS 
 
 495 
 
 Table 69.— W ages of farm labor and prices of farm products, 1801 to 1836. 
 
 : The wage data are from Wright’s Wages and Prices, 1752-1860, in Mass. Bureau of 
 [ Labor, 16th Annual Report (1885), parts ni and iv, p. 317. The index number of 
 ot farm products is that quoted and described in Table 65. See footnote, p. 438.] 
 
 prices 
 
 [Sources 
 Statistics oi 
 
 Year. 
 
 w 
 
 Wages 
 per day of 
 ' agricultural 
 labor. * 
 
 Index No. 
 of wages. b 
 
 Index No. 
 of prices 
 of farm 
 products. b 
 
 Year. 
 
 Wages 
 per day of 
 agricultural 
 labor. a 
 
 Index No. 
 of wages. b 
 
 Index No. 
 of prices 
 of farm 
 products. b 
 
 l8oi 
 
 •577 
 
 77.6 
 
 183.8 
 
 1819 
 
 •533 
 
 71.6 
 
 137.0 
 
 1802 
 
 .622 
 
 83.6 
 
 130.7 
 
 1820 
 
 .750 
 
 100.8 
 
 IO9.5 
 
 1803 
 
 .517 
 
 69-5 
 
 128.2 
 
 1821 
 
 .704 
 
 94.6 
 
 94-7 
 
 1804 
 
 .806 
 
 108.3 
 
 1398 
 
 1822 
 
 .771 
 
 IO3.6 
 
 107.0 
 
 1805 
 
 •958 
 
 128.8 
 
 159-7 
 
 1823 
 
 .940 
 
 126.3 
 
 104.0 
 
 1806 
 
 •932 
 
 125.3 
 
 155-4 
 
 1824 
 
 • • • • 
 
 
 
 1807 
 
 .692 
 
 93-0 
 
 146.7 
 
 1825 
 
 .744 
 
 100.0 
 
 100.0 
 
 1808 
 
 .865 
 
 116.3 
 
 125.2 
 
 1826 
 
 .617 
 
 82.9 
 
 106.7 
 
 1809 
 
 •540 
 
 72.6 
 
 132.9 
 
 1827 
 
 .809 
 
 I08.7 
 
 99.6 
 
 l8lO 
 
 .936 
 
 125.8 
 
 153-2 
 
 1828 
 
 •775 
 
 IO4.2 
 
 89.7 
 
 l8ll 
 
 •592 
 
 796 
 
 1474 
 
 1829 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 90.2 
 
 l8l2 
 
 .854 
 
 114.8 
 
 136.9 
 
 1830 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 91.0 
 
 1813 
 
 .958 
 
 128.8 
 
 172.8 
 
 1831 
 
 .875 
 
 118.3 
 
 99.6 
 
 1814 
 
 .699 
 
 94.0 
 
 212.4 
 
 1832 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 104.7 
 
 1815 
 
 .868 
 
 116.7 
 
 170.1 
 
 1833 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 110.6 
 
 1816 
 
 •752 
 
 IOI.O 
 
 180.1 
 
 1834 
 
 • • • • 
 
 • • • • 
 
 97.2 
 
 1817 
 
 .827 
 
 111.2 
 
 199.9 
 
 1835 
 
 .875 
 
 Il 8.3 
 
 116.2 
 
 1818 
 
 1.490 
 
 200.3 
 
 179-5 
 
 1836 
 
 
 117.6 
 
 136.5 
 
 a Without board. 
 b 1825 = 100. 
 
 Table 70. —Wool prices per pound in New York, 1816 to 1846. 
 
 [Sources: New York Shipping and Commercial List, 1816-1824; for the years 1824-1846, quotations 
 of Mauger & Avery, printed in Wright, Wool Growing and the Tariff, p. 347.] 
 
 Year and 
 month. 
 
 Merino. 
 
 Half 
 
 blood. 
 
 Common. 
 
 Year and 
 month. 
 
 Merino. 
 
 Half 
 
 blood. 
 
 Common. 
 
 
 cts. 
 
 cts. 
 
 cts. 
 
 
 cts. 
 
 ct*s. 
 
 cts . 
 
 1816 Jan. ... 
 
 106 
 
 56 
 
 50 
 
 1820 July ... 
 
 67 
 
 37 
 
 30 
 
 Apr. ... 
 
 100 
 
 50 
 
 40 
 
 Oct. . . . 
 
 67 
 
 37 
 
 30 
 
 July ... 
 
 100 
 
 50 
 
 40 
 
 1821 Jan. ... 
 
 67 
 
 37 
 
 30 
 
 Oct. ... 
 
 68 
 
 47 
 
 40 
 
 Apr. ... 
 
 67 
 
 42 
 
 30 
 
 1817 Jan. ... 
 
 68 
 
 47 
 
 37 
 
 July ... 
 
 57 
 
 35 
 
 32 
 
 Apr. ... 
 
 68 
 
 47 
 
 37 
 
 Oct ... 
 
 72 
 
 42 
 
 40 
 
 July ... 
 
 85 
 
 50 
 
 37 
 
 1822 Jan. ... 
 
 72 
 
 42 
 
 40 
 
 Oct. ... 
 
 80 
 
 50 
 
 32 
 
 Apr. ... 
 
 72 
 
 42 
 
 40 
 
 1818 Jan. ... 
 
 77 
 
 45 
 
 32 
 
 July ... 
 
 65 
 
 45 
 
 37 
 
 Apr. ... 
 
 77 
 
 45 
 
 32 
 
 Oct. ... 
 
 62 
 
 45 
 
 37 
 
 July ... 
 
 80 
 
 45 
 
 32 
 
 1823 Jan. ... 
 
 62 
 
 45 
 
 37 
 
 Oct. ... 
 
 80 
 
 45 
 
 40 
 
 Apr. ... 
 
 62 
 
 45 
 
 35 
 
 1819 Jan. ... 
 
 80 
 
 45 
 
 40 
 
 July ... 
 
 62 
 
 45 
 
 35 
 
 Apr. ... 
 
 80 
 
 45 
 
 40 
 
 Oct. ... 
 
 62 
 
 45 
 
 35 
 
 July ... 
 
 80 
 
 45 
 
 40 
 
 1824 Jan. ... 
 
 52 
 
 37 
 
 32 
 
 Oct. ... 
 
 62 
 
 42 
 
 35 
 
 Apr. ... 
 
 52 
 
 37 
 
 32 
 
 1820 Jan. . 
 
 77 
 
 42 
 
 40 
 
 July ... 
 
 58 
 
 42 
 
 32 
 
 Apr. ... 
 
 77 
 
 42 
 
 40 
 
 Oct. ... 
 
 58 
 
 42 
 
 32 
 
496 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Table 70. —Wool prices per pound in New York, 1816 to 1846. —Continued. 
 
 Year and 
 month. 
 
 Fine. 
 
 Medium. 
 
 Coarse. 
 
 Year and 
 month. 
 
 Fine. 
 
 Medium. 
 
 Coarse. 
 
 
 
 cts. 
 
 cts. 
 
 cts. 
 
 
 
 cts. 
 
 cts. 
 
 cts. 
 
 1824“ Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 68 
 
 53 
 
 40 
 
 1835 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 63 
 
 56 
 
 42 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 70 
 
 46 
 
 31 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 65 
 
 60 
 
 45 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 55 
 
 40 
 
 30 
 
 1836 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 65 
 
 60 
 
 45 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 60 
 
 40 
 
 30 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 68 
 
 62 
 
 47 
 
 1825 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 60 
 
 43 
 
 32 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 70 
 
 60 
 
 50 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 60 
 
 42 
 
 33 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 70 
 
 60 
 
 50 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 50 
 
 4 i 
 
 32 
 
 1837 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 72 
 
 63 
 
 48 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 50 
 
 42 
 
 36 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 68 
 
 56 
 
 46 
 
 1826 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 55 
 
 43 
 
 38 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 52 
 
 52 
 
 36 
 
 Apr. 
 
 . . . 
 
 52 
 
 46 
 
 4 i 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 49 
 
 40 
 
 3 i 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 37 
 
 30 
 
 26 
 
 1838 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 50 
 
 42 
 
 35 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 43 
 
 37 
 
 32 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 50 
 
 42 
 
 35 
 
 1827 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 36 
 
 32 
 
 28 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 46 
 
 36 
 
 30 
 
 Apr. 
 
 ♦ ’ • 
 
 45 
 
 34 
 
 30 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 56 
 
 48 
 
 37 
 
 July 
 
 • 
 
 37 
 
 3 i 
 
 25 
 
 1839 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 56 
 
 48 
 
 38 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 43 
 
 32 
 
 25 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 56 
 
 48 
 
 38 
 
 1828 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 42 
 
 30 
 
 25 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 57 
 
 48 
 
 40 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 44 
 
 36 
 
 28 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 60 
 
 55 
 
 44 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 48 
 
 38 
 
 33 
 
 1840 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 50 
 
 45 
 
 38 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 48 
 
 40 
 
 32 
 
 Apr. 
 
 ... 
 
 49 
 
 43 
 
 36 
 
 1829 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 54 
 
 45 
 
 35 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 45 
 
 39 
 
 33 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 45 
 
 35 
 
 32 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 46 
 
 38 
 
 33 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 46 
 
 36 
 
 32 
 
 1841 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 52 
 
 45 
 
 35 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • . 
 
 37 
 
 30 
 
 27 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 53 
 
 46 
 
 37 
 
 1830 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 40 
 
 35 
 
 30 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 50 
 
 44 
 
 34 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 50 
 
 38 
 
 32 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 48 
 
 42 
 
 33 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 60 
 
 50 
 
 40 
 
 1842 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 48 
 
 42 
 
 35 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 70 
 
 60 
 
 48 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 46 
 
 40 
 
 32 
 
 1831 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 70 
 
 60 
 
 48 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 43 
 
 37 
 
 30 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 70 
 
 60 
 
 50 
 
 Oct. 
 
 
 38 
 
 3 i 
 
 25 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 75 
 
 65 
 
 60 
 
 1843 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 35 
 
 30 
 
 25 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 70 
 
 60 
 
 50 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 33 
 
 28 
 
 25 
 
 1832 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 65 
 
 55 
 
 44 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 35 
 
 30 
 
 26 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • . . 
 
 60 
 
 52 
 
 42 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 36 
 
 32 
 
 26 
 
 July 
 
 
 50 
 
 42 
 
 30 
 
 1844 Jan. 
 
 ... 
 
 37 
 
 30 
 
 26 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • . 
 
 50 
 
 40 
 
 30 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 43 
 
 36 
 
 30 
 
 1833 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 55 
 
 4 i 
 
 33 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 45 
 
 37 
 
 32 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 63 
 
 53 
 
 38 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 50 
 
 40 
 
 33 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 61 
 
 54 
 
 40 
 
 1845 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 47 
 
 40 
 
 3 i 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 65 
 
 55 
 
 45 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 45 
 
 38 
 
 32 
 
 1834 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 70 
 
 60 
 
 48 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 40 
 
 36 
 
 30 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 67 
 
 56 
 
 44 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 38 
 
 35 
 
 28 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 60 
 
 50 
 
 40 
 
 1846 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 40 
 
 35 
 
 30 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • • • 
 
 62 
 
 50 
 
 40 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • • • 
 
 38 
 
 33 
 
 28 
 
 1835 Jan. 
 
 • • • 
 
 63 
 
 50 
 
 40 
 
 July 
 
 • • • 
 
 38 
 
 32 
 
 2 7 
 
 Apr. 
 
 
 65 
 
 60 
 
 45 
 
 Oct. 
 
 ... 
 
 36 
 
 30 
 
 22 
 
 a The grades quoted by Mauger & Avery were fine, medium and coarse. 
 
MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS 
 
 497 
 
 Table 71.— Imports of wool, 1822 to 1846. 
 
 [Sources: U. S. Commerce and Navigation Reports; and Wright, Wool Growing and the Tariff, 
 
 340 for the years 1822-28.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 1822 
 
 1823 
 
 1824 
 
 1825 
 
 1826 
 
 1827 
 
 1828 
 
 1829 
 
 1830 
 
 1831 
 
 1832 
 
 1833 
 
 1834 
 
 Total imports 
 (1000 lbs.). 
 
 Coarse 
 Wool. a 
 
 Fine 
 
 Wool. b 
 
 Year. 
 
 Total imports 
 (1000 lbs.). 
 
 Coarse 
 Wool. a 
 
 Fine 
 Wool. b 
 
 L 7 I 5 
 
 
 
 1835 
 
 7,290 
 
 5,544 
 
 L 747 
 
 L 673 
 
 
 
 1836 
 
 12,688 
 
 n ,033 
 
 1,655 
 
 1,300 
 
 
 
 1837 
 
 10,408 
 
 9 , 48 o 
 
 928 
 
 2,147 
 
 
 
 1838 
 
 6,968 
 
 6,551 
 
 417 
 
 2,638 
 
 
 
 1839 
 
 7,925 
 
 7,399 
 
 527 
 
 3,331 
 
 
 
 1840 
 
 9,899 
 
 9,304 
 
 595 
 
 2,453 
 
 
 
 1841 
 
 15,006 
 
 14,410 
 
 597 
 
 1,494 
 
 
 
 1842 
 
 11,421 
 
 10,637 
 
 784 
 
 670 
 
 
 
 1843° 
 
 4,758 
 
 4,512 
 
 246 
 
 5,623 
 
 
 
 1844 
 
 14,008 
 
 13,809 
 
 200 
 
 4,043 
 
 
 
 1845 
 
 23,833 
 
 23,382 
 
 45 i 
 
 950 
 
 
 950 
 
 1846 
 
 16,558 
 
 16,428 
 
 130 
 
 591 
 
 
 591 
 
 
 
 
 
 n Value not exceeding 8 cents per lb.; after 1842, 7 cents. 
 b Value exceeding 8 cents per lb.; after 1842, 7 cents. 
 
 c Official figures covering only 9 months have been increased by one-third. 
 
 Table 72.— Price of Hour, 1800 to 1855. 
 
 [Average annual export price at New York, from Klippart, The Wheat Plant, p. 328.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Average 
 annual price. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Average 
 annual price 
 
 Year. 
 
 Average 
 annual price. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Average 
 annual price. 
 
 l800 
 
 $10.00 
 
 1814 
 
 $ 14.50 
 
 1828 
 
 $ 5.50 
 
 1842 
 
 $6.00 
 
 l80I 
 
 13-00 
 
 1815 
 
 9.25 
 
 1829 
 
 5-oo 
 
 1843 
 
 4.50 
 
 1802 
 
 9.00 
 
 1816 
 
 7-37 
 
 1830 
 
 7.25 
 
 1844 
 
 4-75 
 
 1803 
 
 7.00 
 
 1817 
 
 14-75 
 
 1831 
 
 5.62 
 
 1845 
 
 4.51 
 
 1804 
 
 7-75 
 
 l8l8 
 
 10.25 
 
 1832 
 
 5.87 
 
 1846 
 
 5.18 
 
 1805 
 
 13.00 
 
 1819 
 
 8.00 
 
 1833 
 
 5.50 
 
 1847 
 
 5-95 
 
 1806 
 
 7.50 
 
 1820 
 
 5-37 
 
 1834 
 
 5.50 
 
 1848 
 
 6.22 
 
 1807 
 
 8.25 
 
 1821 
 
 4.25 
 
 1835 
 
 6.00 
 
 1849 
 
 5-35 
 
 1808 
 
 6.00 
 
 1822 
 
 7.00 
 
 1836 
 
 7-50 
 
 1850 
 
 5.00 
 
 1809 
 
 7-50 
 
 1823 
 
 7-75 
 
 1837 
 
 10.25 
 
 1851 
 
 4-77 
 
 l8lO 
 
 8.25 
 
 1824 
 
 6.62 
 
 1838 
 
 9.50 
 
 1852 
 
 4.24 
 
 l8ll 
 
 10.50 
 
 1825 
 
 5-37 
 
 1839 
 
 6.75 
 
 1853 
 
 5.60 
 
 l8l2 
 
 10.75 
 
 1826 
 
 5-25 
 
 1840 
 
 5-37 
 
 1854 
 
 7.88 
 
 1813 
 
 1300 
 
 1827 
 
 8.00 
 
 1841 
 
 5-20 
 
 1855 
 
 10.10 
 
 33 
 
498 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Table 73.— Imports of wheat, 1824 to 1846. 
 
 [Source: U. S. Commerce and Navigation Reports.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Wheat. 
 
 Flour. 
 
 Flour Equiv. 
 of wheat. a 
 
 Total wheat. 
 
 
 bu . 
 
 cwt . 
 
 bu . 
 
 bu . 
 
 1824 
 
 488 
 
 370 
 
 849-5 
 
 1 , 337-5 
 
 1825 
 
 1,065 
 
 118 
 
 270.9 
 
 1 , 335-9 
 
 1826 
 
 3,448 
 
 33 
 
 75-8 
 
 3 , 523.8 
 
 1827 
 
 1,064 
 
 47 
 
 107.9 
 
 1,171.9 
 
 1828 
 
 852 
 
 6 
 
 13-8 
 
 865.8 
 
 1829 
 
 263 
 
 151 
 
 346.7 
 
 609.7 
 
 1830 
 
 422 
 
 201 
 
 461.5 
 
 883.5 
 
 1831 
 
 620 
 
 5 
 
 II.5 
 
 631-5 
 
 1832 
 
 I,l68 
 
 9 
 
 20.7 
 
 1,188.7 
 
 1833 
 
 1,600 
 
 37 
 
 84.9 
 
 1,684.9 
 
 1834 
 
 1,225 
 
 32 
 
 73-5 
 
 1,298.5 
 
 1835 
 
 238,769 
 
 28,483 
 
 65 , 394.6 
 
 304,163.6 
 
 1836 
 
 583,898 
 
 66,731 
 
 153 , 208.9 
 
 737,106.9 
 
 1837 
 
 3,921,259 
 
 30,709 
 
 70,5054 
 
 3,991,764.4 
 
 1838 
 
 894,536 
 
 12,731 
 
 29,229.3 
 
 923 , 765.3 
 
 1839 
 
 32,884 
 
 7,348 
 
 16,870.4 
 
 49,7544 
 
 1840 
 
 593 
 
 329 
 
 755-4 
 
 1,348.4 
 
 1841 
 
 632 
 
 86 
 
 197.4 
 
 829.4 
 
 1842 
 
 4,082 
 
 28 
 
 64.3 
 
 4,146.3 
 
 l 843 b 
 
 16,107 
 
 75 
 
 172.2 
 
 16,279.2 
 
 1844 
 
 446 
 
 243 
 
 557.9 
 
 1,003.9 
 
 184S 
 
 281 
 
 14 
 
 32.1 
 
 3 I 3 -I 
 
 1846 
 
 512 
 
 62 
 
 142.3 
 
 6513 
 
 a Converted at rate of bushels of wheat to 196 pounds of flour. 
 b Official figures covering only 9 months have been increased by one-third. 
 
 Table 74—Hops: Quantity inspected and prices in Massachusetts, 1806 to 1840. 
 
 [From 4th Report, Agric. of Mass. (1841), pp. 490-491.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Inspections. 
 
 Price per 
 lb. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Inspections. 
 
 Price per 
 lb. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Inspections. 
 
 Price per 
 lb. 
 
 
 lbs . 
 
 cts . 
 
 
 lbs . 
 
 cts . 
 
 
 lbs . 
 
 cts . 
 
 1806 
 
 278,221 
 
 15 
 
 1818 
 
 616,366 
 
 14 
 
 1830 
 
 566,489 
 
 II 
 
 1807 
 
 369,496 
 
 II 
 
 1819 
 
 656,902 
 
 5 
 
 1831 
 
 505,251 
 
 ioi 
 
 1808 
 
 322,976 
 
 10 
 
 1820 
 
 782,663 
 
 62 
 
 1832 
 
 400,543 
 
 23 3 
 
 1809 
 
 280,063 
 
 10 
 
 1821 
 
 561,063 
 
 7 * 
 
 1833 
 
 698,724 
 
 l6 
 
 l8lO 
 
 299,500 
 
 2 7 
 
 1822 
 
 548,709 
 
 ioi 
 
 1834 
 
 722,596 
 
 14 
 
 l8ll 
 
 416,050 
 
 7i 
 
 1823 
 
 618,444 
 
 20 
 
 1835 
 
 695,800 
 
 
 l8l2 
 
 322,913 
 
 12 $ 
 
 1824 
 
 575,030 
 
 10* 
 
 1836 
 
 847,590 
 
 7 * 
 
 1813 
 
 243,242 
 
 22 
 
 1825 
 
 621,241 
 
 15 
 
 1837 
 
 623,648 
 
 6 
 
 1814 
 
 179,640 
 
 25 
 
 1826 
 
 409,007 
 
 15 
 
 1838 
 
 359,992 
 
 15 
 
 1815 
 
 331,673 
 
 30 
 
 1827 
 
 752,140 
 
 7 
 
 1839 
 
 233,461 
 
 15 
 
 1816 
 
 287,374 
 
 32 
 
 1828 
 
 662,334 
 
 6 
 
 1840 
 
 279,833 
 
 30 
 
 1817 
 
 729,862 
 
 34 
 
 1829 
 
 541,632 
 
 8* 
 
 
MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS 
 
 499 
 
 Table 75. —Urban concentration, 1840. 
 
 [Towns and cities of over 8,000 population. Source: U. S. Census, 1840.] 
 
 State and town or city. 
 
 Popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 | 
 
 State and town or city. 
 
 Popula¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Maine: 
 
 Bangor . 
 
 8,627 
 
 New Jersey: 
 
 Newark . 
 
 17,290 
 
 Portland . 
 
 15,218 
 
 Pennsylvania: 
 
 
 Massachusetts: 
 
 
 Philadelphia and Suburbs 
 
 205,850 
 
 Roxbury . 
 
 9,089 
 
 93,383 
 
 Lancaster . 
 
 8,417 
 
 8,410 
 
 Boston . 
 
 Reading . 
 
 Charlestown . 
 
 11,484 
 
 Alleghany . 
 
 10,089 
 
 Cambridge . 
 
 8,409 
 
 Pittsburgh . 
 
 21,115 
 
 Lowell . 
 
 20,796 
 
 Delaware: 
 
 
 Lynn . 
 
 9,367 
 
 Wilmington . 
 
 8,367 
 
 Nantucket . 
 
 9,012 
 
 Ohio: 
 
 
 New Bedford . 
 
 12,087 
 
 Cincinnati . 
 
 46,338 
 
 Salem . 
 
 15,082 
 
 Missouri: 
 
 
 Springfield . 
 
 10,985 
 
 St. Louis . 
 
 16,469 
 
 Rhode Island: 
 
 Newport . 
 
 8,333 
 
 Maryland: 
 
 Baltimore . 
 
 102,313 
 
 Providence . 
 
 23,171 
 
 Kentucky: 
 
 
 Smithfield . 
 
 9,534 
 
 Louisville . 
 
 21,210 
 
 Connecticut: 
 
 Hartford . 
 
 9,468 
 
 Virginia: 
 
 Norfolk . 
 
 10,920 
 
 New Haven . 
 
 12,923 
 
 Petersburg . 
 
 11,136 
 
 20,153 
 
 New York: 
 
 Richmond . 
 
 Albany . 
 
 33,721 
 
 South Carolina: 
 
 
 Buffalo . 
 
 18,213 
 
 Charleston . 
 
 29,26l 
 
 Rochester . 
 
 20,191 
 
 Georgia: 
 
 
 Troy . 
 
 19,334 
 
 Savannah . 
 
 11,214 
 
 Utica . 
 
 12,782 
 
 36,233 
 
 Alabama: 
 
 
 Brooklyn . 
 
 Mobile . 
 
 12,672 
 
 Fishkill .' 
 
 10,437 
 
 Michigan: 
 
 
 Newburgh . 
 
 8,933 
 
 Detroit . 
 
 9,102 
 
 New York . 
 
 312,710 
 
 District of Columbia: 
 
 
 Poughkeepsie . 
 
 10,006 
 
 Alexandria . 
 
 8,459 
 
 
 Washington . 
 
 23,364 
 
500 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Table 76.— Prices of wheat ( winter ) per bushel, at New York, 1840 to i860. 
 
 [Source: Aldrich Report (1893), part 2, p. 63.] 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 JPrice. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 1840 Jan . 
 
 $1,230 
 
 1847 Jan. 
 
 $ 1,130 
 
 1854 Jan. 
 
 $1,900 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1. 120 
 
 Apr . 
 
 1-575 
 
 Apr . 
 
 2. 110 
 
 July . 
 
 I.O9O 
 
 July . 
 
 1-575 
 
 July . 
 
 2.250 
 
 Oct. 
 
 I .030 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1.235 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1.725 
 
 1841 Jan. 
 
 1-045 
 
 1848 Jan. 
 
 1.360 
 
 1855 Jan. 
 
 2.380 
 
 Apr. 
 
 0.975 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1.460 
 
 Apr. 
 
 2. 500 
 
 July . 
 
 1-275 
 
 July . 
 
 1.210 
 
 July . 
 
 2.525 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1.425 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1.270 
 
 Oc.t . 
 
 I 800 
 
 1842 Jan . 
 
 1.250 
 
 1849 Jan . 
 
 1.260 
 
 1856 Jan . 
 
 1.930 
 
 Apr . 
 
 1.255 
 
 Apr . 
 
 1.210 
 
 Apr . 
 
 I 850 
 
 July . 
 
 1.270 
 
 July . 
 
 1.240 
 
 July . 
 
 1-675 
 
 Oct . 
 
 0.910 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1.210 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1 . 575 
 
 1843 Jan . 
 
 0.925 
 
 1850 Jan. 
 
 1.265 
 
 1857 Jan. 
 
 1.590 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1-075 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1-275 
 
 Apr . 
 
 I.650 
 
 July . 
 
 1.190 
 
 July . 
 
 1.500 
 
 July . 
 
 1.950 
 
 Oct . 
 
 0.955 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1.150 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1.140 
 
 1844 Jan. 
 
 1.020 
 
 1851 Jan. 
 
 1.215 
 
 1858 Jan. 
 
 1.200 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1-045 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1.125 
 
 Apr . 
 
 I. igO 
 
 July . 
 
 0.900 
 
 July . 
 
 1.080 
 
 July . 
 
 I.II 5 
 
 Oct . 
 
 0.915 
 
 Oct . 
 
 0.945 
 
 Oct . 
 
 I 165 
 
 1845 Jan . 
 
 0.955 
 
 1852 Jan . 
 
 1.115 
 
 1859 Jan . 
 
 1.300 
 
 Apr . 
 
 1.015 
 
 Apr . 
 
 1.100 
 
 Apr . 
 
 1-530 
 
 July . 
 
 1.030 
 
 July . 
 
 1.125 
 
 July . 
 
 I.650 
 
 Oct . 
 
 0.975 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1.090 
 
 Oct . 
 
 I 350 
 
 1846 Jan . 
 
 1.300 
 
 1853 Jan. 
 
 1.320 
 
 i860 Jan. 
 
 1.410 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1.180 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1.230 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1.450 
 
 July . 
 
 0.920 
 
 July . 
 
 1.290 
 
 July . 
 
 1.410 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1.085 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1.590 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1.265 
 
 Table 77.— Prices of wheat (No. 2 winter ) per bushel, at Chicago, 1840 to i860. 
 
 [Source: Aldrich Report (1893), part 2, p. 61.] 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 1840 Apr. 
 
 $ 0-595 
 
 1848 July . 
 
 $ 0,975 
 
 July . 
 
 -595 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .625 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .850 
 
 1849 Jan. 
 
 .685 
 
 1841 Jan. 
 
 • 595 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1.125 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .520 
 
 July . 
 
 .705 
 
 July . 
 
 .650 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .760 
 
 1842 Oct. 
 
 .525 
 
 1850 Jan. 
 
 -775 
 
 1843 Jan. 
 
 •465 
 
 Apr. 
 
 -775 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • 5 i 5 
 
 July . 
 
 I . 100 
 
 July . 
 
 .805 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .700 
 
 1844 Apr. 
 
 .650 
 
 1851 Jan. 
 
 •675 
 
 July . 
 
 .630 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .625 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .650 
 
 1852 Jan. 
 
 •575 
 
 1845 Jan. 
 
 .710 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .650 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .780 
 
 July . 
 
 .720 
 
 1846 July . 
 
 •515 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .660 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .600 
 
 1853 Jan. 
 
 .820 
 
 1847 Jan. 
 
 .560 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • 750 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .675 
 
 July . 
 
 .840 
 
 July . 
 
 -575 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1.065 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • 730 
 
 1854 Jan. 
 
 1.105 
 
 1848 Jan. 
 
 .825 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1.160 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .875 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1 -175 
 1-350 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 1855 Jan. 
 Apr. 
 July 
 Oct. 
 
 1856 Jan. 
 Apr. 
 July 
 Oct. 
 
 1857 Jan. 
 Apr. 
 July 
 Oct. 
 
 1858 Jan. 
 Apr. 
 Oct. 
 
 1859 Jan. 
 Apr. 
 July 
 Oct. 
 
 1860 Jan. 
 Apr. 
 July 
 Oct. 
 
 Price. 
 
 $1,260 
 1-525 
 1-725 
 1.500 
 1.450 
 1.500 
 I. 105 
 I .210 
 I. 105 
 I. 125 
 1.500 
 I • 075 
 .700 
 •750 
 1-035 
 I.065 
 I- 3 I 5 
 1-255 
 .870 
 1.090 
 1.150 
 1.150 
 1.000 
 
MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS 
 
 501 
 
 Table 78. —Prices of beeves (good to prime, live weight ) per 100 pounds, 
 
 at New York, 1840-1860. 
 
 [Source: Aldrich Report (1893), part 2 , p. 25.] 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 1840 Jan. 
 
 $3.64 
 
 1847 Jan. 
 
 $ 3-78 
 
 1854 Jan. 
 
 $ 5-32 
 
 Apr. 
 
 3-50 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4.20 
 
 Apr. 
 
 6.l6 
 
 July . 
 
 4.20 
 
 July . 
 
 4.48 
 
 July . 
 
 5-04 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3.50 
 
 4.20 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4.06 
 
 Oct 
 
 5.18 
 
 5-88 
 
 1841 Jan. 
 
 1848 Jan. 
 
 4.48 
 
 1855 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4-34 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4.62 
 
 Apr. 
 
 7.00 
 
 July . 
 
 3-50 
 
 July . 
 
 4.06 
 
 July . 
 
 5-88 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3.22 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3.22 
 
 Oct 
 
 e . 60 
 
 1842 Jan. 
 
 3-00 
 
 1849 Jan. 
 
 4.76 
 
 1856 Jan. 
 
 6.16 
 
 Apr. 
 
 3-64 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5-32 
 
 Apr. 
 
 6.44 
 
 July . 
 
 3.22 
 
 July . 
 
 4.48 
 
 July . 
 
 5-32 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3.08 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4-32 
 
 4.48 
 
 Oct . 
 
 c. 88 
 
 1843 Jan. 
 
 3-36 
 
 1850 Jan. 
 
 1857 Jan. 
 
 6.72 
 
 Apr. 
 
 3.08 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4.48 
 
 Apr. 
 
 6.16 
 
 July . 
 
 3-30 
 
 July . 
 
 4.48 
 
 July . 
 
 5-88 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3-36 
 3 - 2 4 
 3-50 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4.20 
 
 Oct 
 
 6 16 
 
 1844 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1851 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4.20 
 
 5-04 
 
 1858 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5-60 
 5-32 
 
 July . 
 
 3-08 
 
 July . 
 
 4.48 
 
 July . 
 
 4.20 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3.08 
 
 Oct. . 
 
 4.06 
 
 Oct . 
 
 5-04 
 
 5-46 
 
 1845 Jan. 
 
 3-30 
 
 1852 Jan. 
 
 4.76 
 
 1859 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 3-64 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5.60 
 
 Apr. 
 
 6.16 
 
 July . 
 
 3-64 
 
 July . 
 
 4.48 
 
 July . 
 
 6.16 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3.08 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4.76 
 
 5-04 
 
 Oct . 
 
 5-32 
 
 5.60 
 
 1846 Jan. 
 
 3.36 
 
 1853 Jan. 
 
 i860 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4.20 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5-60 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5-88 
 
 July . 
 
 3.22 
 
 July . 
 
 5.60 
 
 July . 
 
 5-04 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3.78 
 
 Oct. 
 
 5-60 
 
 Oct. 
 
 5-32 
 
 Table 79. —Prices of beeves (good to choice, live weight) per 100 pounds, 
 
 at Cincinnati, 1843 to i860. 
 
 [Source: Aldrich Report (1893), part 2, p. 24.] 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 1843 July . 
 
 $ 2-75 
 
 Oct. 
 
 2.25 
 
 1844 Apr. 
 
 3.25 
 
 July . 
 
 2-75 
 
 1845 Jan. 
 
 3-00 
 
 July . 
 
 3-75 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3-50 
 
 1846 Jan. 
 
 3-25 
 
 Apr. 
 
 3.15 
 
 July . 
 
 3-75 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3.50 
 
 1847 Jan. 
 
 3.50 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4.40 
 
 July . 
 
 4-50 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4-25 
 
 1848 Jan. 
 
 3.15 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4-25 
 
 July . 
 
 4-25 
 
 1849 Jan. 
 
 4-50 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4-15 
 
 1850 Jan. 
 
 4.00 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 1850 Apr. 
 
 $ 5-25 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3-75 
 
 1851 Jan. 
 
 4-75 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5-75 
 
 July . 
 
 5.00 
 
 Oct. 
 
 5-25 
 
 1852 Jan. 
 
 4-75 
 
 Apr. 
 
 6.25 
 
 July . 
 
 5-50 
 
 Oct. 
 
 5-25 
 
 1853 Jan. 
 
 6.50 
 
 Apr. 
 
 6.50 
 
 July . 
 
 7.00 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4-35 
 
 1854 Jan. 
 
 4.50 
 
 Apr. 
 
 7.50 
 
 July . 
 
 6.10 
 
 Oct. 
 
 5-25 
 
 1855 Jan. 
 
 6.25 
 
 Apr. 
 
 9-50 
 
 July . 
 
 7.25 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 1855 Oct. 
 
 $4.00 
 
 1856 Jan. 
 
 3-75 
 
 Apr. 
 
 3-50 
 
 July . 
 
 3.87 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3-75 
 
 1857 Jan. 
 
 4.00 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5.25 
 
 July . 
 
 5.00 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4.00 
 
 1858 Jan. 
 
 4.00 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4.00 
 
 July . 
 
 3-75 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3.25 
 
 1859 Jan. 
 
 4.25 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5-75 
 
 July . 
 
 5.00 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3-50 
 
 i860 Jan. 
 
 3-75 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4-25 
 
 July . 
 
 3-25 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3-25 
 
502 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Table 8o. —Prices of butter per pound, at Boston, 1840-1860. 
 
 [Source: Aldrich Report (1893), part 2, p. 73.] 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 1 
 
 Price. 
 
 1840 Jan. 
 
 $0.180 
 
 1847 Jan. 
 
 $0.180 
 
 1854 Jan. 
 
 $0,170 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .140 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .185 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .210 
 
 July . 
 
 . l6o 
 
 July . 
 
 . 170 
 
 July . 
 
 . 180 
 
 Oct. 
 
 . l6o 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .200 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .255 
 
 1841 Jan. 
 
 . l6o 
 
 1848 Jan. 
 
 . 170 
 
 i8ss Tan. 
 
 • “JJ 
 
 . 24 ^ 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • 1/5 
 
 Apr. 
 
 . 190 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • ^ r J 
 
 •275 
 
 July . 
 
 .175 
 
 July . 
 
 . l6o 
 
 July . 
 
 .190 
 
 Oct. 
 
 . 175 
 
 Oct. 
 
 . 170 
 
 Oct. 
 
 . 2 IS 
 
 1842 Jan. 
 
 • 175 
 
 1849 Jan. 
 
 . l8o 
 
 i8s 6 Tan. 
 
 . — X J 
 
 .2^ 
 
 Apr. 
 
 •175 
 
 Apr. 
 
 . 170 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .215 
 
 July . 
 
 •175 
 
 July . 
 
 . 170 
 
 July . 
 
 .165 
 
 Oct . 
 
 . 180 
 
 Oct. 
 
 . 190 
 
 Oct . 
 
 . 220 
 
 1843 Jan. 
 
 .150 
 
 1850 Jan. 
 
 . 170 
 
 1857 Jan. 
 
 .235 
 
 Apr. 
 
 . ISO 
 
 Apr. 
 
 . 170 
 
 Apr . 
 
 . 2 SS 
 
 July . 
 
 . 140 
 
 Julv . 
 
 . l60 
 
 July . 
 
 .215 
 
 Oct . 
 
 . ISO 
 
 Oct . 
 
 . 170 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .220 
 
 1844 Jan . 
 
 .150 
 
 1851 Jan . 
 
 • 175 
 
 1858 Jan . 
 
 . 190 
 
 Apr . 
 
 • 185 
 
 Apr . 
 
 . I 7 S 
 
 Apr . 
 
 250 
 
 July . 
 
 .185 
 
 July . 
 
 •155 
 
 July . 
 
 •175 
 
 Oct . 
 
 • 185 
 
 Oct . 
 
 . 16s 
 
 Oct .... 
 
 190 
 
 1845 Jan . 
 
 .150 
 
 1852 Jan . 
 
 .190 
 
 1859 Jan . 
 
 •235 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .150 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • 245 
 
 Apr. 
 
 •215 
 
 July . 
 
 . 170 
 
 July . 
 
 . 170 
 
 July . 
 
 . l80 
 
 Oct. 
 
 . 170 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .24s 
 
 Oct 
 
 . 20 S 
 
 1846 Jan. 
 
 .195 
 
 1853 Jan. 
 
 .270 
 
 i860 Jan. 
 
 .210 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .150 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .210 
 
 Apr. 
 
 . 170 
 
 July . 
 
 .150 
 
 July . 
 
 .170 
 
 July . 
 
 . 170 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .165 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .200 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .200 
 
 Table 81. —Prices of cheese per pound, at Boston, 1840 to i860. 
 [Source: Aldrich Report (1893), part 2, p. 74.] 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 I 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month 
 
 1840 Jan. 
 
 $0.090 
 
 1847 Jan. 
 
 $0.070 
 
 1854 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .090 
 
 Apr. 
 
 •075 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 .090 
 
 July . 
 
 •075 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .090 
 
 .090 
 
 Oct. 
 
 •075 
 
 .065 
 
 Oct 
 
 1841 Jan. 
 
 1848 Jan. 
 
 1855 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .090 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .065 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 .070 
 
 July . 
 
 .070 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .065 
 
 .070 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .070 
 
 .070 
 
 Oct 
 
 1842 Jan. 
 
 ! 1849 Jan. 
 
 1856 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .070 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .070 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 .070 
 
 July . 
 
 .060 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .070 
 
 .065 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .060 
 
 Oct 
 
 1843 Jan. 
 
 1850 Jan. 
 
 .060 
 
 1857 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .065 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .070 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 .065 
 
 July . 
 
 .070 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .060 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .065 
 
 .050 
 
 Oct .. 
 
 1844 Jan. 
 
 .050 
 
 1851 Jan. 
 
 1858 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .060 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • 055 . 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 .060 
 
 July . 
 
 .050 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .0S0 
 
 .050 
 
 Oct. 
 
 . 060 
 
 Oct 
 
 1845 Jan. 
 
 1852 Jan. 
 
 .065 
 
 1859 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .080 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .080 
 
 Apr 
 
 July . 
 
 •075 
 
 July . 
 
 .070 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .065 
 
 •075 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .070 
 
 .085 
 
 Oct 
 
 1846 Jan. 
 
 1853 Jan. 
 
 i860 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 •075 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .080 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 •075 
 
 Tuly . 
 
 .070 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .070 
 
 Oct. 
 
 •095 
 
 Oct. 
 
 Price. 
 
 $0.105 
 .110 
 .080 
 .080 
 •095 
 •115 
 .070 
 •075 
 .085 
 . 100 
 •075 
 
 .070 
 . 100 
 .130 
 .085 
 
 .075 
 
 .065 
 .080 
 .060 
 .070 
 . 100 
 . 100 
 .070 
 .085 
 . 100 
 .110 
 .075 
 . 100 
 
MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS 
 
 503 
 
 Table 82. —Prices of corn per bushel, at New York, 1840 to i860. 
 
 [Source: Aldrich Report (1893), part 2, p. 7.] 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 1840 Jan . 
 
 $0,580 
 
 1847 Jan. 
 
 $0.8l0 
 
 1854 Jan. 
 
 $ 0,795 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .565 
 
 Apr . 
 
 .970 
 
 Apr . 
 
 •750 
 
 July . 
 
 •545 
 
 July . 
 
 •930 
 
 July . 
 
 .770 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .585 
 
 .570 
 
 •495 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .665 
 
 Oct. 
 
 •755 
 
 1.000 
 
 1.000 
 
 1841 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1848 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .685 
 
 •530 
 
 1855 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 .630 
 
 July . 
 
 •530 
 
 July . 
 
 • 895 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .710 
 
 .665 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .770 
 
 .650 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .860 
 
 1842 Jan . 
 
 1849 Jan . 
 
 1856 Jan . 
 
 .925 
 
 Apr . 
 
 ••595 
 
 Apr . 
 
 •575 
 
 Apr . 
 
 .640 
 
 July . 
 
 .6lO 
 
 July . 
 
 .560 
 
 July . 
 
 .515 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .585 
 
 Oct . 
 
 •645 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .685 
 
 1843 Jan . 
 
 •545 
 
 1850 Jan . 
 
 .630 
 
 1857 Jan. 
 
 .680 
 
 Apr . 
 
 .515 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .560 
 
 Apr . 
 
 .690 
 
 July . 
 
 •565 
 
 July . 
 
 .610 
 
 July . 
 
 .845 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .515 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .655 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .700 
 
 1844 Jan. 
 
 •475 
 
 1851 Jan. 
 
 .660 
 
 1858 Jan. 
 
 .600 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .525 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .680 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .690 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .505 
 
 .490 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .560 
 
 .625 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 • 730 
 •715 
 
 1845 Jan . 
 
 •490 
 
 1852 Jan . 
 
 .660 
 
 1859 Jan . 
 
 .790 
 
 Apr . 
 
 .490 
 
 Apr . 
 
 .670 
 
 Apr . 
 
 •895 
 
 July . 
 
 • 475 
 
 July . 
 
 .605 
 
 July . 
 
 .820 
 
 Oct . 
 
 • 575 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .705 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .920 
 
 1846 Jan . 
 
 .715 
 
 1853 Jan . 
 
 .740 
 
 i860 Jan . 
 
 .890 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .700 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .640 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • 70 S 
 
 July . 
 
 • 535 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .635 
 
 .830 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 .630 
 
 .690 
 
 Table 83.— Prices of corn (ear) per bushel, at Cincinnati, 1840 to 1853. 
 
 [Source: Aldrich Report (1893), part 2, p. 8.] 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 1840 Jan. 
 
 $0.31 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .20 
 
 July . 
 
 .22 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • 25 
 
 1841 Jan. 
 
 .22 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .23 
 
 July . 
 
 .28 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • 34 
 
 1842 Jan. 
 
 .28 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • 23 
 
 July . 
 
 .23 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .21 
 
 1843 Jan. 
 
 .21 
 
 1844 Jan. 
 
 .25 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .29 
 
 July . 
 
 .24 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • 32 
 
 1845 Jan. 
 
 $0.32 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • 34 
 
 July . 
 
 • 34 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .36 
 
 1846 Jan. 
 
 • 34 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • 3 i 
 
 July . 
 
 .25 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .23 
 
 1847 Jan. 
 
 .21 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .40 
 
 July . 
 
 .41 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • 31 
 
 1848 Jan. 
 
 • 31 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .26 
 
 July . 
 
 • 30 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .28 
 
 1849 Jan. 
 
 .28 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .26 
 
 1849 July . 
 
 $0.34 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • 34 
 
 1850 Jan. 
 
 • 3 i 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .38 
 
 July . 
 
 .48 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • 51 
 
 1851 Jan. 
 
 .38 
 
 Apr. 
 
 • 37 
 
 July . 
 
 •37 
 
 Oct. 
 
 • 34 
 
 1852 Jan. 
 
 .28 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .27 
 
 July . 
 
 • 32 
 
 Oct. 
 
 .41 
 
 1853 Jan. 
 
 .42 
 
 Apr. 
 
 .41 
 
 July . 
 
 . 48 
 
 Oct. 
 
 •55 
 
504 
 
 AGRICULTURE IN NORTHERN UNITED STATES 
 
 Table 84 .—Prices of hogs (fair to good packing, live weight ) per 100 pounds, 
 
 at Cincinnati, 1841 to i860. 
 
 [Source: Aldrich Report (1893), part 2, p. 27.] 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 1841 Jan. 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1842 Jan. 
 
 1843 Jan. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1844 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 1845 Jan. 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1846 Jan. 
 
 July . 
 
 1847 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1848 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1849 Jan. 
 
 Oct . 
 
 $3.70 
 
 3-15 
 
 2.00 
 
 1 - 75 
 1.87 
 2.50 
 
 2 - 45 
 2.62 
 2.50 
 
 3- 60 
 4.00 
 4.15 
 
 1.80 
 
 3.20 
 
 4 - 50 
 4.00 
 
 2.50 
 2.75 
 
 2.00 
 
 3.50 
 
 3-35 
 
 225 
 
 1850 Jan. 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1851 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1852 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1853 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1854 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1855 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 $2.90 
 
 3-50 
 
 4.15 
 
 3-50 
 
 3-50 
 
 3 - 65 
 4.90 
 5-oo 
 5-00 
 5-65 
 
 6.25 
 
 5-05 
 
 4 - 25 
 6.00 
 4.40 
 4.00 
 3-25 
 
 3 - 85 
 
 4 - 50 
 
 4.25 
 
 4-85 
 
 6.00 
 
 1856 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1857 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1858 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1859 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 1860 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct . 
 
 $ 5-55 
 
 4.60 
 
 5-25 
 
 5-io 
 
 6.70 
 
 6.25 
 
 5-90 
 
 6.15 
 
 4.90 
 
 4-65 
 
 3 - 65 
 
 4 - 45 
 6.25 
 6.50 
 
 5 - 25 
 4.60 
 6.00 
 5.00 
 3 *io 
 5-75 
 
 Table 85 .—Prices of hogs (good to prime, live weight ) per 100 pounds, 
 
 at New York, 1840 to i860. 
 
 [Source: Aldrich Report (1893), part 2, p. 28.] 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Year and month. 
 
 Price. 
 
 1840 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 $ 4,750 
 
 4-875 
 
 4.625 
 
 1847 Jan.. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 $ 5-375 
 
 5-125 
 
 5-375 
 
 5-500 
 
 5.000 
 
 1854 Apr. 
 
 Tulv 
 
 $ 5-500 
 
 4 - 750 
 
 5 - 375 
 5.125 
 5-250 
 
 5-500 
 
 July . 
 
 July . 
 
 J L4A J •••••• 
 
 Oct. 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3 - 375 
 
 4 - 750 
 
 Oct. 
 
 t8cc Tnn 
 
 1841 Jan. 
 
 1848 Jan. 
 
 J • • • • • • 
 
 Apr. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4.500 
 
 Apr. 
 
 6.000 
 
 July . 
 
 July . 
 
 5.000 
 
 July . 
 
 4-875 
 
 Oct. 
 
 6.750 
 
 1842 Jan. 
 
 4.000 
 
 4-500 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4.690 
 
 4.625 
 
 i8=;6 Tan 
 
 6.500 
 
 6.875 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1849 Jan. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 4-500 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5-500 
 
 July . 
 
 6-375 
 
 Oct. 
 
 3 - 56 o 
 
 3 - 750 
 
 4 - 750 
 4.500 
 4.250 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4-500 
 
 4.000 
 
 Oct 
 
 6-375 
 
 6.750 
 
 7.500 
 
 6-375 
 
 6.875 
 
 5-750 
 
 1843 Jan. 
 
 i8=;o Tan. 
 
 18^7 Tan 
 
 Apr. 
 
 July . 
 
 Apr. 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4.000 
 
 4.190 
 4.250 
 5-375 
 
 ±%J 0 / J a11 . 
 
 Apr. 
 
 Tulv 
 
 1844 Jan. 
 
 1851 Jan. 
 
 J . 
 
 Oct 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4-750 
 
 Apr. 
 
 1858 Jan. 
 
 July . 
 
 5.000 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4-875 
 
 4.620 
 
 A nr 
 
 6.250 
 
 4.190 
 
 Oct. 
 
 4.000 
 
 1852 Jan. 
 
 July . 
 
 1845 Jan. 
 
 3-625 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5-750 
 
 5-750 
 
 Oct . 
 
 4 - 750 
 
 5- 250 
 
 Apr. 
 
 4-750 
 
 July . 
 
 1859 Jan. 
 
 July . 
 
 4.125 
 
 3-500 
 
 Oct. 
 
 5-625 
 
 6.250 
 
 Aor 
 
 5-500 " 
 
 6.000 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1853 Jan. 
 
 July . 
 
 1846 Jan. 
 
 4.250 
 
 Apr. 
 
 7.250 
 
 S.000 
 
 Oct .... 
 
 5.625 
 
 5.625 
 
 6.060 
 
 6.750 
 
 6.690 
 
 Apr. 
 
 5.000 
 
 July . 
 
 i860 Jan ... 
 
 July . 
 
 4-750 
 
 4.005 
 
 Oct. 
 
 5-375 
 
 5-750 
 
 Anr 
 
 Oct. 
 
 1854 Jan. 
 
 July . 
 
 Oct. 
 
MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS 
 
 505 
 
 Table 86. —Maple sugar: Production in the United States. 
 [Source: U. S. censuses, 1840, 1850 and i860.] 
 
 Geographic division 
 and State. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 i860. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 lbs.). 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 (lbs.). 
 
 Per 
 
 cent. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 lbs.). 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 (lbs.). 
 
 Per 
 
 cent. 
 
 Total 
 
 (1000 
 
 lbs.). 
 
 Per 
 
 capita 
 
 (lbs.). 
 
 Per 
 
 cnet. 
 
 United States . 
 
 34,516 
 
 2.0 
 
 100.0 
 
 34,253 
 
 1.5 
 
 100.0 
 
 40,120 
 
 1.3 
 
 100.0 
 
 Geographic Division: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New England. 
 
 6,699 
 
 3-0 
 
 I9.4 
 
 8,588 
 
 3-1 
 
 25.1 
 
 13,510 
 
 4-3 
 
 33.7 
 
 Middle Atlantic .... 
 
 12,314 
 
 2.7 
 
 35 V 
 
 12,686 
 
 2.2 
 
 37-0 
 
 13,587 
 
 1.8 
 
 33-9 
 
 East North Central. 
 
 11,956 
 
 4.1 
 
 34-6 
 
 10,809 
 
 2.4 
 
 31.6 
 
 10,658 
 
 1.5 
 
 26.6 
 
 West North Central 
 
 316 
 
 • 7 
 
 •9 
 
 260 
 
 •3 
 
 .8 
 
 832 
 
 •4 
 
 2.1 
 
 New England: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maine . 
 
 258 
 
 •5 
 
 •7 
 
 94 
 
 .2 
 
 •3 
 
 307 
 
 • 5 
 
 .8 
 
 New Hampshire ... 
 
 I,l62 
 
 4.1 
 
 3-4 
 
 1,299 
 
 4.1 
 
 3-8 
 
 2,255 
 
 6.9 
 
 5-6 
 
 Vermont . 
 
 4,648 
 
 15-9 
 
 13-5 
 
 6,349 
 
 20.2 
 
 18.5 
 
 9,898 
 
 31.4 
 
 24.7 
 
 Massachusetts . 
 
 579 
 
 .8 
 
 1-7 
 
 795 
 
 .8 
 
 2.3 
 
 1,006 
 
 .8 
 
 2.5 
 
 Rhode Island . 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Connecticut . 
 
 52 
 
 .2 
 
 . 1 
 
 51 
 
 . 1 
 
 .2 
 
 44 
 
 . 1 
 
 . 1 
 
 Middle Atlantic: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 New York . 
 
 10,048 
 
 4.1 
 
 29.1 
 
 10,357 
 
 3-3 
 
 30.2 
 
 10,816 
 
 2.8 
 
 27.0 
 
 New Jersey . 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 Pennsylvania . 
 
 2,266 
 
 1.3 
 
 6.6 
 
 2,327 
 
 1.0 
 
 6.8 
 
 2,767 
 
 1.0 
 
 6.9 
 
 East North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ohio . 
 
 6,363 
 
 4.2 
 
 18.4 
 
 4,588 
 
 2.3 
 
 13.4 
 
 3,346 
 
 1.4 
 
 8-3 
 
 Indiana . 
 
 3,728 
 
 5-4 
 
 10.8 
 
 2,921 
 
 3 -o 
 
 8.6 
 
 1,542 
 
 1.1 
 
 3-9 
 
 Illinois . 
 
 400 
 
 •9 
 
 1.1 
 
 249 
 
 •3 
 
 • 7 
 
 134 
 
 . 1 
 
 • 3 
 
 Michigan . 
 
 1,330 
 
 6-3 
 
 3-9 
 
 2,440 
 
 6.1 
 
 7 .i 
 
 4,052 
 
 2.3 
 
 10.1 
 
 Wisconsin . 
 
 135 
 
 4.4 
 
 •4 
 
 611 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 1,584 
 
 2.0 
 
 4.0 
 
 West North Central: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Minnesota . 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 371 
 
 2.2 
 
 . Q 
 
 Iowa . 
 
 41 
 
 1.0 
 
 . 1 
 
 78 
 
 •4 
 
 • 3 
 
 315 
 
 • 5 
 
 .8 
 
 Missouri . 
 
 275 
 
 • 7 
 
 .8 
 
 179 
 
 • 3 
 
 •5 
 
 142 
 
 . 1 
 
 •4 
 
 Nebraska . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 Kansas . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *T 
 
 
 
 a Less than 500 pounds. 
 
INDEX 
 
 Agricultural chemistry, 319 
 education, 320 
 fairs, 318 
 
 improvement, 184, in the East, 200 
 machinery, 405, effects of, 293; see 
 also Tools and Implements, 
 Reaping Machines and Thresh¬ 
 ing Machines 
 periodicals, 469 
 societies, 184-193, 317 
 Agriculture in 1840 
 
 Eastern and central New York, 
 260 
 
 Maryland and Delaware, 262 
 New England, 259 
 Southeastern Pennsylvania, 261 
 Western New York and eastern 
 Ohio, 262 
 The West, 263 
 
 Alfalfa, 234 
 
 American Husbandry, 458 
 Apples, 16, 99; see also Orchards 
 Asparagus, 16 
 
 Associated dairy system, 430 
 
 Bank loans, use of by farmers, 248 
 
 Barberry bushes, legislation against, 93 
 
 Barley, 14, 97, 241, 356 
 
 Barns, see Farm Buildings 
 
 Beans, 16 
 
 Beatty, Adam, 473 
 
 Beef cattle, 108, 264, 387-405 
 
 in the Connecticut Valley, 224 
 in the earliest settlements, 27 
 in Kentucky, 401 
 in Maine, 227 
 in Michigan, 393 
 in New York, 395 
 in New England, 396 
 in Ohio, 177, 178, 39B 401 
 in Pennsylvania, 227, 395 
 in Wisconsin, 393 
 on the prairies, 392 
 receipts at New York, 399, 400 
 weight, 109 
 
 western in eastern markets, 227 
 Beef production, in the West, business organiza¬ 
 tion, 391 
 Bees, 32 
 
 Berkshire Agricultural Society, 187 
 Black-stem rust, 13, 93, 238 
 Blast on wheat, see Black-stem rust 
 Boston, market for farm products, 141 
 tax lists, 26, 28, 30, 32, 37 
 Bounties, see State aid to agriculture 
 Bounty lands, 74 
 Brighton Market, 225, 397 
 Broom corn, 245, 382 
 
 Broom straw, see Grasses, native 
 Buckwheat, 97, 241 
 Buel, Jesse, 239, 281, 316, 470, 473 
 Buffalo, grain trade, 310 
 
 Buffalo grass, and buffalo clover, see Grasses, 
 native 
 
 Business organization in beef production, 391 
 Butter, 109, 228 
 
 methods of production, 424-427 
 production in New York State, 424 
 By-industries of farming, 253 
 
 Cabbages, 16 
 Caird, James, 472 
 California, migration to, 394 
 Cane, see Grasses, native 
 Capital, use in colonial agriculture, 115 
 scarce, on pioneer farms, 162 
 Carrots, 16, 379 
 Carts, 36 
 
 Cattle driving, across Alleghanies, 177 
 from Texas, 400 
 Cattle fattening, see Beef cattle 
 Cattle shows, 187 
 Cauliflower, 16 
 Census of Agriculture, 317 
 Cereals, European, in earliest settlements, 12 
 Cheese, 109, 182, 228, 229 
 
 exports from New England, 109 
 factories, 429 
 
 methods of production, 424-427 
 production in New York State, 424 
 production in Ohio, 428 
 receipts at Albany, 422 
 Cherries, 16 
 
 Chester County, Pennsylvania, 232 
 Qiicago, beef packing, 393 
 grain trade, 310 
 
 Cider, consumption in New England, 99 
 Cincinnati, pork packing, 439 
 Clearing, process of, in earliest settlements, 8 
 Gearings or openings, 6 
 
 their origin, 8 
 
 Clovers, see Grasses, English 
 
 Colman, Henry, 252, 254, 255, 465 
 
 Colonial agriculture, economic characteristics, 
 
 H5 
 
 Common fields, 21, 55 
 
 their disadvantages, 57 
 Commons, town, 21 
 stinted, 22 
 
 Competition of western wheat in New England, 
 2 37 
 
 Connecticut Colony, inventory of estates, 10, 26, 
 28, 30, 32, 35 
 
 Connecticut, land utilization, 120 
 Connecticut tax lists, 112, 120 
 Connecticut Valley, 99, 109, 224, 235, 246, 384, 
 397 
 
 507 
 
508 INDEX 
 
 Corn, 89-92, 168, 240, 264, 311, 339 - 349 , 390 
 cultivation by English settlers, 11 
 cultivation on prairies, 345 
 imported into New England from other 
 parts of the Union, 240 
 Indian management of, 10 
 in Kentucky, 342 
 in Ohio, 343 
 
 in New England, 90, 340-342 
 in New Sweden, 92 
 method of harvesting, 342, 347 
 purchased from Indians, 40, 41 
 west of Ohio, 345-347 
 Corn Belt, 393, 437 
 Corn planters, 300-302, 348 
 Country Gentleman, 470 
 Country store, 133 
 
 County agricultural societies, 188-193 
 Cow herd, duties, 22 
 Cow rights, 23 
 Cradle, 207 
 
 Credit system, see Land policy, federal 
 Crop enemies, 374 
 
 of wheat, 332 
 Crop management, 85 
 Crop rotation, 232, 322, 327, 350, 368, 369 
 Crop yields, 101, 170, 239, 335 
 Crops and tillage, 232-246 
 
 on pioneer farms, 168 
 Crops in earliest settlements, 9 
 Cultivator, 470 
 Cultivators, 210, 302 
 
 Dairy cows, introduction of new breeds, 432 
 production of milk, 229, 431 
 Dairy products, 227 
 Dairy system, associated, 430 
 Dairying, 109, 421-434 
 
 in central New York, 422 
 in earliest settlements, 27 
 in New England, 421 
 in the Hudson and Mohawk valleys, 
 422 
 
 in southeastern Pennsylvania, 427 
 in the Western Reserve, 427, 429 
 west of Ohio, 428 
 westward movement, 228 
 Davy, Sir Humphrey, 319, 320 
 Deere, John, 283 
 Delaware, farming in 1840, 262 
 peach orchards, 380 
 Diet of farmers, 127 
 Draft animals, 29, 403-405 
 Dufour, John, 381 
 Dwight, Timothy, 460 
 
 Education of farmers, 184-195 
 Eliot, Jared, 458 
 Ellsworth, Henry W., 316 
 Ellsworth, Henry L., 317 
 Emigration, 280, 358 
 
 from New England, 71 
 to the frontier, causes, 76 
 Erie Canal, 150, 181, 306, 308 
 
 effects of, 181, 237, 306 
 shipments on, 182, 183, 310, 329 
 
 Essex County (Mass.), inventory of estates in, 
 9, 26, 28, 30, 32, 35 
 Europe, exports to, 134 
 Expansion on new land, causes, 70 
 Exports; see also Markets for farm products 
 inspection of, 244 
 
 of agricultural produce from New 
 England, 43 
 
 of animal products, 493, of wheat and 
 corn, 494 
 
 of horses from New England, 113 
 of northern farm products, 136 
 
 Fallowing, 102, 325 
 Farm buildings, 121, 271 
 capital, 247 
 credit, 248 
 equipment, 34 
 houses, 129 
 wages, 204-207 
 women, work of, 252 
 Farms, size of, 37, 115 
 Federal aid to agriculture, 317, 365 
 Fences, 21, 121, 271 
 
 Fertilizers, 87, 88, 232, 234, 320, 327, 340, 343, 
 348 , 367, 368; see also Soil Amendments 
 Fish, use as fertilizer, 234 
 Flail, 126 
 
 Flax, 14, 98, 250, 359-363 
 Flint, Charles L., 469 
 Flour consumption in Massachusetts, 236 
 receipts at Boston, 311 
 shipments on Lake Erie, 327 
 Food, dependence on natural resources, 5 
 scarcity in earliest settlements, 40 
 Forests, importance in pioneer farming, 158 
 Fruit, 16, 99, 382 
 
 Gardiner, Robert Hallowell, 194 
 Genesee Valley, 449 
 Goats, 18, 32 
 Goodall, S. L., 469 
 
 Grain trade, of Buffalo and Chicago, 310 
 Grain worm, 238, 333, 357; see also Wheat 
 midge 
 
 Grape culture, commercial; see Vineyards 
 Grapes, 17 
 Grasses, 102 
 
 cultivated; see Grasses, English 
 English, 20, 103, 159, 161, 234, 366, 367, 
 
 369 
 
 native, 19, 102, 159-161, 366, 371 
 Grass land, 234, 235 
 Guano, 234 
 Gypsum, 232 
 
 Harrows, 124, 210, 304 
 Harvesting of grain, 125 
 Hay, 102, 105, 366-372 
 
 in eastern Pennsylvania, 369 
 in Kentucky, 369 
 in New York, 368 
 in New England, 369 
 on prairie farms, 369, 371 
 
INDEX 
 
 509 
 
 Haying machines, 297 
 Headers, 291 
 Hemp, 15, 100, 363-365 
 Herds grass, 104 
 Herdsmen, 21 
 
 Hessian fly, 95, 238, 324-326 
 Hogs; see Swine 
 Holland Land Company, 75 
 Holmes, Ezekiel, 469 
 Home industries, 126 
 
 Home lots, see Land tenure in New England 
 Home market, its significance, 197 
 see also Markets 
 
 Homespun textiles, see Household industries 
 Hops, 243, 384 
 Horse rakes, 213, 296 
 Horses, 18, 29, in, 231, 403, 443-447 
 Conestoga, 113 
 
 exported from New England, 44 
 improvement in breed of, 446 
 Morgan breed, 443 
 Narragansett pacers, 113 
 Household industries, decline of, 250-253 
 Houses, in earliest settlements, 6 
 Hudson Valley, dairying, 422 
 
 decline of wheat growing, 326 
 Humphrey, Col. David, 187, 217 
 Hussey, Obed, 213, 287 
 
 Illinois, horse raising, 447 
 
 sheep driving from, 419 
 wheat growing, 330 
 Immigration, 205 
 Imports, animal products, 494 
 food, 40 
 wheat, 498 
 wool, 497 
 
 Indians, management of maize, 10 
 
 Intervales, 234 
 
 Iowa, wool growing, 420 
 
 Jarvis, William, 218 
 Jefferson, Thomas, 208 
 Johnson, John, 318 
 
 Kentucky breeding of mules, 447 
 corn production, 342 
 farming in 1840, 264 
 hay crops, 369 
 hemp production, 364 
 native cattle, 401 
 types of horses, 443 
 
 Kentucky blue grass, see Grasses, English 
 Klippart, John H., 473 
 
 Labor, cooperative, 34, 164 
 
 farm, 33 116, 163, 204-207, 274-277 
 indentured servants, 33, 117 
 Indians, 33 
 negro slaves, 33, 118 
 Labor-saving machinery, 204-216 
 Land grants, to communities, 49 
 grants, individual, 49 
 in Pennsylvania, 72 
 
 Land, law of inheritance, 58, 66 
 
 method of distribution in New England, 
 5 . 1-53 
 
 policy, colonial, 75 
 policy, federal, 151-155 
 speculation, 72, 74, 75, 154 
 surveying, rectilinear, 52 
 system, colonial, in New York, 73 
 system, colonial, in Pennsylvania, 72 
 system, in Maine, 75 
 
 system, in New England, its significance, 
 
 58 
 
 tenure, 49-66 
 
 tenure in the middle colonies, 60-66 
 tenure in New England, 49-59 
 tenure in New Netherland, 62 
 tenure in New York, 63 
 utilization, 38, 119 
 values, 70, 242, 328 
 Liebig’s mineral theory, 319 
 Lime, use of, 88 
 Linen, 15 
 
 Livestock, 217-231 
 
 brands, 23 
 
 control of breeding, 23 
 earliest importations, 18 
 earmarks, 23 
 
 in earliest settlements, 26 
 management, 21, 107, 166 
 number and kinds on farms, 105 
 shelter, 25, 107 
 winter feed, 25, 107 
 Livingston, Robert, 186, 187, 217, 465 
 Long Island towns, tax lists, 26, 28, 30, 32, 37 
 Longworth, Nicholas, 381, 449 
 Lucerne, 234 
 
 Machinery, agricultural, 281-305 . 
 
 Maine, beef production, 227 
 wild lands, 75 
 Maize, see Corn 
 Manufactures, 132 
 
 relation to agriculture, 198 
 Maple sugar, 80 
 
 production in the United States, 
 505 
 
 Market gardening, 242 
 
 information service, 226 
 milk, 22 8, 429 
 
 Marketing, cooperative, 249 
 
 methods, 174, 178, 225, 244, 249, 397, 
 
 430 
 
 Markets and fairs, 46 
 
 Markets, for farm products, 132, 164, 169, 242 
 domestic, 45-48, 137-142, 17L 177, 182, 
 197-203, 226, 230, 306-311 
 for beef cattle, 391-394, 403 
 for butter and cheese, 427 
 for eggs, 442 
 for flax, 361, 413 
 for hay, 235, 368-371 
 for horses, 446, 447 
 for milk, 429 
 for oxen, 396 
 for potatoes, 374 
 
510 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Markets, for western farm products, in the 
 East, 171, 311, in the South, 172, 308 
 foreign, 133 - 135 , 196, 312, 442 
 in the West Indies, 42-45, 135 
 influence on farming, 202 
 
 Marl, 233 
 Marsh, C. W., 472 
 Martha’s Vineyard, no 
 Maryland, farming in 1840, 262 
 peach orchards, 380 
 Massachusetts, farm wages, 206 
 
 land utilization, 119 
 
 Massachusetts Society for Promoting Agricul¬ 
 ture, 185 
 
 Massachusetts Valuation Returns, 105, 112, 119 
 McCormick, Cyrus H., 213, 287 
 Meadows, irrigated, 103 
 permanent, 234 
 Meat packing at Chicago, 393 
 Meslin, 14 
 
 Miami Valley, corn production, 342 
 
 Michigan, beef cattle, 393 
 
 Middle colonies, cultivation of wheat, 93 
 
 land tenure, 60-66 
 trade, 45 
 
 Milk, marketing of, 429 
 
 Mississippi River, shipments of western pro¬ 
 duce, 309 
 
 Missouri, breeding of mules, 447 
 farming in 1840, 264 
 Missouri Valley, vineyards, 381 
 Mitchell, Dr. John, 459 
 Mohawk Valley, dairying, 422 
 
 decline of wheat growing, ^26 
 
 Mortgages, 248 
 
 Moms Multicaulis, 382 
 
 Mowing machines, 212, 294-296, 372 
 
 Mules, 113, 447 
 
 Mutton, no 
 
 Narragansett Country, 109, 116 
 Natural clearings, 157 
 Neat cattle, 18, 167. See also Beef Cattle 
 colonial, their ancestry, 24 
 Devons, 24, 402 
 
 driving to eastern markets from 
 Ohio, 390 
 Danish, 24 
 Dutch, 24 
 
 improved breeds from England, 
 179, 223, 401-403 
 native breed, 224, 401 
 Shorthorns, 402, 403 
 Spanish, 24 
 weight of, 403 
 winter feeding, 392 
 Newbold, Charles, 208 
 New England, cattle feeding, 396, 399 
 corn production, 340 
 cultivation of maize, 90 
 dairy industry, 421 
 dependence on southern and 
 middle colonies, 142 
 effects of western competition, 
 237 
 
 New England, exports, 43 
 
 farming in 1840, 259 
 hay crops, 369 
 
 improvement of agriculture, 202 
 land policy, 71 
 land system, 49-60 
 legislation against barberries, 93 
 markets for potatoes, 374 
 oat crops, 350 
 tobacco production, 382 
 trade of ports with back coun¬ 
 try, 140 
 
 types of horses, 443 
 use of slaves for farm labor, 
 118 
 
 village community, 58 
 wheat crops, 92, 236, 322 
 wheat growing, 333 
 wool growing, 408 
 
 New Haven Colony, inventory of estates, 26, 28, 
 30, 32 
 
 New Jersey, land distribution, 60 
 
 New Netherlands, land tenure, 62 
 
 New Orleans, market for western products, 
 
 173 , 175 
 
 receipts of produce, 309 
 New Sweden, cultivation of maize, 92 
 New York, cattle feeding in southern and east¬ 
 ern counties, 395 
 dairying, 228, 422 
 
 eastern and central, farming in 
 1840, 260 
 hay crops, 368 
 land policy, 73 
 land speculation, 74 
 land tenure, 62 
 
 market for farm products, 89 
 
 oat crops, 350 
 
 tobacco production, 382 
 
 trade with back country, 139 
 
 wheat crops, 325 
 
 wheat growing, 333 
 
 wool growing, 408 
 
 New York Society for the Promotion of the 
 Useful Arts, 186 
 
 Oak openings, 267 
 Oats, 14, 97, 241, 350 
 Ohio, corn production, 344 
 
 eastern, cattle grazing, 178 
 native cattle, 401 
 northern, grazing, 391 
 sheep driving, 414 
 types of horses, 443 
 wheat crops, 327, 335 
 
 Ohio Valley, agricultural development, 156 
 physical features, 156 
 vineyards, 381 
 
 Onions, 16, 99 
 Orchard grass, 234 
 Orchards, ico, 243, 380 
 Organization of farmers, 184-193 
 Oxen, 30, 108, hi, 210, 231, 396, 403 
 
INDEX 
 
 511 
 
 Pasturage, 102, 234 
 
 in common, 21 
 Pasture lands, 368 
 Pears, 16 
 Peas, 99 
 
 Pennsylvania, barns of German settlers, 122 
 
 cattle fattening in Chester 
 County, 227, 395 
 dairying, 427 
 eastern, hay crops, 369 
 farm wages, 205 
 land distribution, 60 
 land policy, 72 
 
 southeastern, farming in 1840, 
 261 
 
 Tax Lists, 106 
 wheat crops, 327 
 wool growing, 412 
 Periodicals, agricultural, 193, 316 
 Peters, Richard, 186 
 
 Philadelphia, trade with back country, 138 
 Philadelphia Society for Promoting Agricul¬ 
 ture, 184 
 
 Pioneer farming, 265 
 
 by-industries, 79 
 crops and tillage, 78 
 economic conditions, 162 
 general description, 76 
 hardships, 81 
 
 in the eighteenth century, 69- 
 
 . 83 
 
 livestock, hay and pasturage, 
 79 
 
 methods of clearing, 77 
 on the prairies, 267-273 
 a process of capital making, 
 62 
 
 transition to settled farming, 
 
 165 
 
 west of the Alleghanies, 147- 
 161 
 
 Pioneers, characteristics of, 156 
 Plaster of Paris, 232 
 Plows*35, 123, 208-210, 282-286, 303 
 Plums, 16 
 
 Population, urban, 199, 499 
 Pork, see Swine 
 
 Pork packing at Cincinnati, 437, 439 
 Potash, process of manufacture, 80 
 Potato disease, 374-376 
 Potato starch, 374, 376, 378 
 Potatoes, 16, 97 , 241, 373-379 
 
 introduction into New England, 16 
 use as food, 98 
 Poudrette, 234 
 Poultry, 32, 442 
 Prairie Farmer, 470 
 
 Prairie farming vs. woodland farming, 158 
 Prairies, 157 
 
 their influence on agricultural prog¬ 
 ress, 2 66 
 Preemption, 74, 154 
 Prices, beeves, 315, 501 
 butter, 315, 502 
 cattle, 227 
 cheese, 315, 502 
 
 Prices, corn, 314, 503 
 
 farm products, 175, 191, 312, 493 
 flax straw, 363 
 flour, 237, 497 
 general, 191, 493 
 hay, 236 
 hogs, 314, 504 
 hops, 498 
 implements, 281 
 potatoes, 378 
 wheat, 293, 313, 500 
 wool, 219, 221, 495 
 Pumpkins, 16 
 
 Quinces, 16 
 
 Railroads, 270, 276, 306, 307 
 
 effect on agriculture, 398-400, 413, 
 442 
 
 Randall, Henry S., 469 
 
 Reaping machines, 281, 287-294, 337 
 
 Red top, 235 
 
 Renick, Felix, 401 
 
 Root crops, 241, 373-379 
 
 Rust, black-stem, 13, 93, 238 
 
 Ruta-bagas, 379 
 
 Rye, 14, 96, 240, 353-356 
 
 Scioto Valley, 177, 342, 390, 399 
 Scythe, 125 
 Seed drills, 299 
 
 Self-sufficient farming, on colonial farms, 126- 
 
 131 
 
 decline in New En¬ 
 gland, 247 
 
 on pioneer farms, 164 
 Sheep, 18, 28, no, 406-421 
 
 driving to Chicago, 414 
 driving from Illinois to Texas, 419 
 importation from England, in 
 management in the East, 416; in the 
 West, 417 
 
 Merino, 187, 217-220, 410, 412, 415 
 
 Mutton breeds, 410 
 
 in New England and New York, 408 
 
 in Pennsylvania, 412 
 
 on the prairies, 413 
 
 New Leicester, 220 
 
 Saxony, 220, 410, 412 
 
 weight of fleeces, 418 
 
 Shorthorns, see Neat cattle, importation of im¬ 
 proved breeds from England 
 Sickle, 125 
 Silk, 101, 193, 382 
 Size of farms, 449 
 Skinner, John T., 316 
 Slaves, see Labor 
 Sorghum, 382 
 Soil amendments, 87-89 
 
 depletion in New York State, 335 
 exploitation, 272 
 fertility, conservation, 232 
 Spelt, 96 
 Squashes, 16 
 
INDEX 
 
 512 
 
 Squatters, in New York, 73 
 
 in Pennsylvania, 72 
 State aid to agriculture, 189, 193, 324 
 State boards of agriculture, 318, 468 
 Sugar beets, 379, 382 
 Sulphate of lime, 232 
 Swine, 18, 31, in, 167, 435-441 
 average weight, in, 441 
 imports of improved breeds, 229 
 improvement in breeds, 440 
 in the East, 435, 437 
 in the West, 437-441 
 native type, 441 
 
 Teasels, 246 
 
 Tenant farming, 73, 242, 449 
 Texas, cattle driving from, 400 
 Threshing machines, 215, 281, 292, 297-299, 337 
 Tile drainage, 318 
 Timothy, see Grasses, English 
 Tobacco, 15, 98, 182, 246, 382 
 Tools and implements, 34, 123, 207-216; see 
 also Agricultural Machinery, Reaping ma¬ 
 chines and Threshing machines 
 Town bull, 23 
 Town commons, 21 
 
 Trade, agricultural, 40-45, 142; see also Markets 
 Transportation, cost, 181, 440 
 of hay, 371 
 overland, 180 
 
 see also Railroads and Erie 
 Canal 
 
 Tucker, Luther, 316, 470 
 Tull, Jethro, 337 
 Turnips, 16, 241, 379 
 
 U. S. Patent Office Annual Reports, 317, 468 
 
 Vegetables, 16, 99; see also those specifically 
 mentioned 
 
 Village community, in New England, 58 
 Vineyards, 243, 381 
 
 Wabash Valley, 179 
 Wages, of farm labor, 117, 274, 277, 495 
 Warren, General James, 186 
 Watson, Elkanah, 187 
 West, settlement of, 69 
 Western competition, 230 
 West Indies, exports to, 42, 135 
 Western farming in 1840, 263 
 Western New York, products marketed, 171 
 Western Reserve, cheese production, 427, 429 
 Westward movement of population, 147-151, 
 269, 277, 448 
 
 Wheat, 12, 169, 236, 255, 307, 310, 311, 321-338 
 crop enemies, 238 
 drills, 337 
 
 dependence of New England on Middle 
 and Southern Colonies, 236 
 in the Middle Colonies, 93 
 in New England, 92, 322-325 
 in New York, 325-327 
 in Ohio, 327-329 
 in Pennsylvania, 327 
 seed selection, 95 
 
 shipments on the Great Lakes, 307 
 tillage, 96 
 
 varieties, 95,. 239, 330 
 west of Ohio, 329-332 
 Wheat midge, 326 
 Wild rye, see Grasses, native 
 Wisconsin, beef cattle, 393 
 
 wheat growing, 330 
 Wood, Jethro, 209 
 Wool, no, 217-223; see also Sheep 
 in the West, 183 
 imports, 221 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


 
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 
 
 630.973B47H C004 
 
 HISTORY OF AGRICULTURE IN THE NORTHERN U 
 
 3 0112 020353345