Various
Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, Volume 67, No. 411, January 1850
"The farm of Auchness contains nothing remarkable: for although the peculiar culture of the potato in moss is generally inapplicable, there are many farms in Scotland which have moss attached to them. The sea-ware may also be got on most farms on the coast, and where this is the case, it is commonly used. The soil is not good, and is certainly below the average quality; but I cannot understand what is meant by Mr Caird, when he asserts, on p. 7, that the '125 acres of light sandy soil is better adapted for wheat than for barley or oats when in a high state of cultivation,' for, in other parts of the country, such a soil would be eminently suited for barley. The steading is large for the size of the farm, but every steading ought to be made conformable to the farm by the landlord. The system of farming followed by Mr M'Culloch, of having 'no fixed rotation of crops,' is highly objectionable, and Mr Caird, with great propriety, does not commend it; since the farmer who manages so, has no dependence on the amount of crop he may receive any year, and must work according to circumstances, and not on principle, as the unhappy Irish hitherto have done. In this respect, also, Auchness is no example for the country; and, were a regular rotation followed on it, so many potatoes could not be grown, and the profits would be proportionally reduced.
"On the whole, then, I would say that Auchness farming is not generally applicable; and therefore it is useless to proclaim it as an antidote to free competition. For although it is probably true, as Mr Caird says, 'that green crops are likely henceforth to be the main stay of the agriculturists of this country,' yet he must be conscious that he is wrong in recommending, as an example, and as a substitute for protection, the enlarged cultivation of potatoes as a green crop, seeing that their growth has, of late years, been attended with great uncertainty. Is it not a mockery, then, to tell us that our main stay against foreign competition should depend upon a peculiarly uncertain crop? Will his pointing to a moss of 30 acres in Wigtonshire, convince the farmers of this great kingdom, that their future safety, as a class, must entirely depend upon their cultivating such a root on such a soil, in preference to wheat on the fertile loams of glorious old England? I apprehend that such a result is beyond the power of argument."
The non-agricultural reader must pardon us for the insertion of these details. They are necessary for our case, because, if high farming can be made an efficient substitute for protection, we are bound to adopt it, and we should owe a deep debt of gratitude to any one who could point out the way. We are fully alive to the necessity of agricultural enterprise; and, if we thought that our farmers were standing beside their mired waggon, clamorously invoking the assistance of Jupiter, when they should be clapping their own shoulders to the wheel, we would be the first to remonstrate on the heinous folly of their conduct. It is because no amount of personal exertion has been spared, that we seek to enforce their claim according to the utmost of our ability; and, in doing so, we are bound to prove, that no ordinary means which have been suggested for their extrication can be of the smallest avail. Mr Caird has come forward in the character of adviser, and we have stated the opinion of practical men as to the feasibility of his scheme. We have yet more to state, for nature has already denounced his plan far more effectually than opinion. When the county Down farmer visited Auchness in July last, he found more than one-third of the whole farm under potato culture. Upon that crop depended not only the whole profits, but a great deal more. Without the potatoes, there would have been a loss, at a more favourable calculation than his, of £419, on a farm paying only £262 of rent. Since then, we are informed on the best authority, that disease has attacked the potatoes. The highly-manured moss could not preserve from decay, if it did not accelerate it, the uncertain and precarious root. Mr Caird must not quarrel with the penalty he has incurred for having totally misunderstood the nature of the question which is now agitating the public mind. Whilst all others were directing their attention to cereal produce, he kept his eyes obstinately fixed on a little patch of ground which seemed to give unusual facilities for the growth of the doubtful potato. He never attempted to show that, without potatoes, and an exorbitant growth of that vegetable, high farming could pay at Auchness, even with the important elements of very low rent, and singular liberality on the part of an enthusiastic landlord. He perilled his whole case upon the probable returns of a root which every farmer views with suspicion; and – more than that – his statistics, which he wished to be inferred were of universal application, were only applicable to a few remote and isolated spots in Scotland. The result is, that, with all these advantages, the experiment has failed; and that all the liquid manures, economy of dung, guano stimulants, and so forth, as practised at Auchness, cannot, at present prices of produce, force up so much grain, or feed so much stock, as will nearly pay for the required and inevitable expenses. We pass over all possible mistakes. It may have been matter of delicacy for Mr Caird to have exposed the balance-sheet of his neighbour, or he may have assumed, rather hastily, statistics for which he had meagre warrant. We can allow him a large margin. Without potatoes, and such an extent of potato as would be plainly ludicrous if adopted as a general rule, Auchness never could have paid. With potatoes, it has failed in the very year wherein Mr Caird has chosen to exhibit it as a universal model.
So much for the only instance of high farming which has been adduced, as an example of its efficacy in superseding the protective system. In justice to Mr M'Culloch, whom we believe to be a most intelligent farmer, let it not be thought that we presume to call it empirical. On the contrary, we are convinced that that gentleman has acted with great judgment, suiting his management to the nature of the ground with which he had to deal; and that he has made as much of it as any man could do under similar circumstances. He was compelled to deal with a precarious crop, and few men could have dealt with it better: still, his method is no example to others differently situated, nor are his results to be taken by them either as matter of warning or of triumph. It is sufficient for us that Auchness farming, successful or not, is peculiar, and cannot be dragged in as a rule or example for the English or the Scottish farmer. We have enough of high farming statistics to lay before our readers, and, therefore, without any further apology, we dismiss the matter of Auchness, as totally inapplicable to the great question at issue.
In order to arrive as nearly as possible at the true state of the case, in so far as Scottish farming is concerned, we put ourselves into communication with two gentlemen, of the highest eminence in their profession. We need scarcely tell our countrymen on this side of the Border, that it would be difficult to find better testimony on such a subject than that of Messrs Watson of Keillor, and Dudgeon of Spylaw; and we apprehend, moreover, that many English agriculturists are fully acquainted with their character and high reputation. Through their kindness we have been furnished with the statistics of farms situated in the fertile grain-growing districts of Forfar and Roxburgh; and the calculations as to the yield, prices, and expenses, were made from their own books. The rent set down is that which is usual in the district for land of the best description, and the tenant's capital is named at an amount which might enable him to develop the full capabilities of the soil. The estimates have been most carefully framed, with the view of avoiding every kind of exaggeration; and they have been gone over by Mr Stephens, who attests their general accuracy. They are as follows: —
No. I
Returns of Produce from a 500 acre farm in Strathmore, county of Forfar, on a five-shift rotation of crops, with an improved stock of cattle and sheep, on an average of years previous to free trade in corn, cattle, &c.; and
Comparative Statement of what may be calculated upon as the returns from the same farm under the present legislative measures affecting British agriculture.
To meet this sum there is the produce of 200 acres of corn crop, and the profits on live stock, (the whole grass and green crop being consumed on the farm.)
Convert the above disposable produce into money, at the present prices, or rather at what may be fairly calculated upon for future seasons, under a system of free trade, and the following is the result: —
HUGH WATSON,Keillor, 1st December 1849.
No. II
Statement of the average Produce of a farm in a full state of productiveness, managed agreeably to the five-shift course, as usually adopted in the south-eastern Borders of Scotland, where the returns of stock form a very considerable means of remuneration, and the price of which, of course, is a material element in the calculation as to the rent to be given.
To meet this sum, there is the produce of 200 acres of grain, in each year, distributed as follows: —
Remain disposable, at the prices on which his calculations were founded and warranted by the rates, as is proved, under protection: —
The above grain produce yields, at the highest average I feel warranted in assuming, under free trade —
JOHN DUDGEON, Spylaw, 3d December 1849.22
We addressed the following circular letter to some of the most eminent agriculturists in Scotland, enclosing copies of the above statements: —
"Edinburgh, 8th December 1849.
"Sir, – Wishing to publish in our Magazine as accurate a statement as we could obtain of the real condition and prospects of agriculture in Scotland at present, we have for some time been engaged in correspondence on the subject with various gentlemen connected with agricultural pursuits.
"The enclosed statements of the working of a farm, and the quantity and value at present prices of the produce, have been drawn out by Mr Watson, Keillor, Forfarshire, and Mr Dudgeon, Spylaw, near Kelso, assisted by Mr Stephens, author of the "Book of the Farm."
"At the suggestion of Mr – we write to ask whether you will consent to allow us to affix your name to these statements, as attesting their accuracy, to the best of your experience, in farming. If it strikes you that in any of these statements the profits are either over or under estimated, we shall feel greatly obliged by your pointing out where you think the error lies. Any correction you may make we shall submit to the consideration of one or all of the above-mentioned gentlemen, with whose names, as competent judges of the working of a farm, you are probably acquainted.
"We shall feel further obliged by your making any remarks that may occur to you, and stating any facts that have come within your own observation, our only wish being to get as near the truth as may be. The article in the Magazine, into which this attested statement will be introduced, is founded upon the facts that we have been able to gather in the course of somewhat extended inquiries by ourselves, or rather by friends on whose knowledge of agriculture we could safely rely.
"Will you be so good as to send any answer you may think proper to this application, within a week from this date, or sooner if you can, as we have very little time to get everything into order for publication in the January number of our Magazine. – We are," &c.
The following gentlemen have given us permission to use their names, as attesting the accuracy of these statements, to the best of their experience, in farming: —
Mid-Lothian—23
Thomas Sadler, Norton Mains, Ratho.
East-Lothian—
John Brodie, Abbey Mains, Haddington.
Andrew Howden, Lawhead, Prestonkirk.
Peter Ronaldson, Moreham Mains, Haddington.
Wm. Tod, Elphinstone Tower, Prestonkirk.
Berwickshire—
Robt. Hunter, Swinton Quarter, Coldstream.
Wm. Dove, Wark, Coldstream, attests Mr Dudgeon's only.
Robt. Nisbet, Lambden, Greenlaw.
Roxburghshire—
R. B. Boyd, of Cherrytrees, Yetholm.
Nicol Milne, Faldonside.
Wm. Broad, Clifton Hill, Kelso.
Fred. L. Roy, of Nenthorn, Kelso.
James Roberton, Ladyrig, Kelso.
Fifeshire—
James B. Fernie, of Kilmux.
John Thomson, Craigie, Leuchars.
Forfarshire—
Alexander Geekie, Baldowrie, Coupar-Angus.
David Hood, Hatton, Glammis.
James Adamson, Middle Drums, Brechin.
Wm. Ruxton, Farnell, Brechin.
Aberdeenshire—
Robert Walker, Portleithen Mains, Aberdeen.
John Hutchison, Monyruy, Peterhead.
Robt. Simpson, Cobairdy, Huntly.
William Hay, Tillydesk, Ellon.
William M'Combie, Tillyfour, Aberdeen.
Elginshire—
Peter Brown, Linkwood, Elgin.
Kincardineshire—
J. Garland, Cairnton.
R. Barclay Allardyce, of Ury, Stonehaven.
James Falconer, Balnakettle, Fettercairn.
We further subjoin extracts from the letters of several of these gentlemen, containing remarks or suggestions about the statements: —
"I was favoured with your letter and enclosure of the 8th inst. I have gone carefully over the statements of the working of a farm, and the quantity and value, at present prices, of the produce – all of which appear to me to be fairly stated. I have drawn up a statement of the returns of produce of a 400 acre farm in Mid-Lothian, which, if it meets your approval, you are at liberty to publish along with the others. The prices of the grain which I have assumed are in some instances higher than those of Messrs Dudgeon and Watson; but I think this can be explained, by the farm being situated in the neighbourhood of the best market." – (THOMAS SADLER, Norton Mains, Ratho.)
"I am in receipt of your letter of the 8th current, inclosing statements by various eminent agriculturists, showing the difference between times past and to come for farmers. I perfectly coincide with these gentlemen; and consider their valuation of produce and price to be average and just: although we are not at present realising the prices quoted, yet it is fair that an allowance should be made this year for the full crop wheat." – (ANDREW HOWDEN, Lawhead, Prestonkirk.)
"On looking over the statements you handed me of the comparative value of farm produce, under protection and free-trade prices, as drawn up by Messrs Watson and Dudgeon, my first impression was, that they had fixed the protection price of grain too high; but on taking the average prices of my own sales of the different kinds of grain, as entered in my corn-book, from crop 1827 to that of 1845, I find they are not beyond what I have actually received during that period. The only points in which I differ from these gentlemen's statements are in the rents fixed by them for land yielding the crops they mention, which in my opinion should not be less than 35s. per acre, and £1000 might be taken from the sum put down as necessary for floating capital by Mr Watson; and I think, upon an average of years, that £50 should cover the loss of live stock. These alterations I have suggested would make no material change in the calculations, which, in the main particulars, I hold to be perfectly correct." – (ROBERT NISBET, Lambden, Greenlaw.)
"I have to acknowledge the receipt of your agricultural statements, and have carefully examined them, especially Mr Dudgeon's, as being the one with which I am best acquainted. I have tested its various items, and have found them generally correct, and in agreement with my own practical experience. There is one, however, which I consider too low – viz., the allowance of barley for seed and servants. Mr Dudgeon, I believe, uses a drill-sowing machine, and, by that means, will save about one bushel of seed per acre; but as this mode of sowing has not come into general use, the following is what is commonly found necessary —
From the general accuracy of the statement, I have no hesitation in consenting to the use of my name in connexion with it." – (WILLIAM BROAD, Clifton Hill, Kelso.)
"Having for several years farmed land in the vicinity of Kelso, and of a description somewhat similar to that described by Mr Dudgeon, Spylaw, I beg to say that I agree essentially with the statement subscribed by him. It exhibits, in my opinion, a fair estimate of the returns of such a farm when in good condition, and of the necessary expenses attending the working and keeping it in good order. In many cases, a much larger sum has been expended in improvements, but that would probably make no great difference in the result; for while the occupier would have a larger sunk capital to draw out of the land, he would probably have a smaller rent to pay. I may remark, that even where land has been thoroughly drained, or does not require it, there is usually a large sum sunk at the commencement of a lease in liming, for I consider that almost all land in this district would require to be limed during the currency of a lease, in order to yield full crops." – (FRED. L. ROY, Nenthorn, Kelso.)
"I think Mr Dudgeon makes too little allowance for stock and insurance, (£50.) Mr Watson's allows double, (£100,) which is low enough. Some of my neighbours here have lost from £200 to £300 by pleuro-pneumonia upon cattle alone, independent of other stock. I also think they are both wrong in the average quantity of grain grown. It may be done upon a farm of good land, in high condition, but – I mean taking a whole county – it is, I think, above the mark. For example, 1836, 1837, 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, being six years running, with as fine appearance of wheat as I ever grew, I did not average twenty-six bushels per acre, weighing 64 lb. to 65 lb. per imperial bushel, in these six years. I considered my loss equal to 2000 bolls wheat below a fair crop, all in consequence of the fly." – (JOHN THOMPSON, Craigie, Leuchars.)
"I have carefully looked over Mr Watson's statement, and I think that his calculations are very correct, and agree entirely with my experience, except in regard to the profits upon stock, which I think he has rather overrated, as the price of stock is falling every week. I do not think it necessary, however, to make out a separate statement." – (David Hood, Hatton, Glammis.)
"In reply to yours of the 8th instant, requesting my opinion as to the accuracy of the statements in your enclosed proof-sheet, I have to state that, after mature consideration, I generally concur with the statement drawn by Mr Watson as to the results; though, I think, that as a deduction of £20 per cent on the profits of livestock has been made in the free-trade account, a like percentage should be deducted from the amount stated for casualties in the charge, thus making the loss under free trade £20 less. It also appears to me, that both the capital invested, and the amount received for crop and stock, are considerably beyond the average of farming capital and proceeds in Strathmore and the eastern district of Forfarshire; but as the statement is headed as "under the improved system of agriculture," of course the amounts must be different, and therefore are acceded to.
"It may be remarked, that the depreciation of £20 per cent on the value of livestock, which has taken place this year, ought only to be deducted from the average of the last ten or twelve years, as the present prices might be considered equal to what we had been receiving previously to the opening up the southern markets.
"In my own case, the rent is considerably lower than that assumed, as I occupy a large proportion of unequal, inferior soil, which I have drained at my own expense; and, in order to raise the same quantity of grain per acre as mentioned in the statement, I have hitherto had to pay at least £100 more for manure than what seems to be allowed for under the title 'expenses of management.'" – (William Ruxton, Farnell, Brechin.)
"I received yours of the 8th, with the enclosed statements regarding the prospects of agriculture, and as this was a ploughing-match day, (the Buchan district,) I deferred writing you until I should also show it to several experienced farmers for their opinions, and we all consider the statements as near as may be correct." – (John Hutchison, Monyruy, Peterhead.)
"I have examined minutely the statements drawn up by Messrs Watson and Dudgeon, and have compared them with some calculations that I had previously made myself, and have no hesitation in allowing my name to be affixed to them as attesting their accuracy, in so far as my knowledge of the localities in which they are drawn up leads me to be a judge. Had I had time, I should have liked to have furnished you with a similar comparative statement of the difference likely to be made by free trade in our more northern climate, where we cannot raise the same quality of grain, and where little or no wheat is grown, and I am much afraid it would not have been so favourable to farmers as Messrs Watson and Dudgeon's are. The average price of what has been sold of this year's crop, in the counties of Aberdeen and Banff, is not more, I am sure, than 1s. 8d. per bushel for oats, and 2s. 6d. for bear or barley." – (Robert Simpson, Cobairdy, Huntly.)
"As to the statements of Messrs Watson and Dudgeon, the items appear to me, on the whole, to be fairly put. My only difficulty is in regard to the £3000 put down in Mr Watson's statement as invested capital. I presume, however, he includes in this draining and lime sunk, machinery, implements, horses, &c.; and, considering the valuable breed of cattle and sheep on the Keillor Farm, I would not regard £5000 as at all too large an estimate for capital of both kinds. As to the considerable difference in profits shown in Nos. I. and II., that might be accounted for in many ways. In 500-acre farms, with equal management and a like rent, greater differences will be induced by variations in the soil and climate alone.
"On the presumption above stated, as to what Mr Watson means by invested capital, I have no difficulty in allowing you to affix my name, as attesting, to the best of my knowledge, the substantial accuracy of statements Nos. I. and II." – (William M'Combie, Tillyfour, Aberdeen.)
"I have gone over the respective statements with much care and anxiety, and have compared the different items entered to the debit and credit of the farm by both gentlemen with my own experience in such matters, and, on the whole, I have no hesitation in pronouncing them as nearly correct as, under the circumstances, they could be framed. Were I to draw up a statement of a farm of the like extent in this county, I believe the result would be still less favourable for the farmer, because if we have such returns as are stated by Messrs Watson and Dudgeon, we obtain them by the application to our land of a larger quantity of foreign manure than those gentlemen seem to use." – (Peter Brown, Linkwood, Elgin.)
Some of the gentlemen to whom we wrote, whilst entirely concurring in the estimates of Messrs Watson and Dudgeon, have not authorised us to affix their names. Only three gentlemen, out of nearly fifty, have refused their assent on the ground of difference of opinion. The most important objection specified by any of them was, that the prices of grain assumed in No. II., as having been received before protection was withdrawn, were higher than those warranted by the fiars' prices of the county. Such were, however, the actual prices received in those years by Mr Dudgeon; and the reader is requested to refer to the extract from Mr Nisbet of Lambden's letter for a corroboration as to that point. That there should be some difference of opinion is only natural, when the variations of soil, climate, and locality are considered; but we think it will generally be admitted, that the ordeal to which these estimates have been exposed, without exciting more challenge than we have just noticed, is a tolerably convincing proof of their general accuracy.
The receipt of these statements has induced several gentlemen, in different parts of the country, to draw up further estimates of the working of farms in their own districts, and these documents we now proceed to lay before our readers —
No. III
Statement of Income and Expenditure on an Aberdeenshire farm of the ordinary description, taking the value of produce at an average of a series of years – say 19 – previously to the late alteration of the law in relation to the importation of corn and cattle. – Extent, 250 acres.
Annual Expenditure.
Annual Income
250 acres, on the five-course rotation: —
Income under Free-trade Prices.
I consider the above a fair statement of the expenditure and income on a farm in the lower district of Aberdeenshire, under former and under present circumstances. It will be observed that no wheat is grown; but the soil is well adapted for the rearing and feeding of cattle, and from this source the Aberdeenshire farmer expects to derive a large proportion of his returns. In the comparison, reference is had solely to the fall in the price of the kinds of grain cultivated. Whatever decline in the price of fat cattle may arise from free trade, will fall heavily on the farmers of this district; and the reduction of income thus occasioned will, of course, add to the amount of loss shown above.
JAMES HAY,Little Ythsie, 13th December 1849.
Having lately had an opportunity of examining a number of actual accounts of income and expenditure on various farms, I can confirm the substantial accuracy and fairness of the above statements, Nos. I. and II. Mr Hay's statement above, referring to the system of agriculture with which, in this part of the country, we are most conversant, may, in my humble opinion, be regarded as fair and just, and as near the average that a comparison of a number of individual cases would indicate, as it can be made.
I am sensible that, in many cases of calculations – more especially in those in which certain assumptions have to be made – it is quite possible, even with a show of fairness, to bring out by means of figures almost any result that may be desired; but it is to be observed that, in the above statements, the same assumptions (if they can be regarded as such) are made on both sides of the comparison, with the exception of the prices at which agricultural produce is taken; and it is submitted with confidence that these are neither made higher in the one case, nor lower in the other, than experience warrants.
W. HAY,Tillydesk, 14th December 1849.
No. IV
Estimated Value, of the produce upon a farm in Roxburghshire of 500 acres, managed according to the five-shift rotation, thus: —
200 acres of corn crop.
200 " of grass.
100 " of turnips.
–
500
It is here assumed that there are no local advantages, the whole green crops being consumed upon the farm by sheep and cattle.
I. Produce of Corn Crops.
Average Value during the ten years preceding Crop 1848.
Expenses and Rent —
Estimated Value of the same amount of produce at the present rate of prices: —
The total amount of capital invested is £4500, of which £2500 is sunk upon improvements. According to the first estimate, the annual return, exclusive of 5 per cent per annum for repayment of the sum sunk, would be £548, or at the rate of about 121⁄5 per cent. According to the second estimate, the annual return would be £45, 10s., or at the rate of about 1 per cent per annum upon the same sum.
I shall be glad to allow my name to be affixed to Mr Dudgeon's statement, as attesting, in so far as my experience goes, the accuracy of it.
My estimates and his very nearly correspond; but as every one has his own method of making up such statements, I take the liberty of handing along with it this detail of my own.
In all, excepting in regard to the value of live stock, or produce of grass and turnips, we nearly agree; and this difference may be accounted for, because no part of farm produce varies so much in its return as that of the live stock. Upon such a farm as that which is taken as an example, sheep and cattle are not wholly reared upon the farm, but part are bought in to fatten; hence the returns depend upon three circumstances, – 1st, upon the crops of turnips and grass being less or more abundant; 2d, upon the price of lean stock; and, 3d, upon the price of fat. While, therefore, the butcher market may be very high, the feeder may not necessarily be well paid, – and hence, in making up returns under this head, a correct average is not easily ascertained; and as there must always be a difference of opinion among practical men upon this part of the subject, I think, for publication, Mr Dudgeon's method of stating the returns in one sum is preferable to giving them in detail.
JAS. ROBERTON,Ladyrig, 13th Dec. 1849.
No. V
Statement of the Annual Charge against, and Returns from, a 400 imperial acre Farm in Mid-Lothian – on an average of ten years previous to free trade in corn and cattle; – with a comparative statement of the Returns of Produce from the same farm under the present free-trade measures affecting agriculture. The farm alluded to is managed on the four-course shift – the whole straw, turnips, and clover being consumed on it, and an average number of stock fattened.
To meet this sum there is the produce of 230 acres corn crop, 10 acres potatoes, and the profits from live stock as follows: —
The like quantities of disposable grain, taken at the present prices, fetch as follows: —
THOs. SADLER,Notron Mains, 14th December 1849.
No. VI
Valuation of Produce, and Expense of Management of a Farm of 320 Scots acres, situated within five miles of Edinburgh, on an average of seven years previous to potato failure in 1846, and farmed according to the four-shift rotation, the straw being sold in Edinburgh, and dung bought. The produce is a fair average of the best-managed farms within five miles of Edinburgh, during the period from which the average is taken. The prices noted are what were realised, being about 3s. 6d. per qr. above the average prices of the county, and the expense of management charged is what was actually paid.