South Canterbury Times, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1880.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2303, 4 August 1880, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1880.

Several land agents and stock growers on the plains between the Eangitata and Kakaia Jrivers have lately been endeavoring to enlighten the unsophisticated natives on the secrets of profitable fanning. They have apparently demonstrated, as far as arithmetical argument can do so, that properly worked farms will produce a clear profit on outlay of fifty to one hundred per cent, per annum. According to their statistics and mode of reckoning, fanners in nearly every part of colony, and particularly on the vast shingle plains of Canterbury, should be as rich as Cnesus, whereas they are generally as poor as church mice. For if the agriculturists of South Canterbury,' with its undulating country, covered with any depth of rich loam and clay, have frequently a struggle to make both ends meet, the condition of the plains farmer who has to knock a living out of shingle must be something deplorable. But according to the authorities we refer to, who have recently been reading papers before Agricultural Associations and rushing into print as well, the average farmer of the plains, instead of being bufl'etted about between merchant, storekeeper, billbroker and bailiff, should be leading an independent rational existence in the full confidence of a steady and unalterable flow of prosperity. Various reasons are assigned for agricultural depression, and some of them are undoubtedly entitled to consideration. A good deal is said about had or injudicious farming, and the consequence of a superficial or insufficient knowledge of the laws of husbandry. It is alleged that through a disregard of natural requirements the soil is frequently impoverished and overworked, and the farmer necessarily suffers. Inattention to such things as a rotation of crops the employment of suitable fertilisers, the combination of tillage with stock feeding,or the application of the soil to its best purposes, is enumerated by the agricultural doctor among the leading causes of failure. Yet while there may be a fair amount of wisdom in what these gentlemen say and prescribe,there is, wo are assured, a good deal of unreasonableness in much that they urge. That they have made out what appears on the face of .it to be a good bill of indictment against the unsuccessful farmer, may be perfectly true, but this circumstance docs not by any means make their case a strong one. If we examine their facts and figures, wo find a very large amount of fallacy mixed up with their wisdom, and that the elysium they have painted for the farmers of New Zealand is due to an abnormally vivid and treacherous imagination. While we do not believe in despondency respecting the prospects of agriculture, neither do we approve of high coloring. The former may be calculated to discourage, but the latter is likely to mislead. How many investors in eligible homesteads, beguiled by glowing advertisements and highly colored plans, have had reason to lament the day that they listened to the voice of the tempter! ft is unfortunate for themselves as well as for their obvious objects, that the gentlemen who are addicted to puffing up fanning prospects,arc in the habit of laying on the color too thick. No farmer with practical experience can listen to their figures and nostrums without a feeling akin to profound contempt.

Generally, the figures given by the persuasive agricultural dry-nurse are excessively unreliable. He presents, to a considerable extent, but one side of the ledger—the delusive side, lie dwells on the profits, but he has not one word to say about the losses. The sun always shines on his crops, the markets never fluctuate, sudden frosts never blight his potatoes or his hopes. His horses never die, his cattle never stray, scab and foot-rot never afflict his flocks, and his lambing season never proves a failure. The ideal fanner of the drynurse is invulnerable to meteorological disturbances; storms, floods, the nor’wester or the avalanche, never afflict him. Added to all these propitious things, he is never short of money, his homestead and fences never require repair, and his ploughs, harrows, and harvesters, never wear out. As for acceptances and mortgages and heavy interests, he is quite beyond the reach of such influences ; his banker’s features wear an everlasting smile, and the wealth of his bank is ever at his disposal to help him over his difficulties. Out of such a combination of undivided and unmingled blessings, it would be impossible to paint anything else than a most fascinating picture, hut alas ! how much like the Dead Sea apple ! Long, dreary, and badly made roads to market, bridgcless rivers, heavy railway freights, cold bleak plains with hardly a skimming of soil for thistles to survive upon, rapacious merchants storekeepers and bill brokers, losses in stock, cos tty implements to be renewed, heavy medical and attorney’s bills, and oats at eightpence per bushel, materially alter the pleasent prospect. But who are these dry nurses ? Are they animated by kindly or disinterested

motives?. Are they practical farmers themselves, or arc they merely moderately successful graziers, and big land agents rolled into one ? Have they rapidly deteriorating shingle-beds to dispose of ? Do they realise fifty to one hundred per cent, on their outlay ? Or, are they, on the other hand emulating the example of Irish landlords ? Is not their desire to quit the soil themselves, and to draw the last shilling from a much harassed and frugal tenantry ? Is not their object to transplant to New Zealand the landlord and tenant system of Great Britain with its worst abuses ? Fortunately misleading statistics can do little harm at this juncture, and the pertinacity of agricultural dry nurses who have large estates in the market, is not likely to induce even new arrivals to risk their little all in the hopeless task of extracting fifty per cent per annum out of plains of shingle.