AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURAL LOBOUR IN AUSTRALIA.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 4, Issue 180, 1 March 1860, Page 4

AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURAL LOBOUR IN AUSTRALIA.

[From the South Australian Register.] Agriculture is, or should be, the mainstay of this colony; but to be worthy of dependence, it must receive much attention and much more encouragement than it has ever yet enjoyed. We do not undervalue the pastoral interest;; on the contrary, we look upon the sheepfarmer as the natural pioneer of the agriculturist, and freely admit to the former the colony has been still his, and for years to come will be deeply indebted. But, notwithstanding the value of the pastoral interest, the agricultural interest is more valuable, and will increase in importance as the other diminishes. Then, again, we have the mining interestone of immense growing, and we trust, permanent value. But highly important, - as it no doubt is, it is not so important as the agricultural interest. Our runs, our mines, our farms, —each are all our sources of wealth; but our farms, though last named, are first in the order of- importance, and should be watched and developed in accordance; with their just pre-eminence. r Country readers will say that they know all this—and we suppose they do know it. But knowledge should lead to corresponding action, which agricultural knowledge does not, in every instance do. In spite of our ploughing matches, in spite of our agricultural shows, i in spite of the Farmer’s theory of , farming is considerably behindhand in this colony, and the practice is worse than the ; theory. Of course we are hot alluding to the few agriculturists who both know how to farm and do farm; but to the very large number ’ of persons in every part of the colony who have no capital, no science, no experience, ; and consequently —no luck. , Of late considerable attention has been l awakened to this suject, and several very good ■ suggestions have been made by practical far--5 mers at various agricultural gatherings. , Our • object to support those who have in tbis ; way

come forward to the support of agriculture. It is nothing wonderful that the theory and practice of good farming should not be familiar to every landholder in iSouth Australia. .Many owners and occupiers of sections.never followed a plough .in their lives till they came out here ; and, many ethers who even came, hither possessed pf some share of rural skill, are working under such , a pressure of difficulties and discouragements that it would be absurd to suppose them capable of “ high farming.” We must, in fact, be content first to creep and then to turn; but whether creeping or running, it is desirable to advance, and nothing is more like-to stimulate us than a clear consciousness of the absolute necessity of steady improvement.

It is laid down in England as a rule, that good farming pays better than slovenly farming], It costs more, but it yields even more than the additional outlay. A two fold benefit is thus secured; the farmer givei more employment, and at the same time realizes better profits. The days of farms overgrown with weeds, sprawling hedge-rows, untidy stockyards, ricketty barns, sun-dried manure heaps, and neglected tillage, have all gone, or are fast going by. Farmers do not trust Providence less, but they study Liebig more, and the result is that agriculturists, as a body, are now doing better under free trade and moderate prices than ever they did under fixed duty or sliding scale. They now conduct their business so as to make it pay; and if farming is to pay in South Astralia, it must avail itself of all the improvements which modern science, art, and experiment suggest, j The great difficulty here ; is the price of ! labour. There is evidently a hitch somewhere. The labourer cannot work at a figure low ! enough to induce the farmer to employ labour ifreely. Hence agriculturists are constantly j studying with how little labour can they doinstead of asking how much they can make use of? It is of no use disguising the fact:— high wages mean low farming, and low wages high farming. Undoubtedly this consideration materially affects any argument drawn from Englsh rural economy and applied to this colony. Still, we ought, not, because of one difficulty, to give up the hope of agricultural improvement. The high rate of wages as compared wi th those of Dorsetshire or Suffolk, is not everything ; the migratory character of our rural population is another drawback. We have yeomen, hut no peasantry; indeed we are not quite sure whether the bare idea of peasantry would not be regarded as heretical under our free constitution. ; But what’s in a name-—whether we call farm workmen peasants or labourers—-they have the same kind of work to do, and are equally indispensable. When we say that we have no peasantry in our farming districts, we mean that we have not yet succeeded in raising as at home, a body of .. men attached to the soil. This is a great inconvenience to farmers, but it is not “the fault of the labourers. If we have a yeomanry withput a peasatry, we have farmers without farms. Many of our farmers do not require a permanent staff of workmen. They do not farm in the extended sense of the word, as used in the country; they merely grow corn. Hence all they need, is a supply of labour at a particular season of the year; when of couse it must be paid for in accordance with the rate of wages prevailing, at time, of increased demand. But if, instead of merely growing wheat, agriculturists would graze sheep, especially dairies, grow wine and fruit, and carry on a more 'varied business, they would need a more steadier supply of labour; cottages would spring upj about them; labourers with their wives and) children would settle, and in numerous ways! economise their pay, until they would be able| to live better on lower rates than are now barely sufficient to support existence. Nothing is more common than to hear persons quote the Dorsetshire. labourer maintaining himself and family upon Bs.. per week; but it should not be forgotten that that the Dorset .cotter, though he may not receive more than Bs. per week in cash, has opportunities of greatly supplementing nis little income. His cottage, his garden, his potatoe plot, his pig, fowls, perhaps cow—the odd jobs done for the neighbours' by, his wife and children-—all assist to eke out his income ; but in this colony such adjuncts are rather the exception than the rule, entailing great loss upon farmers, who are compelled to make up in direct money payment what is not to be obtained in any other way. As profitable farming depends upon skilful and thorough farming, and as this in turn depends upon the liberal employment of labour, it is of consequence to the agriculturist to encourage the growth of a settled peasantry —or body of rural labourers. We have thus referred to the subject of agricultural labour, because we do not wish farmers to suppose that we have overlooked this essential question. But labour, though a'; great point, is not everything, "With the same amount of labour now employed, many improvements might be carried -out in our system of farming. It is ■ often; said that wheat-growers will have to cease sowing wheat on the plains. Is this so certain! Cannot they sow earlier ? .Would not a njfe nute inquiry into the yield of the wheat crops on the plains show (situation and soil being .equal).that many early, sown.- crops have survived, hot winds and drought when late sown ; crops have succumbed ? ; But it is not merely a plains question. The farming system in the whole colony is involved in the inquiry,r- --“ How may agriculture be developed in /South Australia?” • •. .

' A glorious opportunity for acquiring lasting fame and achieving .great good is now .open to any gentleman who will do,in South Australia, what Prince Albert, Mr. Mechi, and other

public personages have done in Great Britain. It would not be easy to describe the rapid strides made by agriculture at home since “ model farms” began to be instituted. Farmers, at first, did not like them ; “ what could razor strop makers and courtiers know about agriculture •? ” Farmers and t sailors have a great contempt for “ outsiders but in spite of the more than Chinese-walls of prejudice wliich for so many years hedged in alike those who ploughed the land and those who ploughed the ocean, the sailor and the farmer of 1859 are both of them exceedingly unlike their respective predecessors, when Nelson'turned his blind eye to the signal for retiring, and when George 111 shook his venerable pigtail approvingly at some country yokel by courtesy designated a “varmer.”’ Yes; the times have changed since then ; but we in this colony have not kept pace with the times; In Ireland there are no fewer than ninety “ schools of theoretic and practical agriculture’’—all supplied with teachers from a central establishment, called the Albert Model Training Farm. Scotch fanning has long been pre-eminent; and the model farms of France are amongst the most important and useful of its rural institutions. In Victoria great efforts are being made to advance the interests of agriculture; science and experiment both being freely made use of. The “ Experimental Farm ” near Melbourne is now looked upon as a valuable adjunct to agriculture in that country, and the support both of Parliament and of private adherents is very freely rendered. We have selected for publication, either in the present or in an early number, as our space may permit, an interesting narrative of a recent visit paid to this useful institution.

“But," some one will ask, “have we not a Government farm' also ? ” Undoubtedly we have something so called; something of that name for which uotes are taken in Parliament. But what it contains—-except two police horses —we really do not know. Many a worse thing might be done than to establish a Government Farm—not, of course, under the superintendence of the Government, hut under that of a Board of Agriculture to be created for the purpose, or under that of r the Agricultural Association. We are not attached to any particular plan, but w@ should like to see something done to encourage enterprise, to facilitate experiment, and to serve as a basis for an improved rural systems. Our neighbours are making great efforts to render themselves independent of our wheat fields, and we must take care that their science and. enterprise do not carry the market.. *

A Nuisance.— Hepbnrn was charged with creating a nuisance/ by allowing stagnant water to lie on a vacant piece of land belonging to him. The defendenfc urged in defence, that the drainage of the surrounding neighbourhood flowed on his land,, which caused the nuisance in question. He considered, that he was not responsible for this, but his neighbours, who made use of his vacant property as a cesspool. His Worship thought otherwise, and gave the defendant until Saturday next to abate the nuisance, or else it would be done by the Corporation officers, at his expense;