The result was not so fatal to Sicily, Algeria and Syria, but it was owing to some particular causes; in Sicily to the thickness and nature of the earth's strata and their general want of declivity; in Algeria and Syria to the depopulation which allowed nature to correct part of the mischief; there as everywhere else the first act of man was to destroy; his work of reconstruction begins late. That which took place in remote ages and in the midst of events which could at a distance be mistaken as causes of the result, is being reproduced in America; the conditions in which this transpires do not leave any doubt as to the cause of the evil. Virginia, Georgia, and the Carolinas present the spectacle of numerous estates with buildings abandoned by their owners, who seek further west new settlements; and why? Let a Virginia editor answer :-"We have sold in the shape of tobacco, wheat and cotton, the blood and sinew of our land, which now exhausted refuses longer to pay the expenses of cultivation." Thus in a few years a virgin soil, rich with the accumulations of centuries, is reduced to sterility by culture without manure. We may remark that in the United States, and particularly in those above named, cattle are not numerous, and being in the genial season, to avoid the labor of feeding them, allowed to ramble in pastures, extensive prairies and forests, produce little manure; and often the stables are so constructed as to allow in winter both the waste of urine and excrement, by rain or sun. The Americans, persisting in the practice of the first colonists, make little use of manure, relying on protracted rest to repair their exhausted lands. It may be that owing to the sparseness of population this course is best. In the rich and populous State of Ohio the average production of wheat is 16 bushels per acre, and allowing one bushel to seed an acre, the yield is only 15 to 1. Europe, and especially France, cannot do without manure to keep up the productiveness of their lands; hence the importance of cattle in their agriculture. In the use of manure, we must bear in mind the following theorem: "Being admitted that the expenses of cultivation are in proportion with the extent of surface, indep ently of the product, the effect of manure is in the same ratio with the richness of the soil;" that is to say, 100 pounds of manure will produce 15 pounds of grain in a soil which is already saturated with manure, 10 pounds in one of average fertility, and only 5, 4, or even 3 pounds in a poor soil. Let us suppose two lots of the same extent and nature, both of them having received the same amount of work, manure and seed, one of them only being previously saturated with manure; this lot will be charged with an extra expense, but it will yield 25 to 30 bushels of wheat to the acre, whereas the other cannot give more than 10 or 12. It is evident that the extra expense charged to the former will be more than compensated by the surplus of 18 bushels, and therefore the cost of wheat is considerably diminished, as shown by the following table, which I copy from the Journal d'Agriculture pratique : Therefore we have the right to affirm, that in our agriculture "no profit is to be expected without manure ;" that is to say, without "cattle," for therein resides the only means of increasing the quantity of produce and lessening its price. We said that cattle are machines to turn forage and litter into manure. Contrary to the usual object of all other industries here, the manufactured product is less valuable than the material from which it is derived; the aim of agriculture is to obtain it without cost, and that end is obtained by continuing the manufacturing process, that is, turning manure into grass, wheat and meat, which brings money. The farmer who does not collect and use all his manure, is equal to a laborer who, having performed his work, neglects to take his pay; and hence we must consider cattle from the other points of view-of profit, such as work, milk, meat, &c. Many of these branches are connected together in such a manner that, at first, it may seem profitable to unite them. For a long time the principle prevailed that an agriculturist ought to raise that which he consumes, and never purchase any thing. That principle is coeval with poor, pristine, and unimproved cultivation; it is an anachronism in our age of canals, railroads and telegraphs; no intelligent farmer would dare proclaim it now. There is a tendency to substitute a new principle for it, which aims at the same results. Several branches of farming, it is said, carried on by the same farmer, insures him against serious loss, because if some of these branches fail, it is not at all probable that all of them will. France applied this system to both vegetable and animal productions, but progress in industry began only when labor was divided, when masters and mechanics were confined to a single operation. Since division of labor was so useful to industry proper, it cannot fail to be profitable to agricultural industry, which is so difficult and complicated, and acts upon living beings by means of agents so little known and entirely out of our control. England affords a proof that division labor possesses great advantages. No system of agriculture is so simple, so perfect, so profitable as the English; there are farms where sheep only are raised; others produce nothing but milk, or butter, or cheese; in other places they breed oxen and horses only; some are devoted entirely to the fattening of stock. In France we see districts and villages become prosperous as soon as they adopt an exclusive occupation. In the country of Cotentin and Bray, the production of butter has become very profitable; in the provinces of Boulogne and Perche, they are made rich and famous by breeding horses; Poitou obtains wealth and supremacy by its mules; exclusive branches, whatever they may be, are every where and always prosperous. It is impossib'e that an intelligent man, who concentrates all his energes on one branch of business, may not attain ultimate success; therefore the necessity of simplification in agricultural pursuits, and the adoption of as few branches as possible. We have insisted on the decisive influence which cattle exercise on agriculture. The number of animals compared with the extent of cultivated land, and with the number of inhabitants, will afford an important element in estimating the agricultural condition of a country. In the following tables, drawn by Mr. Bloch, the small animals were computed, in the due proportion of weight, to form one large one, an ox as a standard: That is, 15 head of cattle for 100 acres of cultivated land, and 413 to 1000 inhabitants. The census of 1848, in Bavaria, shows Making about 26 head of cattle for 100 acres of cultivated land, and 737 to 1000 inhabitants. Being 34 head of cattle for 100 acres of cultivated land, and 484 to 1000 inhabitants. In Ohio, 1305 for 1000 inhabitants, and 31 herd for every 100 acres in cultivation. This gives 32 head of cattle for 100 acres of cultivated land, and 556 for 1,000 inhabitants. The ratio is, as in France, 32 head of cattle for 100 acres of cultivated land, and 528 to 1,000 inhabitants; the apparent inferiority is more than compensated by the advantage of weight. The proportion is 39 head of cattle to 100 acres of cultivated land and 400 to 1,000 inhabitants, which shows a dense population. There is in Ohio more live stock, in proportion to the number of inhabitants, than in any nation of Europe. If we reduce sheep and swine to equivalents of cattle or horses, the following exhibit is obtained, according to the most recent accessible European authorities: From this it will be observed that we have about three times as many cattle, in proportion to the inhabitants, as an average of the above-named European nations. SHEEP. "Has any attention been paid to sheep breeding in your county, within the past five years? "What variety of sheep are most generally bred ? "Are there any Spanish merinos in your county? "Are there any French in your county ? "Are there any Leicestershires in your county? "Which of these imported breeds is held in the highest estimation; and why? "For what purposes are sheep most generally bred-for mutton or wool? "Which varieties are considered the best mutton? "Which varieties are considered the most profitable for mutton? "What is the probable cost of rearing a two year old sheep? "What system, if any, is adopted of wintering sheep? "What diseases are most common among sheep? "Are many lost by disease? "What varieties appear to be best adapted to the food, soil, and climate in your county ?" HICKORY GROVE, LONDON, Madison Co., O., Feb. 22d, 1862. JOHN H. KLIPPART, Esq.-Dear Sir: Either time has been too precious or I have been too negligent to reply to your queries, on sheep and wool growing, &c, |