Appletons' Popular Science Monthly, October 1899: Vol. LV, May to October, 1899Various
Philosophy
Appletons' Popular Science Monthly, October 1899: Vol. LV, May to October, 1899
Various
Science -- Periodicals; Technology -- Periodicals
The statements made by Sir W. Crookes about the wheat acreage in the
States are as incorrect as those about Canada, for he says, in his
letter to The Times of December 8, 1898, that "the whole wheat acreage
in the United States is less than it was fifteen years ago," whereas
the official figures for 1897 and 1898, which were before him at the
time, told him that the wheat acreage in 1897 was 3,000,000 acres in
excess of the average of the preceding fifteen years, and in 1898 was
in the neighborhood of 5,000,000 acres in excess of any year in the
history of that country. Do not the fluctuations in the wheat acreage
of the United States in recent years prove conclusively that they were
solely the result of the movement of prices, and had no bearing
whatever on the question of exhaustion of land? Under the depressing
influence of an unprofitable market, the wheat area fell from
39,900,000 acres in 1891 to 34,000,000 acres in 1895, but, under the
stimulus of a substantial appreciation, increased again, in three
years, to 44,000,000 acres. If, in spite of a rising and remunerative
market, the area had remained stationary or shown signs of decrease,
it would have been in order to call attention to the fact as
indicating exhaustion; but when, in immediate response to a rising
market, the area increases by leaps and bounds, the question of
exhaustion becomes less and less one of actual probability, and more
and more one of theoretical possibility. A precisely similar line of
reasoning is applicable to the fluctuations in the province of
Ontario, and goes to show just as clearly that the decrease in area
has had absolutely no bearing on the wheat-producing capabilities of
the province.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account