Vermont Watchman And State Journal

We question the propriety of charging household furniture or family expenses against the farm. A merchant may be doing a very good business, and making liberal profits on his capital invested, and yet his family expenses may far exceed the profits of his business: he would not be warranted in saying that his business did not pay, because its profits did not equal the extravagance of his family. So a farmer may manage his farm in such a way as to derive a net income of $1500 or $2000 above all legitimate expenditures, and yet if his family expenses should be $2000 to $3000, he would run behind. Could he justly say that farming don't pay? Farmer A has 100 acres of land which he manages so well as to make a clear profit of $1000. He has a small, economical family, which lives comfortably on his just salary, and he lays up the $1000 profits, satisfied that farming pays. Farmer B has 100 acres which he manages equally well, with similar profits; but he has a large family, perhaps of daughters, which must have "expensive furniture," dress in the height of fashion, and spend money freely. At the end of the year B finds that the profits of the farm and his own salary have been exhausted, and that there are bills for current family expenses unpaid: shall he be justified in saying that his farm has not paid?—Corres. Country Gentleman.