Table A.— Showing the estimated amount in bushels, §■/:., of each principal crop qf the scrrral States named, the yield per acre, the total acreage, the average price in each Stale, and the value of each crop, for 1865.

Table B.— A general summary showing the estimated number of bushels, S?~ of each crop, the number of acres of each, the value of each, and the bushel'. acres, and value of all, and the increase and decrease of the same, for lit years 1863, 1S64, and 1865, and the comparison between 1S64 and 1865. ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF CROl'S. EXPLANATION OF THE FOREGOING TABLES. Table A shows the estimated quantity in bushels, pounds, or tons of the crop of 1S65, with the average estimated yield per acre, the price and the total value. The quantity is estimated from the returns of county correspondents, reported in tenths of the previous crop, showing increase or decrease as the report gives more or less than ten tenths. These county returns, equitably averaged, give at least the united, deliberate judgment of a corps of careful resident observers ; and if it is not absolutely correct, as it is not pretended to be, it is the nearest ap proximate estimate ever yet attained for the guidance of interested producers and consumers who always do and ever will seek greedily current judgments concerning crop productions, however incomplete, partial, and unreliable. Table B shows the estimated quantity, acreage, and value of the principal crops of 1863, 1804, and 1865. The immense value of the nine products enumerated, amounting to one-third of the entire aggregate of the national debt, exhibits the magnitude of our na tional agriculture. The extraordinary prices prevalent in 1864, arising from the war demand and rise in gold, swell the aggregate to 81,504,543,690, about fifty per cent, more than in 1805, when the aggregate quantity produced was ac tually greater. It is possible, perhaps probable, that the next exhibit will show prices still further reduced. If, in addition to these products, the crops of cotton, hemp, sugar-cane, sor ghum, tobacco, garden vegetables, fruits, and a multitude of small products, not enumerated, could be introduced into a grand aggregate, the sum would &&■ touUh even the political economist. 62 AGRICULTURAL REPORT. The following statement of the average rate of gold during the war will assist in understanding these variable values : Years. 18(52 1863 18G4 1805 Value, of crops. Rate of gold. Gold increase per cent. Increase value « crops per cent. ?70fi, 887, 405 955, 764, 322 1,440,415,435 1,047,3611,167 131 147 227 140 12 54 38£decrease. 35 50 30. 4 decrease. AVERAGE VALUE OF CROPS PER ACRE. The following tables are deductions from data furnished by the corps of statistical observers who have reported to this department during the last four years. A comparison of figures for the different States, furnished by independent parties who could have no collusion with each other, will show a similarity in circumstances that are similar, and marked differences where one would naturally expect them from superior culture or proximity to markets, that furnish indubitable evidences of approximate correctness. And yet they are not assumed to be entirely accurate, nor yet so accurate as they may be made in the future. It will excite surprise in the superficial observer, but not in the thinking mind, that " sterile New England " should show so large a value of product; per acre. This value results primarily from the markets created by manufactures, which also furnish the means and the inducements to artificial fertilization, and an encouragement to a greater expenditure of labor. It should be remembered that an acre of corn in New England means more than one hundred and sixty rods of soil slightly scratched ; it means also manure and hard work. As to actual profit, in proportion to labor and money expended, it mar, or it may not, equal a similar expenditure in the west. These tables teach, not only the value of home markets, but show how excessive charges for transportation are eating out the substance of the west, reducing home prices and farmers' profits, and consigning corn to the grate or furnace. It should teach the west to diversify its industry, and divert labor from wheat- growing to industries which make light products. It should teach the west to consume its own wheat and corn, as far as possible, and save to its soil the elements of its fertility that are now wasted in the rivers of the east and of Europe The cost of transportation is in part the cause of the following receding scale of values, from east to west: BEPOET OF THE STATISTICIAN. G7 THE FAEM STOCK OF 1833. The estimates of the; number of each kind of farm stock are made for each county by our corps of statistical correspondents according to their best judg ment, after careful examination and mature reflection, first, iu comparison with the published census returns, and then, year by year, with the estimates of the preceding year, the expression being in a certain number of tenths of such preceding crop. These estimates were made in January, 1S6G, and show 3,899,019 horses, against 3,740,933 in January, 1865. Mules, 250,151 ; for 1864, 247,553. Cows, 5,779,644; for 1864, 5,768,130. Other cattle, 6,895,324 ; for 1864, 7,072,591. iSheep, 32,695,797; for 1864,28,647,269. llogs,13,616,S76; for 1864, 13,070,887. Table F.—Showing the estimated total number and total value of each hind of live stock, and the general average price thereof, fur each Slate, for Feb ruary, 1S66. FARM STOCK OF THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE. A comparison of the farm stock of this country and European nations illus trates well the extent and munificence of our agricultural resources. A vast area of great fertility has enabled us, in the very brief period of our national history, to secure an ampler supply of meat than any other civilized nation iu proportion to population. There has been a loss, to be sure, since 1860, by the waste of the war, in every thing except sheep. It is a loss, however, that stock-growing enterprise, stimulated by high prices, will soon repair. The increase of sheep to double their numbers in 1860 is an earnest of what can be accomplished by such an incitement. If the States reported in the following tables may be assumed fairly to represent this decrease for the whole country, including the southern States and their heavy losses on the one hand, and the steady increase of stock in the Pacific States on the other, the per centage of decrease since 1860 may be esti mated as follows : horses, ten per cent. ; mules, twenty per cent. ; cattle, seven per cent.; swine, twenty-two per cent. The following is the statement for 1860 for the whole country : Horses 6, 249, 174 Moles 1, 151, 148 Cattle 25, 616, 019 Sheep 22, 47 1 , 275 Swine 33, 512, 867 70 AGRICULTURAL REPORT. But *here is another return of the assistant marshals in charge of the census, which includes stock not on the schedules of farmers, representing stock in market, in transitu, or in the hands of individuals not stock-growers. Add this, and the exhibit is as follows : Horses 7, 434, 6SS Mules 1 , 317, 934 Cattle 28, 903, 02$ Sheep «. 23, 977, 035 Swine 30, 9S0, 772 TABLE II.—An exhibit of the estimated numbers of the several kinds offarm stock of U. States in January. 1866, as compared with the census exhibit of i860.

Table I. —The following ia a table showing the results of the official census recently (and for the first time) taken in Great Britain. As in our own census, the figures are more likely to be too small than too large, on account of the lurking suspicion (which also affects the accuracy of our own census to some extent) that taxation is at the bottom of all inquisition into the farmers' affairs. The English papers stoutly affirm the existence of such a feeling in the present case : In an analysis of tbese tables it appears that the United States led all other nations in 1SC0 in numbers of cattle and swine, as doubtless, at the present time, it leads in sheep likewise. As compared with population, we had 1.5 people to each sheep, 1.1 to each head of cattle, and less than one to each head of swine. We have now less people than sheep. In Europe, according to these tables, the comparison with population is as follows : Denmark, 1.4 people to each head of cattle ; Bavaria, 1.5 ; Sweden, 2 ; llanover, 2.2; Austria, 2.5; France, 2.6; Holland, 2.7; Russia, 2.9; Prussia, 3.2; Great Britain, 3.5; Belgium, 3.6 ; Spain, 5.3. Spain had less than a unit of population to each head of sheep ; Prussia, 1 ; Great Britain, 1.1 ; Denmark, 1.1 ; France, 1.1; Russia, 1.6; Hanover, 1.7; Austria, 2.1 ; Sweden, 2.3 ; Bavaria, 2.3 ; Holland, 3.8 ; Belgium, 7.9. The contrast between this country and those of Europe in the supply ot swine is remarkable. Spain, with a larger population than any other European state had only one-fourth of our supply in proportion to population. Spain had EEPOET OF THE STATISTICIAN. 73 3.6 people to each bead of swine; Austria, 4.4; Hanover, 5; Bavaria, 5.1 j Denmark, 5.6 ; Prussia, 6.8 ; France, 7.1 ; Russia, 7.3 ; Great Britain, 7.6 ; Sweden, 8.3 ; Belgium, 9.8 ; Ilolland, 12.2. SHEEP KILLED BY DOGS The slaughter still goes on, and the useless cur is not even taxed. While all cattle, swine, sheep, and all other animals are sought out by the United States revenue assessors, the dog (which is taxed an equivalent of throe dollars in Great Britain, where it is the source of much revenue) is still on the free list. If the dog is property, he may be taxed ; if not, any one may kill him without hindrance. Efforts have been made to get at least partial returns of losses of sheep by these canine nuisances throughout the country. In the monthly circulars of the department inquiries have been placed, and returns from many counties have been received, exclusive of the southern States and of the Pacific States and Territories. A few of the heavier losses of sheep by dogs (the killed only) in several States are given as follows : Maine: York county, 312 killed. Vermont : Rut land county, 450 killed. Massachusetts : Franklin county, 300 killed. Rhode Island : Hartford county, 294 killed. New York : Steuben county, 605 killed ; Tioga county, 450 killed ; Genesee county, 500 killed ; Chatauque county, 575 killed ; Otsego county, 400 killed. Pennsylvania : Philadelphia county, 1,500 killed ; Butler county, 350 killed ; Erie county, 300 killed. Ohio : Clark coun ty, 627 killed; Champaign county, 540 killed; Fairfield county, 651 killed; Brown county, 619 killed; Coshocton county, 584 killed. West Virginia : Mo nongalia county, 500 killed ; Putnam county, 300 killed. Maryland : Cecil county, 309 killed. Michigan : Ionia county, 1,000 killed; Wayne county, 450 killed. Indiana : Ripley county, 700 killed ; Putnam county, 500 killed ; Ma rion county, 500 killed ; Daviess county, 500 killed. Kentucky : Boone coun ty, 3,000 killed ; Breckinridge county, 5S6 killed ; Warren county 500 killed. Illinois: Brown county, 600 killed ; Cass county, 2,000 killed; Scott county, 750 killed; Macon county, 1,500 killed. Iowa: Lucas county, 1,200 killed; Mahaska county, 865 killed ; Davis county, 600 killed ; Page county 1,094 killed. Wisconsin : Milwaukie county, 654 killed ; Fond du Lac county, 381 killed. Missouri : Cooper couuty, 400 killed ; Miller county, 550 killed ; Marion coun ty, 1,520 killed ; Cedar county, 500 killed ; Hickory county, 1,000 killed ; Clark county, 500 killed ; Lewis county, 500 killed. In thirty counties in Missouri 7,911 are reported killed. Kansas : Doniphan county, 1,300 killed. 74 AGRICULTURAL REPORT. TABLE L.—Exhibiting the number of counties reported, number of sheep killed therein, and average number killed for the counties reported, in the ttatti mentioned. These returns are not given as estimates of the total number of sheep killed in the counties mentioned. The inquiry was an exceptional one, and the an swers given, as expressly stated, included only a partial exhibit, as far as the immediate knowledge of the correspondent extended. The actual fact, on full return, would possibly double the figures in many counties. It is worthy of no tice that far greater losses are reported in Kentucky and Missouri than in Ohio, running up to 1,000, 2,000 and even 3,000 in a county. The counties returned are less than one-fourth of the whole number of counties in those States. The showing, so far as it proves anything, establishes the fact that some of the other States lose far more in proportion to their number of sheep than the State of Ohio, and that the estimates heretofore made upon that basis are rather below than above the truth. Even this partial enumeration of 77,854 sheep killed, multiplied by four to represent the total number of counties in the several States reported, and increased by similar estimates for the southern and Pacific States, would give a round half million of sheep killed by dogs in the country. Then add the injuries inflicted upon sheep, and sum up the total loss, at present prices, and the result would be enormous. The average estimated value last win ter was $4 50 for the northern States. Estimated at $4 for the whole country, the loss of half a million sheep this year will prove a tax of two millions of dol lars upon the industry of tho country ; and the injuries would increase the sura by more than fifty per cent., making an aggregate of three millions. But this is REPORT OF THE STATISTICIAN. 75 not the worst view of the case ; a far greater loss results to the productive wealth of the nation by the refusal of farmers to engage in wool-growing, repelled by these discouraging losses. PRODUCTION' AND CONSUMPTION OF WOOL. An erroneous impression exists in many minds relative to the amount of wool manufactured in this country. Because almost fabulous increases have been effected in army enlistments, the contraction of national indebtedness, and in the popular estimate of national power, it is thoughtlessly assumed that the number of pounds of wool worn annually per capita is augmented in like pro portion. There has been much annual wa.-te by a million of men in arms, but they constituted but three per cent, of the population ; and with a plethora of currency, and high prices of labor, the people at large were able to wear more woollens. This has increased the per capita consumption from 4J or 5 pounds to 6 pounds per annum, at a fair estimate. It should be remembered that in 1830 the value of woollen manufactures was but 814,528,166; iu 1S40 it was 820,690,999; in 1850, 843,207,515; in I8G0, SG8,SG5,965, in which 80,386,572 pounds of wool were consumed. This was the highest figure ever attained before the war. Now, examine the facts of later consumption of wool in manufacture, and the results will show a progress suffi ciently encouraging, without indulging in vague and wild estimates which are far beyond the truth. The following tables are the official figures representing the wool imports from July 1, 1SG1, to June 30, 1865, inclusive—four years. They show an aggre gate of wool and shoddy, (27,155,133 pounds of the latter,) amounting to 279,183,049 pounds. This, with the wool produced in those four years, con stitutes nearly the amount manufactured. To be exact, something should be dedacted.from the aggregate of wool, on account of the greater amount on hand July 1, 1865. The available wool product of the United States is, therefore, fairly estimated as follows : Pounds. 1 8G1 55, 000, 000 186a G7, 500, 000 18G3 82, 500, 0f)0 1864 95, 000, 000 Total 300, 000, 000 The wool of the above-mentioned years, and the imports referred to, less the difference in the amount on hand, comprise the amount manufactured in that period. Pounds. Amount produced 300, 000, 000 Amount imported 279, 183, 049 Total 579, 183, 049 Yearly average for consumption 144, 795, 762 The estimate of consumption in the calendar year of 1864, made by this de partment, was 160,000,000 pounds, and 120,000,000 of that aggregate' were obtained from actual returns of manufacturers. It is possible that the total aggregate, had it all been obtained from actual returns, would have exceeded 7G AGRICULTURAL REPORT. slightly 100,000,000 pounds, but the above showing of a wool supply not ex ceeding 145,000,000 pounds per annum for the four years would corroborate strongly the presumed accuracy of the estimate of last year. In the earlier part of the wnr the mills were in operation night and day; in the latter part their running time was less, but their number and capacity were greater. Thus it is seen that we manufacture double the amount of wool that we did in 1860, and that during the entire period of the war the increase over the then unprecedented consumption of that year averaged fully seventy-five per cent. In addition to the amount of wool manufactured in this country, the amount of woollens imported must be taken into consideration. The sum total, as appears from the fallowing tables, was $87,782,918 during the same period. This is $21,945,729 for each year.
It will be readily seen from these figures that an average supply, in time of peace, of all needed woollens can very soon be attained if wool of the United States is not displaced by low-priced foreign wools.
Table M.— Giving a statement of wool imported during the year ending June 30, 1862.