THE OLD FARMER AND HIS COR

MR

RESPONDENTS

R. THOMAS is never more entertaining than in his replies to his numerous correspondents. His Almanac became popular so rapidly that, almost from the outset, he received all sorts of material from interested readers, — poems, anecdotes, and puzzles, observations on agriculture, jests, riddles, mathematical problems. Agricultural observations were particularly welcome. In the preface to the second number (1794), the author, in stately, old-fashioned phrase, invites contributions of this kind:

My precepts and observations on agriculture, I have the vanity to believe, have been approved of by farmers in general. Agriculture affords an ample field in this country for the ingenious to expaciate upon, in which improvements are making every day; and as my greatest ambition is to make myself useful to the community in this way, 'tis my sincere wish that men of experience and observation in agriculture, would be kind enough to forward me such hints towards improvement, as are capable of being rendered serviceable and of general utility to the public.

And again, in 1795:

Experiments in Agriculture ever afford me the greatest degree of pleasure and satisfaction; wherefore, I earnestly repeat my solicitations, that gentlemen farmers, who have leisure and genius for making experiments in husbandry, would be kind enough to communicate their improvements which may be made useful to

the husbandman; in doing which, they will not only receive the grateful acknowledgements, but, confer the greatest favours on the Author of the following sheets.

In 1796 Mr. Thomas met with a disagreeable experience, as may be seen from a passage in his preface for the next year: "It is with much regret, that the Author is under the necessity to apologize for the admission of some pieces of entertainment in his last year's Almanack, which was owing to his indulging the printer in that peculiar province, who took the liberty to retrench several useful matters to make room for a Sermon in favour of thieving,' and several ludicrous anecdotes, which were highly disgusting to many of the friends of the Farmer's Almanack, and for which he humbly asks forgiveness, acquainting them at the same time, that those pieces were unknown to him. In future, he is determined to make all the arrangements himself." From this time he scrutinized the lighter pages of his annual with the same care which he bestowed on the astronomical computations.

In 1801 begins the series of " acknowledgments to correspondents," which continued without a break for many years. The author is brief and pointed, sometimes his frankness must have been rather startling; but men were much in the habit of speaking their minds in those days, and Mr. Thomas had a touch of humor which deprived his sharp speech of much of its wounding potentiality. The closing words of the preface for 1801 embody in a summary form much that was to come in detail, addressed to various persons in subsequent years: "Several favours received are deferred, for want of room; some, it is necessary to say, for want of merit."

In 1807 there is a very outspoken remark: “J. P. is thanked for his good-will, but his Anecdote is too obscene for admission."

In 1808 "S. D. is thanked for his kind

intentions; but his riddle is not sufficiently enigmatical: besides, it has been often published." Another correspondent in the same year appears to have been too enigmatical: "Margaret Snufftaker's hints, are unintelligible and futile." Originality was ever a desideratum, and S. B., in 1809, seems therefore to have been treated with much consideration on the whole; his "communications," he is told, "were very acceptable, though," adds Mr. Thomas, "we should have been better pleased if they had not been quite so stale, have published the most interesting." T. K., who is noticed in 1813, must have been what we should now call a stimulating or suggestive writer; his "favours," we are told, "though crude, are always acceptable, as they are generally capable of producing much sagacity." This is assuredly high praise!

When contributors expostulated Mr. Thomas took high ground: "J. H. seems to think himself unfortunate we feel to commiserate him, but we must claim the right to judge the palm" (1822). He is not to be dictated to, even by the ladies: "Mrs. H. wishes us to give her communication at full length'- we really think a miniature would be quite as creditable to her, and we are certain it would be to us" (1827). In 1830 "our friend A. B. is thanked for his contribution, but at this time we have a superabundance of this kind of ware."

Very rarely the full names of correspondents are given, as in 1837, when there had been some discussion about the correct answer to a problem: "Our friend Jerh. Hallet of Yarmouth, contends that Mr. O. Norcross, of Belchertown, is under a mistake respecting his question, as in our Almanack for 1835, and wishes us to insert his demonstration. Not having room, we rather prefer the gentlemen would settle it between themselves." This shows how carefully the Almanac was read and how entertaining its patrons found it. The old numbers were preserved, and

the correspondents, as in the present instance, kept run of each other from year to year. The whole history of the Hallet-Norcross imbroglio covers the period from 1835 to 1838, when the controversy is judicially summed up by Mr. Thomas: "Messrs. Norcross and Hallet's misunderstanding seems to be in Mr. N.'s misconception of the question."

"G. H.," writes the editor in 1837, "may know how to manufacture salt- but we perceive he is no astronomer, or he would know the moon is not the only agent that governs the tides." In 1843, “W.'s puzzle might be called a jumble - we confess we see no propriety in calling it a puzzle." In the same number there are certain "Home Questions for the New Year," which, though not a part of the Answers to Correspondents, stand so near that department that they may come in here, especially as they are worth saving, not only for their common sense, but because they show the complete identity of spirit and method between this, the fifty-first number of the Almanac, and its earliest issues:

Are your accounts all balanced up to Jan. 1, 1843? "Short settlements make long friends." Are you insured against fire? Did you look to the cellar, the roofs of your house and barn, and the wood-pile, and to putting away your ploughs and other utensils before winter set in? Your children, of course, go to meeting and to school regularly! Do you take a well-conducted newspaper? Have you made your will? settled all misunderstandings with neighbors? and do you avoid endorsing? The Scriptures, you know, say "Leave off contention before it be meddled with," and also, "He that hateth suretyship is sure!"

The volunteer poets gave Mr. Thomas a good deal of bother, and when to the offence of doggerel, anonymity was added, the long-suffering editor felt under no obligation to be mealy-mouthed. Thus in 1810 he relieved his mind in the following epigram: "Lines on inebriety, have

not sufficient spirit to preserve them even one year, nor correctness to entitle them to more than one perusal - the author has credit for one thing only, they are without a name." Toward juvenile talent Mr. Thomas is more tenderhearted: "T. L.," we learn in 1811, "displays some genius at poetry, but if we are not much mistaken, they are youthful effusions, which riper years might bring to maturity." Incorrectness and lack of polish are frequent subjects of complaint. Thus, in 1812, " A Riddle by J. D. wants many corrections; the author might be better employed behind the counter, than making riddles," a critical snub which reminds one of Lockhart's sending Keats "back to the shop." In the same year we hear of one "C. C." apparently a local Dr. Johnson: "The Midnight Ghost, is too incorrect to appear in print. We advise the author to hand it to his townsman C. C. after which it will appear." Another rebuke to youthful bumptiousness is tempered with Olympian praise: "Our young friend, who conceives himself 'behind the curtain,' has given himself abundance of airs, which, in some instances, partake of impertinence and vanity - however, as they are conceived to be the effusions of a juvenile fancy, they are easily pardoned. His poetry is far above mediocrity for one of his years — his prose is wrote with care, and he displays no small degree of mathematical knowledge. We think, however, his riddle is not entirely original" (1813). One would like to see the packet which this Gifted Hopkins had sent to the philosopher of West Boylston. Anyhow he was not satisfied, and returned to the charge the next year; but Mr. Thomas is placid: "Our young correspondent X Y and Z seems to indulge a propensity for which he had our pardon last year. — Does he think we shall put up with insolence without notice? We confess, there are instances where it is the greatest wisdom. We are ever desirous to encourage the efforts of youthful genius, as far as our limits