Page:Economic History of Virginia Vol 1.djvu/286

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

which they have always relied for food.[1] In the early part of the seventeenth century, the distaste for it in Europe was likely to have been very much greater than it is now. An examination of the annals of the first decades in the history of Virginia reveals the fact that the settlers, instead of being in a position to export maize or wheat, were constantly in need of both for their own subsistence, and very frequently, even at a much later period, failed to have an adequate supply. This arose in part from negligence, and in part from the dangers of the times and the obstructions to cultivation.

It is quite plain that neither the soil nor the climate of Virginia was adapted to the production of rice or cotton in the perfection that would have ensured in either crop a support for the colonists. And a practical test revealed with equal clearness that reliance could not be placed upon the vine or the silk-worm; both were tried with all the aids to success which the power of the London Company could supply, and both ended in failure. Tobacco had a great advantage over all the other agricultural products of Virginia in the fact that it could be produced in larger quantities to the acre. This was of supreme importance in a country where so much labor and patience were required to clear the ground of its primæval growth in preparation for planting or sowing. Tobacco, moreover, could be shipped to England in more valuable bulk to the space than any other agricultural product. As a result of this circumstance, the pecuniary return upon a cargo of it was larger than upon a cargo of any other commodity of the same general nature in proportion to the expense of transportation for so great a distance.

  1. See the interesting paper by Mr. Charles J. Murphy: “The Introduction of Maize into Europe,” published in the “Report on the Use of Maize in Europe,” U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, 1891.