Townships.

From the Census Report of 1850 we learn that there was in Camden county, New Jersey, 731 farms, comprising 53,968 acres of improved land, and 77,416 acres of land unimproved. The latter included all such as was in occupancy and necessary to the enjoyment of the improved portions, though not itself reclaimed. These 731 farms, therefore, embraced an area of 131,384 acres. Thie distinction between improved and unimproved land is not very clearly drawn, as it is plain, from the result attained, by dividing the total number of acres by the number of farms, the quotient, 180 acres, as the average extent of the farms of Camden county, being quite too great. Much land which is neither meadow nor wood land attached to the farm has been included in the contents erroneously. If one-half the unimproved be considered as forming part of the farm, the average of each will be found to be 126 acres, and the value per acre $52, according to the Census Report of 1850. The total value of farms (implements included) was $4,804,670. According to the census of 1860 the farms of said county embraced 55,734 acres of improved, and 17,837 of unimproved land. The amount unimproved is thus greatly reduced by the latter census, and more just distinction made between that occupied and useful, and that unoccupied and unproductive. (Seventy-seven, in the report of 1850, is probably an error for seventeen, easily made by a copyist.) The total number of acres, properly considered farm land, becomes, therefore, in 1860, 73,571; and if the farms have not increased in number, the average number of acres in each becomes 100, which appears to be very nearly correct. The total value of farms and implements being nearly six millions of dollars, gives to each acre an average value of 835 dollars. As the area of the county of Camden is 173,000 acres, there remain nearly 100,000 acres unoccupied, and unreported by the census of 1860. This is mainly comprised in extensive tracts of unreclaimed brush lands and cedar swamps. A detailed comparison of the census tables for 1850 and 1860 will indicate a general advance, and, in some products, an extraordinary increase during the ten years which intervened. Thus the land and implements in the county of Camden were valued at $1,345,440 higher in 1860; the wheat showed a small decline of about 3,000 bushels; rye and oats a considerable falling off; white and sweet potatoes an increase together of about 70,000 bushels; butter exhibits an increased product of about 18,000 pounds, while cheese declined 12,000 pounds; hay an increase of 1,658 tons; sheep declined 518, and swine 1,227; neat cattle increased but 618; horses increased 195, and asses and mules declined 124; while the value of animals slaughtered was nearly doubled. The returns of orchard products were, in 1860, but half those of 1850, having declined upwards of $10,000. The market garden products had advanced from $42,301 to $193,738, an increase of $151,437, or nearly 360 per cent. The last census inquiry was made five years ago, and cannot exhibit the aggregate products of the county at this time. These are no doubt much in excess of those of 1860, the crops of many kinds gathered in 1864 having been of extraordinary yield, and above the average of some years previous.

The county of Burlington, adjoining Camden on the northeast, is much more extensive, and exhibits, according to the last census, much greater aggregates of products and value, having nearly 900 more plantations, and an extent of improved and unimproved territory of 324,983 acres, or nearly three times that of Camden. Here, also, is exhibited a general advance in value and production which is very gratifying. If we may believe the report, of improved lands nearly $5.000 acres have been taken into cultivation during the ten years prior to 1560; the farms improved in value to the extent of five and a half millions of llars; the wheat increased 25,000 bushels; rye and oats together increased bout 112,000; corn 1,100,000; white and sweet potatoes together upwards of 100.000; buckwheat 7,000; wine 640 gallons; butter increased 5,606, while cheese declined 141,782 pounds; hay showed an increased product of nearly 20,000 tons; sheep 903; swine 1,590 more; cattle of all kinds 3,076 increase;

and horses and mules were, together, in 1860, more numerous,by 1,763 than in 1850; while the value of animals slaughtered increased $275,000. The orchard product was almost identical in value with that of 1850, while the market garden product advanced from 51,639 dollars in 1850, to 267,217 dollars in 1860, a gain of 215,578 dollars, or about 418 per cent. increase in ten years.

Burlington county was divided, according to the Census Report of 1850, into 1,638 farms, which were valued in 1860 at seventeen and a half millions of dollars. The farms averaged 112 acres each, and were estimated worth $63 75 per acre, or about $20 per acre less than the farm lands of Camden. Upwards of 300 square miles of Burlington, near the Delaware, extending twelve miles therefrom, is a fine fertile loam; the rest of the county is sand, or a sandy loam. About 100 square miles of Camden contains the same superior soil as that in the western part of Burlington; the remainder, 173 square miles, is sandy, and cannot be so readily improved. One-half of Burlington is thus of excellent quality, while only about one-third of Camden is highly productive. This difference in the relative extent of the improved soils may account for the more rapid development of the larger county.

PRODUCTS OF SEVERAL CAMDEN FARMS IN 1864.

From a large number of returns to queries distributed among the farmers of Camden county, and responded to by many intelligent, public-spirited gentlemen, we select the following interesting details. Many of the returns cannot be used because imperfect and irregular. Sixty contain details sufficiently clear and full to serve our purpose, for though they represent but one-twelfth of the number of farms in the county, they vary in size from 8 to 500 acres, and in productiveness from very best, perhaps, to very worst, and may be considered representatives of the county, or more properly of the northwestern or cultivated portion :

Horses, 236, valued at

Mules, 34, valued at...

On sixty farms reported, there were in January, 1865:

Milch cows, 446, valued at.

523 81 4,518 80

121 82 $3.50

$26,432

6,290

16,948

49,670

From the above 60 farms the following products were obtained in 1864;

Farm products, excluding horses, mules, and cows...

Vegetable products.

Market garden products.

Orchard products..

Dairy products..

$9,454

$34,391

181,184

37,855

8,244

9,454

271,128

49,670

320,798

.$747,130

22,526

769,656

1,090,454

The average product, per acre, of the sixty farms above referred to, was as follows: Wheat, 15 bushels; rye, 10; corn, 40; oats, 33; buckwheat, 10; hay, 1.52 tons; white potatoes, 85; and sweet potatoes, 94 bushels per acre. By tables prepared for the Department of Agriculture it appears that in 1864 the average yield of wheat in New Jersey was greater than that of any other State except Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut-Rhode Island having exhibited a return of 15 bushels, which was identical with that of New Jersey, while Massachusetts exceeded by one, and Connecticut by but one and a half bushel. New Jersey thus still continues to be one of the leading States in wheat production, though not in absolute product, but in yield per acre.

In the production of corn in 1864, during which this crop suffered greatly from drought in some sections of the State, New Jersey was excelled by Vermont, Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota. New Jersey produced 313, Vermont 38, Illinois 33, Iowa 363, and Minnesota 33 bushels per acre. The average product of the sixty farms under notice, which exhibit a fair sample of the produc tiveness of West Jersey in the better cultivated districts, is thus, even in a season of drought, greatly in excess of that of any of the most favored western States in the yield of corn. This yield, it will be seen, was forty bushels to the acre. The product of hay per acre in New Jersey, in 1864, equalled or exceeded that of every other State, Iowa and Kansas excepted, and fell below these States by but a small fraction of a ton. New Jersey was estimated to have yielded 1.57 ton per acre. The above sixty farms produced 1.52 per acre-a close approximation to the estimated return.

The yield of oats, in 1864, per acre, in New Jersey, was exceeded by that of Vermont and Rhode Island only, and but by half a bushel per acre. Most of the States were surpassed by New Jersey in the production of oats, by from