STOCK FEEDING. 175 



One person ma}' be given one kind and another some other kind, so 

 that each one ma}' find a place, and be cared for by those who have 

 naturally a taste for that particular kind of work. By studying to 

 maintain something of a variety, the farm becomes, in a large meas- 

 ure, self sustaining, and the branch that is pushed for all it is worth 

 as a source of income will be much more of an income, as nothing 

 has to be taken from it to support the family. Thus if we are keep- 

 ing a herd of cows, we may with profit turn some of our attention 

 to swine and poultry. By so doing we shall have their food pro- 

 ducts for an increase in the family larder. As much of their food 

 may be obtained from the waste products of the dairy it will be 

 nearly a clear gain. If our income is to come from horse raising, 

 or any other special branch, there is still room for the same variety 

 for general home use. An occasional veal from the family cow, a 

 few chickens and sometimes a pig or a beef, will go far towards 

 supplying our wants and lessening the general expenses. That 

 system of stock feeding which overlooks this source of supply for 

 home use, and depends solely upon the returns from the special 

 branch, is essentially incorrect, and brings failure oftener than sue- 

 cess. Also, an exclusive growing of one crop every year to the ex- 

 clusion of all others tends to lessen the fertility of the farm, and 

 draw from its natural resources. One of the purposes of the Grange, 

 that should find an echo in every farmer's heart throughout the State 

 is to make our farms self-sustaining by striving to produce more and 

 buy less, to diversify our crops and our stock so as to supply our 

 own general needs. 



And now comes in the third consideration, feeding for profit. 

 For too many years the farmer has been conducting his business 

 more for a means of subsistence than for any profit that might arise 

 from it. In far too many localities every whim has taken its own 

 u>iiise. The great rule has been, haphazard. Fields have been 

 badly tilled and poorly managed. Crops have been changed each 

 year to suit the caprice of the owner, and, as he was always striving 

 after some one that happened to suit his momentary whim, he was 

 never at his best, but always just one notch behind. That this 

 same haphazard system has prevailed in growing and feeding stock, 

 needs only a glance at our herds to prove. But this slipshod 

 method is rapidly going out of fashion, and many of our thinking 

 farmers are now, happily, turning their attention towards a method 

 that shall bring uniformity of results and a return that shall add 



