504 ^^^ Forage Crops^. [November, 



duce in the animal a kind of diarrliea usually denominated 'the 

 scours.' If this objection be well founded as to the facts, it is cer- 

 tainly well grounded as against the doctrine ; it is therefore to the 

 facts that we must direct our attention. Now, that the use of ground- 

 feed, especially of corn, has in many instances led to this result, it 

 would be wrong to deny, for it is unquestionably true. But then arises 

 this most important query — wherefore has it produced this result? — 

 it is the same grain as that fed daily on the cob ; why then, when 

 ground, should it thus affect the animal ? And this consideration 

 leads us to ask whether the unhealthy action complained of, was the 

 result of the hind of food used, or of the q^iiantity given? Was the 

 food itself unwholesome, or was the quantity taken a surfeit? From 

 all that we can learn, we incline to the opinion, tha,t in every case of 

 the kind, excess in the quantity given, and not the unhealthful con- 

 dition of the food, caused this derangement of the animal's diges- 

 tion. Every farmer of experience knows how great is the danger of 

 surfeit, when the animal is fed for the first time upon rich and con- 

 centrated food: hence, it is easy to understand that in the ground 

 and concentrated form of the food, the animal too greedily, takes an 

 immoderate quantity, that by overburdening digestion produces a 

 sub-acute irritation of the stomach and alimentary canal, and nec- 

 essarily passes off by diarrhea. This is the rationale of this result. 

 And now it is not difficult to see that this objection, even when 

 we concede the fact on which it is founded, when pushed to its ulti- 

 mate conclusion, rather commends the doctrine of ground-corn feed- 

 ing, than otherwise : — because the fact on which it rests signifies the 

 development of a greater richness and capacity for nutrition in the 

 same grain, when thus ground, than when crude; if so, then the less 

 of it suffices for the nourishment of the animal, and thereby economy 

 of our forage is attained. 



But we must pursue this point further, in order to fairly and ful- 

 ly meet the objection founded upon this admitted fact: — As we 

 stated above, the health of the animal demands that it shall be sup- 

 plied with something more than the mere elements of nutrition, — in 

 other words, it must have a proper vehicle for carrying those elements 

 into the system. For its healthful digestion, therefore, it must be 

 supplied with some crude and coarser material, as food, to furnish 

 that 'stimulus of distention,' before mentioned, (so called by physi- 

 ologists, for want of a better phrase, I believe — certainly not because 

 it expresses any very definite idea concerning anything !) When 



