486 



THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



expense, whilst the Norfolk man would make more 

 muck. Others would prefer a middle course, that of 

 eating one-half, and converting the rest into dung." In 

 a letter n-ritten a few weeks ago by Mr. Bond to the 

 editor of the Agricultural Gazette, explaining the means 

 by which his sheep are maintained at so cheap a rate, it 

 is shown that for three months in the winter they are fed 

 on straw and mangel alone, and during the three spring 

 months— March, April, and May — on straw, mangel, 

 cow-cabbage, and grass, with the addition of oilcake and 

 bran-meal, no hay being given to them throughout the 

 year. 1 should notice that bis farm is a clay soil, and 

 not suitable for folding sheep on the land ; still there 

 does not seem any decided objection to feeding them 

 similarly in the fold as he does in the yard. I shall 

 close my observation on open yards by heartily expres- 

 sing my argument with the following observation in 

 " Morton's Cyclopoedia," that " All manure should be 

 made under cover, either in stalls, boxes, or sheds." Let 

 us now proceed to the consideration of covered accom- 

 modation for stock. Here a new feature presents itself, 

 a new element of serious moment, viz., the expense; 

 and it may be well to consider it a little separately. 

 Simply as a matter of expense there is no system so 

 economical as stalls ; a shed 16 ft. wide is sufficient for 

 a pathway (3 ft. wide), a manger, and standing room for 

 the animals, whilst 4 ft. in the breadth of the shed is 

 ample ; so that 04 square feet only are occupied by 

 stall-fed cattle. And Mr. Caird mentions some stalls 

 erected on Lady Londonderry's estate, where 20 head of 

 cattle are housed in a wooden she d at a cost of ,£30, or 

 30s. per head, the shed being 70 ft. long and 15 ft. wide, 

 only 7 ft. in width being allowed for each pair of 

 animals, each animal thus occupying only 52 square 

 feet. Now, in the box system it is usual to allow 10 

 ft. by 9 ft. for the box, and the gangway cannot be 

 taken at less than 2 ft. by 10 ft. more — making 110 

 square feet for each animal. These boxes will certainly 

 take in two younger animals, but each full-sized fatting 

 animal requires a separate box. As a question of 

 first cost in the erection of the buildings the boxes 

 may be taken at nearly double of the stalls. As to the 

 expense of the sheds with yards attached, much depends 

 upon the variety. I think it is never desirable to keep 

 more than six animals together in one yard : for this 

 number a shed 36 ft. long and 10 ft. wide, affords com- 

 fortable accommodation ; this is 60 square feet for each 

 animal, and is as cheap as anything. But if it is consi- 

 dered desirable to keep each animal in a separate yard, 

 it requires a shed 10 ft. wide divided into length of 8 ft. 

 6 in. ; each animal then occupying 85 square feet. Such 

 sheds would, however, hold two small animals ; whereas 

 no animals could well be placed closer together in the 

 stalls than as mentioned above. Considering the sim- 

 plicity and cheapness of a 10 ft. compared to a 15 ft. 

 roof, I think I may place the order of cheapness as fol- 

 low : — 



Sheds and yards to hold 6 animals 

 Stalls 



Sheds and yards to hold 1 

 Boxes. 

 But although this question of first cost is one of very 



material importance, I cannot think that it is one that 

 should decide the question of selection ; for I believe 

 that the other points involved, viz., the health of the 

 stock, the economy of food, and the manufacture of 

 manure, should far outweigh it in the consideration of 

 the owner, as well as the occupier of the soil, for upon 

 them in a great measure depends the improvement of the 

 estate. Let us first, then, consider the benefits, &c., of 

 stalls as to the health, &c., of the animal. However 

 well it may besuited for fattening stock, I cannot believe 

 that it is by any means desirable for store stock, to pre- 

 serve which from the inclemency of the weather I believe 

 to be most important, but at the same time it is equally 

 necessary to keep them healthy and hardy, which I 

 conceive can only be done by giving free access to the 

 open air. This observation applies equally to box- 

 feeding store stock. Mr. Iluxtable, whom you all know 

 by reputation, and who keeps about 100 head of cattle 

 on his hill farm, was a great advocate for entirely 

 housing his stock; and Mr. Caird says, in 1851, 

 " The whole stock of the farm, except the breeding 

 ewes, are kept constantly housed night and day, 

 summer and winter, and no particle of their food or 

 manure is suffered to be wasted." It appears that 

 Mr. Huxtable persevered in the system for six or seven 

 years, but at last gave it up, as Mr. Ruegg states in his 

 essay on the farming of Dorsetshire. In the " Journal 

 of the Royal Agricultural Society" for 1855 Mr. Hux- 

 table mentioned the result of an experiment which 

 seems important. He carried on for six or seven years 

 the practice of keeping his dairy beasts in houses, only 

 turning them out once a-day for exercise. This at first 

 was found profitable in many respects ; but ultimately 

 the constitution of the cows and of their progeny be- 

 came so enfeebled, and the development of tubercles in 

 the lungs of the calves so marked, that two years ago 

 the practice was altogether abandoned, and now his 

 breeding stock and cows are kept principally in yards 

 with sheds attached, their food being taken to them. 

 This practice has been found to answer so well, that in 

 future it will be wholly followed. Mr. Guy, of Dilston, 

 a well known agriculturist, calls stall-feeding the un- 

 natural practice of tying-up cattle to stakes, denying 

 them the natural use of their limbs, the choice of their 

 position in lying down, and the means of varying the 

 atmosphere in which they are confined— a matter in 

 which cattle are peculiarly discriminating and sensitive. 

 As to food, I believe there is little to choose between 

 box and stall-feeding: they both admit of its most 

 economical use ; and upon this point the only difference 

 between them and feeding in yards with sheds attached 

 is on the point of the warmth afforded by them, and the 

 consequently smaller quantity of food required hy 

 animals fed in them. This is of importance, but I 

 believe it to be of less than that of health. More upon 

 this point presently. As to the manure made in stalls, 

 I don't think there is much to recommend them. The 

 ordinary practice is to clean out the stall twice-a-day, 

 forming opposite the stalls a heap of manure which is 

 generally exposed to the action of the rain, and being 

 thrown loosely into a heap is in the very best state to 



