THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



487 



encourage rapid decomposition; and I know from ex- 

 perience that there is an enormous loss during wet 

 weather ; and even if the precaution of a tank to receive 

 the drainings is adopted, still I believe it entails unne- 

 cessary expenditure of labour. The system is sometimes 

 modified by allowing the manure to remain under the 

 animals for several weeks ; and I find the manure so 

 made with care to be very good, and not to be injurious 

 to the health of the fatting cattle. The box-system next 

 calls for attention. The same remarks apply to it as to 

 stalls as to the health of the animals and the economy of 

 food. It has the advantage over stalls of giving the 

 animals greater freedom of action, and is no doubt good 

 as to economizing the food. As a manufactory for 

 manure, I believe there is no system to be compared to 

 it. And here it will be well to make some remarks upon 

 the subject of the manure made by farmers. We talk 

 in our discussion upon the growth of roots, corn, &c., 

 of applying so many tons or loads to the acre — little 

 taking into account the diiference of its value per load. 

 I will call your attention to some experiments made by 

 Lord Kinnaird, and reported in the " Royal Agricultural 

 Society's Journal" for 1853. The comparison was in- 

 stituted between manure made by bullocks fatting in a 

 covered yard and that made by another lot stall-fed 

 which was thrown on into an open yard occupied by 

 well-fed young animals. He considered that the manure, 

 from the circumstances under which it was made, should 

 have been about equal. The experiment was tried on a 

 field of twenty acres of very equal quality of rich loam, 

 &c., divided into two equal portions, twenty loads of 

 manure per acre were applied, and the field planted with 

 the same kind of potatoes. Two acres on each half 

 were measured, and the crop weighed. The result was : 



UNCOVERED DUXG. 



Tona. Cwt. Lbs. 

 First acre produced . . 7 6 8 of potatoes. 

 Second „ .. 7 18 99 



COVERED DUNG. 



First acre produced. . 11 17 58 „ 



Second „ .. 11 12 26 



The field was afterwards sown with wheat, and the 

 result was 



WHEAT ON UNCOVERED DUNG. 



Producing ill Grain Weight Produce of 

 Biial). Lbs. per Bushel. Straw. 



One acre 41 19 .... 6U ..Lbs. 3.344 



Two acres .... 42 38 .... 61^ .... 3.520 



WHEAT ON COVERED DUNG. 



One acre 55 5 61 4,840 



Two acres .... 53 47 .... 61 .... 4,620 



These figures speak for themselves, and leave a broad 

 margin for errors of observation, &c., &c. Taking the 

 potatoes at ^3 a ton, and the wheat at 5s. per bushel, 

 the straw at £""1 a ton, the loss on the ten acres in the 

 two years, from the injury done to the manure by ex- 

 posure, amounted to the sum of £157, or nearly £1G 

 an acre. The question may fairly bo asked, can this be 

 true ? Let us refer to Dr. Voelcker's valuable papers 

 in the late Journals cf the Royal Agricultural Society : 

 we shall see among the conclusions he comes to, after a 

 careful investijratiou into the condition and value of 



farm-yard manure under different circumstances, that 

 the soluble constituents of dung are much more valuable 

 fertilizers than the insoluble ; that farm-yard dung, 

 even in quite a fresh state, contains phosphate of lime, 

 which is much more soluble than was suspected ; that 

 the drainings from dung-heaps are very valuable ; that 

 well-rotted dung contains a much larger proportion of 

 soluble matter, and is richer in nitrogen than fresh— 

 and so weight for weight is more valuable than fresh — 

 it is, however, much more liable to loss from exposure 

 to rain, whilst, practically speaking, all t'ae essentially 

 valuable manure constituents are preserved by keeping 

 farm-yard manure under cover. He says, however, 

 that when there is a superabundance of straw, it maybe 

 advisable to expose it. The worst method of making 

 manure, is to produce it by animals kept in open yards, 

 since a large proportion of valuable fertilizing matter 

 is wasted in a short time, and after a lapse of twelve 

 months at least two-thirds of the substance of the 

 manure is wasted, and only one-third inferior in quality 

 CO an equal weight of fresh dung is left behind. Pro- 

 fessor Johnston also found that well-rotted dung had lost 

 more than half of its weight, and he remarks that " a 

 part of this loss may no doubt be ascribed to the 

 evaporation of a portion of the water of the recent dung, 

 but the larger part is due to an actual escape of the 

 substance of the manure itself." This all goes to show 

 the very great importance of properly manufacturing 

 manure, and, when it is manufactured, of properly pre- 

 serving it. On this point the best system seems to be 

 that recommended by Mr. C. Lawrence, viz. : forming 

 the heap of manure very much like our mangel heaps, 

 and covering, or rather plastering it over with a coating of 

 road-drift or mould. The earth covering prevents the es- 

 cape of ammonia, and from the form of the heap the water 

 is thrown off". Returning then to box-feeding,its superiority 

 as a system for the manufacture of manure must be ad- 

 mitted as economising food ; also it is excellent ; but I 

 think it is very questionable as to its superiority for 

 wintering store stock. Now, my own impression is that 

 sheds with yards attached are best suited for maintaining 

 the stock in health, that there is not necessarily any great 

 difference in the economy of the food ; and that, if pro- 

 perly managed, the manure made in them may ap- 

 pro.ximate very nearly to that made in boxes, whilst 

 they have decided advantages in this respect over stalls 

 as generally managed. The following are the opinions 

 of persons in different parts of the country : A friend of 

 Mr. Burnett's,inKincardineshire,says, " Afewyearsago, 

 nothing was thought so suitable for accommodation of 

 stock as covered yards ; now people are more anxious to 

 have small sheds and yards for all store and fatting cattle." 

 Another, in Forfarshire, says, " I much prefer keeping 

 all my store and fatting cattle in small yards and sheds, 

 say from three to six in a yard, finding them do better 

 than when tied up or in loose boxes." A friend of mine, 

 now farming in Wales, who comes from Kincardine- 

 shire, also says, " Store cattle should also be in yards, 

 to go into when they like; avoid draughts, and do not 

 keep too many together." An excellent farmer in 

 the county of Durham, a breeder of prize shorthorn 



