ECONOMY OF FARM ANIMALS. 429 



prod action. Even supposing that the growth of grain is that which 

 is most advantageous on the whole, it by no means follows that the 

 farmer shall give himself up to this exclusively; it is seldom that 

 he can do so, indeed ; he must have manure, and this entails the 

 necessity of keeping cattle. If the latter, liowever, be the least 

 profitable item in the economy of a particular domain, it will of 

 course be kept within as narrow limits as possible. 



In many places where the land is well adapted to the plough, and 

 where the production of grain is unquestionably profitable, stock ap- 

 pears to olfer few advantages ; it sometimes happens, indeed, that the 

 balance as regards the stall and cow-house is on the wrong side for 

 the farmer, when the actual value of the forage that has been con- 

 sumed is taken into the account. The loss is only made up for by the 

 manure, which is in fact the return. This is the view that M. Crud 

 obviously takes when he speaks of the stock upon a farm as a neces- 

 sary evil."^ I am far from participating in his opinion ; the cattle 

 upon a farm are no evil, though they may be very necessary. To 

 be satisfied of this, it is enough, in fact, to recollect the principle 

 which has been established in treating of rotation courses, viz : 

 That in no case is it possible to export a larger quantity of organic 

 matter, and particularly of organic azotized matter, from a farm, 

 than is represented by the excess of the same description of matter 

 contained in the manure consuined in the course of the rotation. 

 By acting otherwise, the standard fertility of the soil would ijievi 

 tably be diminished. 



This principle recognised, and I believe that it cannot be disputed, 

 it is obvious that a portion of the produce of the fields must be re- 

 turned to them to fecundate them anew, and it is precisely this por- 

 tion of the forage crops destined to furnish manure that must be 

 consumed in the stable and cow-house. Reasoning abstractly, the 

 forage plants which it is not intended should quit the farm, might be 

 buried directly as manure, without being made to pass through the 

 bodies of animals ; their fertilizing influence on the soil would come 

 out sensibly the same ; and this is what is done, in fact, so often as 

 we manure by smothering. But we have scarcely made the first 

 step in the rudiments of agriculture before we discover the immense 

 advantages of following the usual custom, which first employs as 

 forage for cattle the crops that are grown w^ith a view to the pro- 

 duction of manure. And we shall by and by find, in fact, that by 

 adding to that portion of these crops a supplement of forage plat ts 

 which it would be legitimate to export, without trenching upon tne 

 fundamental principle above laid down, we obtain the same quantity 

 of njanure, and turn the whole of this supplement into useful forces, 

 or into animal products which possess a market value greatly supe- 

 rior to that of the forage before its assimilation. It is only the price 

 of this portion of the forage, fixed or modified by the cattle on the 

 farm, which can fairly be set down to the debit account of wool 

 grown, of power created, and of flesh and dairy articles producecL 



• Theoret. and Pract. Economy of Agricul. vol. ii. p. 235, (in French.) 



