THE FARMERS* REGISTER. 



191 



Lime can be delivered on the banks of the river, 

 not (ar from Marr's bluR, at one dollar per barrel ; 

 and at a less price, if the purchasers lurnish boxes 

 in which to receive it. Marl can be shoveled 

 from the bank into flats or boats lying in the 

 river; and according to the best information 

 which I have been able lo collect, it may be de- 

 livered on the river bank at this place, at a price 

 not exceeding 5 cents per bushel. Now, sup- 

 posing 200 bushels of marl per acre, to double 

 the planters crop, without increasing his labor ol 

 cultivation, whether, in that case, it would be a 

 profitable operation for him to purchase it at that 

 price, haul it to his plantation and spread it out, 

 is a matter of calculation which every one may 

 make for himself, in his own circumstances. The 

 fertility imparted to soil by lime is more durable 

 than that imparted by perhaps any other manure. 

 The effect of its application to lands in Virginia, 

 50 and 60 years ago, are yet manliest, by the su- 

 periority of the crops produced by these lands, 

 compared with those produced by adjoining lands. 

 Lime seems to effect a permanent amelioration in 

 the texture and qualities o( the soil. 



NO GUESSING — CUTTING OF HAY. 



From tlie New England Farmer. 



Mr. Editor — Much has been said and written 

 upon the advantages of cutting fodder lor cattle. 

 I have frequently heard it said that to cut the feed 

 tor catile, was a saving in the amount eaten o( 

 iirom 20 to 30 pounds to the hundred. An asser- 

 tion to this amount, I not very long since read in 

 your valuable paper, it appears to me some men 

 live for the sake of farming, while others larm for 

 the sake of a living. 1 get my bread by the sweat 

 of my face, and have long since learned to receive 

 cautiously the views of those who give experiments 

 to the public from what " my man'''' says. I never 

 was persuaded to be at the expense of cutting fod- 

 der lor ray slock, until the past winter. In the 

 early part of last winter 1 purchased one of Green's 

 machines lor cutting straw and hay. After having 

 learned my cattle to eat cut feed, (for 1 was oblig- 

 ed to learn them,) I commenced what I considered 

 an experiment that would prove the loss or gain of 

 cutting fodder. I weighed, cut and led myself, 

 with the exception of three or four days, when ill 

 health prevented. And now if you think my expe- 

 riment will be of use to my brother farmers, you 

 may give it a place in the N. E. Farmer. 



In 1840 I was unfortunate, and nearly lost my 

 grass seed by the drought, so that in 1841, my 

 crop was full half sorrel mixed with clover. Upon 

 this hay 1 led my cows, with the addition of now 

 and then a foddering of corn stover. I commenced 

 with two cows, the 29th of January, giving them 

 all they would eat lor seven days ; at the end of 

 which 1 found 1 had given them 270 lbs. All that 

 remained of what 1 had given them, and which 

 they refused lo eat, was 3 lbs. Actually consum- 

 ed, 267 lbs. 



I then fed without cutting for seven days. At 

 the expiration of this time, 1 lound I had given 

 them 290 lbs. ; and there remained of what they 

 refused to eat, 30 lbs. Actually consumed, 

 260 lbs. 



1 then put two cows more with those above re- 

 ferred to, and led them on fine hay and herdsgrass 

 lor seven days, without cutting, and found there 



had been given them 491 lbs. There remained 

 which they refiised to eat^ 45 lbs. Consumed, 446 

 lbs. 



I then put them seven days on the same hay cut 

 and mixed, and found 1 had given them 454 lbs. 

 There remained of that which they refused to eat 

 20 lbs. Consumed, 434 lbs. 



It will be seen that in the last case, 37 lbs. more 

 was given lo the lour ('ovvs ol uncut hay, and 16 

 lbs. more was eaten than of that which was cut. 

 This I account for in the change Irom the poorer to 

 the better hay. Had the good hay been given 

 first cut and then whole, the difference wouldliave 

 been the other way, in all probability ; (or the two 

 weeks succeeding, I hey consumed a lew pounds 

 more of cut than of whole hay. 



Perhaps you may suppose that by this time, my 

 hay cutting machine is stowed safely away in 

 some back corner, as lost and useless. But this 

 is not the case. But I am thoroughly convinced 

 that there is no saving in the quantity of hay by 

 cutting. Nor do I believe that good clean hay 

 pays the expense of cutting for any stock, unless 

 it be lor a horee. But coarse clover and coarse 

 meadow hay pay well for cutting because cattle 

 will eat more not less. I have cut and mixed these 

 two kinds of hay, and if the condition of my cat- 

 tle may be admitted as evidence of the benefit 

 of cutting such hay, it is proved to my satisfac- 

 tion. Yours, respectfully, Otis Brigham. 



Wesiboro\ 2ith March, 1842. 



St5"Mr. Brigham is worthy of all confidence. 

 He has here given very valuablestatements. The 

 fijcts surprise us. We had supposed that there 

 was more actual saving from culling food for our 

 cattle — bul the statements of the scales musi be 

 taken ;— a single tale from them is worth a thou- 

 sand guesses. In one important respect this trial 

 is deficient : the time is not long enough. To 

 show that other trials have resulted differently, 

 wc copy the iollowing statement : 

 " 3Ir. Benjamin HaWs account of the saving 



made by the use of straw cutters, employed to 



cut hay and straw, as fodder for horses. 



Mr. Hale was proprietor of a line of stages run- 

 ning between Newburyport and Boston. He says: 

 The whole amount ol hay 



purchased from April 1 to 



Oct. 1, 1816, (6 months,) 



and used at the stage sta- T. cwt. gr. lb. 



ble, was - - - 32 4 10 



At $25 per ton, (the lowest 



price at which hay was 



purchased in 1816,) - ^800 00 



From Oct. 1, 1816, to April 



1, 1817, whole amount of 



hay and straw purchased 



for, and consumed by the 



same number of horses, 



viz : 



Straw, 711 13 3 10 ^160 23 

 Hay, 13 14 1 00 350 00 



Deduct on hand April 1, 

 1817 by estimation lour tons 

 more than there was Oct. 

 1, 1816, at S25 per ton. 



Saving by the use of the 



^510 23 



^100 00-410 23 



