1846.] Feeding of Cattle. 309 



B, 10 cwt. 106 lbs. Both were fed on the same kind of fond, 

 exxepting that the same amount of barley was given to one, and 

 malt to the other. Hay was found to be essential, for when bar- 

 ley and malt were given alone, the animals loathed it and left it 

 unconsumed. In the first instance, 6 lbs. of barley were given 

 to A, and 6 lbs. of malt to B, a quantity which was speedily raised 

 to 9 and then 12 lbs.; a quantity beyond this couldnot be safely 

 used. Experiments were carried on in this manner with these 

 animals, trora the 1st to the 14th of October, and the quantity of 

 food consumed, was, by 



A of Barley, 198 lbs. ; of Hay, 312.7769 lbs. 

 B of Malt, 198 lbs.; of " 311.75 « 



Under these circumstances the increase of weight in the animals 

 was by A 109 lbs., by 90.5 lbs. In another trial with similar con- 

 ditions, A gained 55, and B 44 lbs. 



Among many trials by Dr. Thompson regarding the production 

 of milk, &c., in cows, one is peculiarly applied to our present 

 purpose: 100 lbs. of mixed barley, hay and grass, produced 8.17 

 lbs. of milk, and 1.95 lbs. of butter, and the animal gained 80 

 lbs. in weight; but when 100 lbs. of malt and hay were given, 

 the produce was, of milk, 7.95 lbs., of butter, 1.92 lbs., and a 

 diminution of 42 lbs. in the weight of the cow. 



These experiments (noticed in the Gardners'' Chronicle, April 

 4, 1846,) show in every respect the advantage of barley over 

 malt for feeding cattle; that it is superior, used comparatively 

 with malt in sustaining the weight and strength of animals. This 

 diminished power in malt is apparently to be sought for in the 

 lessened quantity azotised and saline miatter; as alluded to previ- 

 ously, these two classes of substances are so essential for the nour- 

 ishment and reparation of the body, that without them in a due 

 and proper proportion the system cannot be preserved in a healthy 

 condition, and fit for the discharge of the duties it has to perform. 

 In order to employ malt advantageously and economically for fat- 

 tening, it should weight for weight show an effect decidedly su- 

 perior to barley; for not only (leaning out the question of duty,) 

 is it more expensive, on account of the cost of production from 

 the raw grain, but the processes to which it is submitted cause a 

 considerable diminution of weight, so that 100 parts of barley are 

 equivalent to about 87 of malt; this loss of valuable material for 

 our present purposes is, it is true, attended by increase of bulk, 

 yet it is not by bulk but by weight that we must estimate for the 

 purpose of feeding. 



Dr. Thompson thus writes of malt: — "The only advantage 

 which it seems to hold out in cattle feeding, is the relish which 

 it gives to a mash, but as this depends entirely upon the sugar 



