THE GENESEE FAEMER. 



209 



that pi ant not long ago introduced into this coun- 

 trj- under tlie name of Sorglio. (Tlie word is cer- 

 tainly iKKtCliinese — they could not even pronounce 

 it) In China tlws plant is called Kan Che. They 

 manufacture all their sugar from it, and even ex- 

 port some. They use ox mills, with two vertical 

 cylinders made from iiard wood or stone, and let 

 the sap immediately from the mill by means of 

 wooden tubes run into large iron kettles of the 

 common spheric form, which are built into stone or 

 brick furnaces. Though our mills are similarly 

 constructed, and, if made from iron, perhaps bet- 

 ter, and tliough it seems to me that some of our 

 evaporators are an improvement, yet we are not 

 able, estensively, to granulate its sap into sugar. 

 We know that their apparatus is very simple, and 

 yet, as in many other things, tliey beat us, notwith- 

 standing our more perfect tools and apparatus. 



DOMESTIC ANIMALS. 



As regards domestic animals, there are too many 

 men in Cliina that want to be fed, to have much 

 food left for animals. Horses in China proper are 

 very scarce. If they yoke animals to the plow, it 

 is in most cases the ox or the cow. They do not 

 keup milch cows, at least not in the south, where 

 I have been. In that part they use as working 

 cattle the East Indian buffalo or water ox, which 

 is very different from what we call buffaloes. 

 He is called water ox by the Chinese, because like 

 the hog he lies down in the water when the weather 

 is hot, and is often with his whole body under it, 

 wliile only his nose and eyes are above the surface. 

 Besides they have a peculiar breed of small black 

 hogs, which fatten very easily, and give a very pal- 

 atable meat. These and dogs and cats, the flesh of 

 which is eaten, are the only quadrupeds raised by 

 them extensively for food. To kill a cow or an ox 

 they dislike nearly as much as the people of Hin- 

 dostan, aiid all, though they eat dogs and cats, rats 

 and mice, think it as much disgusting to eat beef, 

 as we do horseflesh. 



They have many kinds of poultry. Our famous 

 Shanghi fowls came from the place of tliat name, 

 and its neighborhood in China. Like the old 

 Egyptians they artificially hatch the eggs of hens 

 and ducks. Both of them are raised and consumed 

 in enormous quantities. On holidays, which they 

 celebrate every full moon and new moon, corres- 

 ponding somewhat with our Sunday (though no- 

 body is bound by law to abstain from work), the 

 poorest families kill and eat some kind of poultry. 



Thus at least in China that famous desire of 

 good king Henrie Quatre is fulfilled to the letter. 



MORE ABOUT BONES. 



LioE ON Cattle. — A correspondent of the 

 Boston ^Itlvator recommends the use of sand 

 both as a preventive and cure for lice on cattle. 

 Haul into the barn a few loads of loam or fine sand 

 and spread it under the stock during the winter. 

 If any of the creatures are lousy whe«i coming to 

 the barn in the autumn, throw some of the sand 

 or h)am upon them; it fills the hair and causes the 

 lice to roll off, but does not kill the nits ; the appli- 

 cation must be repeated two or three times a week 

 jmtil every generation is exterminated. Bulls are 

 noted for tlieir freedom from lice, and it is probably 

 owing to tliiir habit of pawing up earth and throw- 

 ing it Qvev their bodies. 



A CORRESPONDENT sends US the following query: 



Dr. Evan Pugh, as reported in a late number 'of the 

 Farmer, says " bones by burning lose about four per 

 cent, of their nitrogen." Stockhardt says "the organic 

 substance of bones, the gelatine (which contains a great 

 abundance of nitrogen, and is 33 per cent.) is lost by burn- 

 ing." Here is wide, and to us farmers a very material 

 difference of opinion. If the forcing power which bone- 

 dust exercises is owing to the gilatine, which, according 

 to Stockhardt, is lost by burning, then Dr. Fugh is dis- 

 seminatiiii^ a fatal error. Will you please to tell us 

 who is right? 



"We suppose they are both, right. This may 

 seem paradoxical to some, but by way of explana- 

 tion, it must be considered that the chemical analysis 

 of bones, as it regards the animal matter, is only 

 an approxiraation to the truth.' The mineral.parta 

 of bones are more uniform in their component 

 amounts, but the animal, or organized parts, vary 

 exceedingly. Hence the varying results wljich are 

 given by different chemists. If you should take 

 the bones of a healthy and very fat ox for instance, 

 you would find them full of " marrow and fatness." 

 You would find the marrow and other portions 

 rich in oil, fat or carbonaceous matter. You would 

 find the glue or gelatinous portion full of its pecu- 

 liar matter. You would also find the phosphate 

 of lime, and the carbonate of lime presenting their 

 full complenients of ingredients. The animal parts 

 would, in all probability, give you, as we stated in 

 our last, 50 or 51 parts in the hundred, or at least 

 half the weight of the bone. Now, if that same 

 ox had .been starved, or had becoine emaciated by 

 some slow and wasting disease, until it had died of 

 exhaustion, and you should take its bones and an- 

 alyse them, think you they would give you the full 

 proportions mentioned before of animal matter { 

 Certainly not. Well, we have bones of all grades, 

 from those full of marrow to those with no marrow 

 at all. One chemist will take a bone fresh fr&m 

 the aniqjial to winch it belonged, and analyze it. 

 No doubt he will give you the exact proportion^ of 

 ingredients he finds in it. But that can only be re- 

 liable for the bones of that particular animal^ that 

 individual. To-morrow, he takes bones from 

 another animal which appeared to the eye fall as 

 fat and fleshy as the other. He will use the same 

 care and skill in the analysis as in the first 

 case, and yet obtain quite a different result. Hence, 

 as we said before, these chemical examinations are 

 merely approximations. It is only by analyanng a 

 great many different specimens, and taking the 

 average, that the approximation can come near to 

 a positive result. 



Any farmer can demonstrate the truth of these 

 remarks on or in his own soil. Let hijn take a 

 quantity of fresh bones from a fat animal just 

 slaughtered, and grind them to powder. Then let 

 him take the same quantity of bones picked up 

 promiscuously from the fields and bye places, where 

 they have been fed upon by insects and withered 

 more or less by exposure. Let him grind tliese to 

 powder also. Then let him spread equal quantities 

 of each on an equal area of grassland, of like qual- 

 ity, and side by sice. He will soon see the differ- 

 ence in the strength and value of each portion. 



Nitrogen, which Dr. Pugh and Stockhardt 

 speak of, is the gas derived from the decomposi- 

 tion of a part of the animal matter found in bones, 



