i8^ 



GLEAiflNGS m BEE CULTURE. 



2SI 



tried it, and simply had a theory on the subject. 

 The farmers who have actually tried it are well sat- 

 isfied, almost to a man. I have yet to And a single 

 man, who has tried it, who is down on it. Now and 

 then one has made some mistake, and got poor 

 feed; but they do not say any thing against the 

 system. Silos are getting to be quite common in 

 this vicinity, and I have met and talked with quite 

 a large number, at the institute, who have them. 



Friend I.andreth is evidently not posted in regard 

 to the latest irapiovements in silo building and 

 filling. He says the process is only within the 

 reach of the most wealthy. Years ago, when they 

 were built of heavy masonry, there was some call 

 for that statement; but to-day they are built of 

 wood, cheaply. We have good ones, large enough 

 for an ordinary farmer, costing from f60 to $l."iO 

 only. They have been built cheaper and chetiper, 

 and more simple, until Mr. H. Talcott, of Jefferson, 

 our Food and Dairy Commissioner, has one made 

 by only just lining the inside of his barn with 

 matched lumber one inch thick. Just a box one 

 inch thick is all. When I talked with him he said 

 they had emptied one box, or compartment, and 

 did not have a bushel of ensilage that was poor. 

 The cost of pit was a mere trifle. 



A plan much used now is to board up inside, furrow 

 out half an inch, and then lath and plaster with 

 cement. This makes a cheap silo, and gives perfect 

 satisfaction. 



Our farmers have been in the habit of paying 

 from f 1.50 to *200 to get an outfit to do the cutting 

 and elevating, and power to run it. This is not a 

 serious expense; but Mr. I. J. Clapp, with whom I 

 am acquainted, claims in a late number of Hoard's 

 Dairuman, that it is all unnecessary to cut the corn 

 to be put ill a silo. He is a business man, has a 

 cutter on hand, power, etc., but does not use them; 

 he simply puts the corn in whole. The cattle eat it 

 with but trifling loss. It was filled with but little 

 expense, the work being done by the regular help, 

 at their leisure, filling the bins about two feet at a 

 time, and then letting them stand until the corn 

 heats up to 130° before filling any more. This 

 makes " sweet ensilage," not "sauerkraut." 1 do 

 not know of any one who has made any of the 

 sauerkraut kind late years. And that weighting 

 with stones and use of jack-screws is also a thing of 

 the past. They simply cover with tarred paper and 

 lay on a few boards, and then throw on a load of 

 poor hay, straw, or a little sawdust. Weight is of 

 no use, now, only to hold the pai)er and boards down 

 in place. Mr. Talcott was hulling clover just as his 

 silo was filled, and put no paper or boards over, 

 even, but just ran the clover chaft' and straw right 

 on the corn. Cows ate about all the covering. 



Again, they used to cut the corn for ensilage when 

 green and soft, sowing the seed thickly. It was 

 poor, flashy feed. Now they sow only 8 to 13 quarts 

 to the acie, so the sun can get in and make it 

 healthy, and let it stand until the ears are about 

 glazed. Nearly every stalk has an ear. A little 

 bran with this makes a grand ration; IW) lbs. of 

 Mr. Clapp's ensilage has about Iti lbs. of ear corn in 

 It. 



Now, the idea has all exploded that one can get 

 a good deal more out of the silo than he puts in. 

 The outrageous statements in this line at first, set 

 many against it. But there is no question what* 

 ever now, friends, that the silo as now built and 

 filled is a success, particularly in the dairy districts. 



At Windham Institute we heard figures of returns 

 from a 60-cow dairy that were more than double 

 the average. Inquiry showed that the man had 

 built a silo every year for three years, and was in- 

 tending to build two next year. The silo was not 

 the only cause of his success; but the point is, the 

 successful man is the one who knows whether a 

 thing pays ornot. His testimony would have more 

 weight with me than that of a thousand who had 

 never tried it. 



If one raises corn, the silo furnishes the best 

 kniiwn method of preserving it— that is all. You 

 take the corn when just at its best, and put it in 

 the silo and keep it in that condition, pi'actically, 

 until you get ready to feed it, and you can put a 

 large amount of it in a very small space. Any one 

 knows that, if that corn was left outdoors, put up 

 ever so carefully, it would lose much of its value in 

 two or three months, particularly it much rain fell. 

 The silo saves this value, and makes the man more 

 independent of weather. And, again, the succu- 

 lence of the food makes it worth more to the dairy- 

 man. I know of a man in the East who kept over 

 70 cows, last year, on 70 acres, and sold 60 tons of 

 hay. Ensilage the year round did it, and I think 

 this man would laugh at friend L.'s talk against 

 ensilage, and say, " By their fruits ye shall know 

 them." Or, again, as friend Geo. F. Austin, of 

 Wisconsin (who feeds 100 animals on ensilage), puts 

 it: "When science says ensilage isn't a good thing, 

 and my cows say it is, I will stand by the cows, 

 every time." T. B. Tehrv. 



Hudson, O., Mar. 6, 1888. 



I think, friends, the above covers the 

 ground in a few words. How strange it is, 

 that every great discovery or invention 

 must first pass through the preliminary 

 stages ; and that, after these preliminary 

 stages are past, we find many things that 

 were the most expensive are of no impor- 

 tance at all. 



OPEN VS. CLOSED SIDE SECTIONS. 



SOME STRONG POINTS IN FAVOR OF THE FOKMEH. 



aUKING the past four years I have used per- 

 haps 15,000 open-side Sections without sep- 

 arators. For six years previous to this time, 

 I used the ordinary closed-side sections, so I 

 can speak from experience of the merits and 

 demerits of each style. I started out about ten 

 years agoiwith the double-tier wide frames, with tin 

 separators. In comparing the work of colonies in 

 top stories filled with these wide frames of sections 

 with the work of similar colonies in similar top 

 stories filled with large frames of comb or founda^ 

 tion for extracting, it was evident that the supers 

 for extracting had some strong point in their favor. 

 Even where both frames and sections were fur- 

 nished 'alike {with comb or foundation), and other 

 things being etjual, almost two pounds could be ex- 

 pected in the large frames to one In the sections. 

 We naturally look for some practical ditt'erence in 

 the conditions which could cause this difference in 

 results, and we notice those three impassable par- 

 titions running from side to side and from top to 

 bottom of the one super, caused by the closed sides 

 of the sections. 



At some person's suggestion I tried removing? one 

 of the central frames of sections, and placing in its 

 stead a comb for extracting, thus breaking through 



