AND VEGETABLE NUTRITION. 61 



he wanted to make money, and to realize a profit from 

 his beef, his policy would be, to sell off half his lean 

 stock, and to fatten his other half upon his supply of food — 

 for what would keep a score, would fatten half that num- 

 ber. In this way he would evidently be a gainer. He 

 would save the labor of feeding the animals, and have 

 converted into marketable meat the food which they would 

 have required to keep them lean, and which then, in a 

 measure, would have been lost. We go upon this hypo- 

 thesis, — if an animal requires 20 lbs. of forage to supply 

 daily exhaustion, it cannot increase in flesh upon this bare 

 supply; but if the animal can digest 40 lbs. of food per day, 

 or double what is necessary to supply absolute want, all 

 the additional .20 lbs., or most of it, goes to the increase 

 of meat, milk, &c. Now let us apply these remarks to 

 crops. A farmer cultivates 20 acres of corn, spreading 

 upon each acre five loads of manure. If he gets 30 bushels 

 an acre, he thinks he does well. His labor upon each acre 

 is worth ^15 — or on the whole 20 acres it is worth 

 $300 — and he gets 600 bushels of corn, which, at 50 

 cents per bushel, just remunerates him for his labor. 

 His crop, like the lean animal, is but so so. He gets 

 stalks, but comparatively httle corn. Now suppose the 

 food that Is given to the 20 acres, sufficient just to keep 

 in it the breath of life, if this figurative expression is ad- 

 missible, is all applied to five acres, which may be term- 

 ed stall-feeding — let us see what would be the result. 

 We maintain, and our experience for years will warrant us 

 in the declaration, that the average product, under this 

 system of stall-feeding corn, may be safely stated at 80 

 bushels the acre. Thus the product of five acres would be 

 400 bushels, and the expense of culture, at $15 per acre, 

 5^75 — showing a profit of one hundred and twenty-five 

 dollars, or twenty-five dollars an acre. Thus five acres, 

 well fed, would be worth $125 per annum more than 

 20 acres badly fed. 



The comparisons we have made will be sufficient to 

 justify us in suggesting, as rules in farming — 



1. J^Tot to work more land than can be well worked 

 and well fed ; and^ 



6 XV. 



