46 



THE LANCASTER FARMER. 



[ March, 



The question marked out by the society, " Can 

 manure be made equally as good without the farm- 

 ers feeding their grain to their cattle as by feeding 

 it?" was not the question as I argued it, but does it 

 pay the farmers to feed their grain to their cattle. 

 By pay I mean the benefit to their manure pile, or in 

 any other vvaj any profit may seem to accrue. These 

 two questions run so nearly parallel that by answer- 

 ing the one you may answer the other, only that the 

 last gives a little more light and latitude to the 

 subject. 



In ventilating this subject I know I shall encounter 

 the prejudices of those who have been led to believe 

 that a farm can only be kept in a fertile condition by a 

 farmer feeding all his corn and oats to his cattle, 

 and in this way transferring it to his manure pile. 

 And this idea has been so thoroughly ground in by 

 parental precept and example that I may use the old 

 proverb, that " the fathers have eaten the sour 

 grapes and the children's teeth are set on edge." 

 And there are now old fogies in Manor and other 

 townships so set in their opinions that what their 

 fathers did was right that they pursue the same old 

 trodden path to the mill with a stone in one end of 

 the sack and grain in the other. Now I want them 

 to discard these old fogy ideas and adopt those of 

 Young America, of thinking for themselves. Cir- 

 cumstances are continually changing, and what may 

 seem advantageous to-day may not be so to-morrow. 

 The time was when the subject of manures, ground 

 bone, phosphates, A:e., was not spoken of, and for two 

 reasons : 1st, a farmer did not think he had done 

 well unless he got double his first cost when he sold 

 his cattle, and, therefore, corn-fed manure came in 

 as a consequence and secondary matter; and 2d, 

 because he could send his grain to market condensed 

 in form of beef, cheaper than he could hall it to 

 market. This was before the era of railroads. Then 

 Lancaster and Chester counties could put a corner 

 on the market for several months in the year ; then 

 a few hundred supplied the market-; now it takes as 

 many thousands, and Lancaster and Chester coun- 

 ties don't supply one-tenth of what they did then. 

 Chester county, which used to be the banner county 

 for grazing fat cattle, has now gone almost entirely 

 into dairying, and Lancaster does little in comparison 

 to her former greatness in that line. Ai.d why is all 

 this ? Simply because it don't pay. If it was not for 

 our large exportations to foreign countries of both 

 live stock and beef in refrigerator vessels, beef would 

 not bring four cents per pound in our market to-day. 

 The great West is only just beginning to be de- 

 veloped, and she can now send her produce, corn, 

 etc., cheaper to market, condensed in beef and pork, 

 than by any other methods. Texas is now sending 

 her beef, net weight, in refrigerator cars and under- 

 selling both us and the Westin price, and this is only 

 the beginning of the end. And now I predict that in 

 five, or at most ten years, it will not be argued that 

 it pays to feed grain to cattle. 



Now let us see what it costs the farmer to make 

 beef, and we will have a better idea of the cost of 

 grain for the manure pile. From observation and 

 from the best information I can get from our best 

 feeders, I find that about 200 pounds is the average 

 weight put on cattle ; some make 300, and by graz- 

 ing in the fall, and feeding late in the spring, 400 

 pounds may be put on. A fair average is 200, and 

 that takes 40 bushels of grain or 20 bushels per 100 

 pounds. Now, the 40 bushels, at .50 cents per bushel, 

 will cost $20 ; this is a low estimate of the price of 

 grain, and it will cost five cents per bushel to pay 

 the grinding, making .5.5 cents per bushel, or $22 for 

 200 weight, or 11 cents per pound of weight put on, 

 and about five pounds for every bushel of grain fed ; 

 this is the debtor side. 



Now, let us look at the credit side for our profits. 

 The average price of feeding cattle I suppose to be 

 about 5}i cents per pound. Some have paid, I am 

 told, 6 and G}4, and even 7 cents for fine cattle. But 

 I wish to make a low estimate of cost of cattle and 

 feed, so that no complaint shall be made that I have 

 not made a fair expose. Now, the quotation of the 

 Philadelphia beef market is from o% to 63,2' cents 

 per pound, the latter for choice, and that is one cent 

 per pound more for choice than any Lancaster beef 

 cattle will bring, as you may notice that this quota- 

 tion is entirely for Western cattle. Western cattle 

 bring more for two reasons ; first, because we don't 

 get the best cattle here to feed, and second, by being 

 several days on the road in cars they make more net 

 weight per 100 pounds of beef than cattle only one 

 day in the cars. The best Lancaster county cattle 

 therefore bring but 5\^ cents per pound, and it takes 

 at least on-half cent per pound, taking loss of weight 

 and other expenses, to get our cattle to market, thus 

 netting us five cents per pound, making us lose five 

 cents per pound on first cost in the original weight. 

 Now I have shown that every pound of beef we 

 put on costs us Sll per 100 pounds, and 200 pounds 

 costing $22, and by netting us at home §10 for 200 

 pounds, we lose §12 per steer, and add to that a loss 

 of half a cent per pound on first cost of weight of 

 steer, 1,000 pounds being $5, viz: 12 plus 5 makes 

 $17 loss on each steer in feeding, not counting any 

 loss of substance of hay, fodderand corn fed to the 

 cattle. 

 Now let us sum up results in profit and loss : 



DR. 

 20 cattle, wt.. 1,000 fts. each= 20,000 tbs.,at SJJ'C. ^lt).$l,100 00 

 20 cattle, 800 bush, feed, at 55c. ^ bush 440 00 



:$1.640 00 



CR. 



20 cattle, wt.l, 200 tliB. each-24,000 lbs., at 6c. ^ ft. .$1,200 00 

 By credit to the manure pile 340 00 



$1,540 00 



Here we have the very respectable sum of $340, 

 which is supposed in some way to have been added 

 to the manure pile. If invested in lime, that money 

 would buy 3,400 bushels, which would manure fifty 

 acres ; or, if used in the purchase of plaster, it would 

 buy thirty-four tons, or three and a-half car loads, 

 which, if applied to the farm, would, in my estima- 

 tion, be of far more benefit to the soil than that 

 which might be derived from the supposed increased 

 value of the manure. 



Now, we come to the point : How much substance 

 do the cattle take out of the hay, cornfodder, &c.? 

 They consume, you say, perhaps nothing but what 

 passes to beef and the offal that passes into the 

 manure pile. I say more than that. As well might 

 you say the fuel you put into a stove all passes off in 

 smoke and ashes. Condense the smoke and weigh 

 the ashes and you have a very small portion of the 

 original weight of fuel left. The rest passes off in 

 heat to make comfortable the outer man. Just so in 

 feeding cattle ; it takes a large portion of the feed 

 you give them to generate the heat and keep life and 

 action in the animal. Every motion he makes is 

 just so much of the supply used up — extracted from 

 the feed he consumes, and not to be counted in the 

 manure pile. 



An important question arises : Can you convert 

 your hay, fodder, straw, &c., into manure, and as 

 good, without feeding grain ? I say you can. Put 

 on layer after layer of this vegetable mass, and to 

 each layer add plaster as you think it requires, and 

 the rain will soon decompose it for you ; and as you 

 have a credit of $340 from not feeding grain, for 

 which you can purchase 34 tons of plaster (33^ car- 

 loads) at flO per ton, or 30 tons of plaster and 400 

 bushels of lime to go to your manure pile. 



And here I wish you to especially notice that for 

 every pound of grain fed you have the value of and 

 can put on 1'^ pounds plaster. Now is not this bet- 

 ter and of more value than feeding grain ? I do not 

 say you shall use the whole of 34 tons ofplaster, but use 

 as much as you think necessary, and have the rest 

 in value to put on your farm in any other way, or 

 for pocket money. 



In this calculation you will see I have made no 

 account of possible loss by cattle dying, of what 

 might be made from keeping horses from the city, or 

 dry cows bought in the fall to come fresh in the 

 spring, all of which might be brought into the profit 

 account. 



It was contended at a former meeting that whers 

 cattle are fed the farms are more productive and 

 show better results. With this I do not agree, as I 

 know farms the past year in my neighborhood which 

 raised 00 bushels corn per acre, and as good wheat 

 as any of the cattle feeders, and this where no cattle 

 had been fed for several years ; and beside those 

 spoken of as not so productive, they did not likely 

 apply any of the credits shown before in favor of 

 not feeding. 



It was said at our last meeting that facts are stub- 

 born things, I say better than this, that figures won't 

 lie ; and I want our friends of Manor, who seem to 

 be wise above what is written, to make a better 

 showing. 



My friend Kurtz, of Mount Joy, is, I suppose, 

 among the largest cattle feeders in the county. Does 

 he raise more or better tobacco or other crops on his 

 farm and get better prices than those who do not 

 feed cattle ! 



Now let us see why the West can feed cattle and 

 send them to market cheaperthan we can. To make 

 figures easy to calculate we will say a steer weighing 

 1,000 lbs. will take 40 bushels of corn, or 2,240 fts., 

 to put on '200 lbs. of beef, and in place of sending 

 2, '240 lbs. of grain she sends 200 lbs. of beef, saving 

 over a ton weight of freight in every beef they send 

 to market. 



It looks very much as if raising grain and feeding 

 cattle, particularly the latter, is about played out, 

 and the sooner we can get to productions in wliich 

 the West cannot compete, the sooner may we look 

 for more profitable investments. It may be done in 

 milk, market truck, and, perhaps, in some other 

 ways ; or, if Western soil is not adapted for raising 

 first quality tobacco, we may make it pay, and we 

 have a better chance to compete with the West in 

 tobacco than any other crop, even if she can raise as 

 good quality tobacco as we can, from the fact that 

 labor is much more costly and scaice in the West 

 than here, and it requires more labor in proportion 

 to the amount of land put in than any other crop. 



It may be contended that this essny is more calcu- 

 lated for agriculture in general than tobacco ; but I 

 contend that anything that will throw any light or 

 have a bearing on the productiveness of the soil is 

 as necessary to the cultivation of tobacco as any 



other crop — in short, what is sauce for the goose is 

 sauce for the gander. 



Henrt Kdetz though the essay was a pretty J 

 good one, but the essayist had made some wrong es- fl 

 timafes. His manure pile made in the above way 

 would be next to worthless. On such land not more 

 than a ton of hay can be raised per acre. (Here 

 Mr. Kennedy inquired of Mr. Kurtz how much corn 

 he raised per acre from his grain fed manure pile, 

 when it was discovered that Mr. Kennedy raised a 

 good deal more than Mr. Kurtz). He said we pay 

 too ranch for our cattle ; we should combine to- 

 gether not to do it. He knew of an instance where 

 a Western dealer got 5% and 7 cents for stock cattle, 

 but even then he believes money can be made out of 

 them by feeding them grain. Such corn fed manure 

 lasts years, and its effects are plainly visible for a 

 long time. He kept an account of an 8 acre field 

 which he planted one year in wheat and one in to- 

 bacco, and he got $4,700 worth of produce off it. 

 That paid, but he put on 100 bushels of lime per 

 acre and as much manure as he conveniently could. 



WiNFiELD S. Kennedy has fed from 30 to 46 

 head of cattle each season ; he always goes to Pitts- 

 burg and still further West to get his cattle ; in this 

 way he buys them right ; he begins with feeding 

 four quarts of corn per day, gradually increasing to 

 six quarts. Twelve or fourteen bushels of corn are 

 all he feeds to a steer ; he makes about $45 or $50 

 per steer, and it pays him : he does not take into 

 account the grass they eat — only the grain. He 

 makes a large amount of good manure. 



Sylvester Kennedy said the pasturing question 

 had nothing to do with the subject. If Mr. Kurtz 

 can't raise more than fifty bushels of corn to the 

 acre, he ought to quit feeding corn to cattle. If it 

 is the wrong plan to pay too much for cattle, why 

 does Mr. Kurtz do so ? 



Henry Shiffner related the fact that on two 

 farms in his neighborhood no cattle are fed ; they 

 are surrounded by cattle feeders, but yet they raise 

 one-third more corn !ind wheat to the acre than their 

 neighbors. He had carefully observed these farms 

 for the past seventeen years, and such was the result 

 of his observations. Last year he saw many lots of 

 tobacco, and also this year, and he has found that 

 where cattle are grain-fed on the farm, the tobacco 

 is invariably the best, both in quality and quantity. 

 No lime was put on the above farms, but only the 

 manure made in the ordinary way. 



Sylvester Kennedy did not believe in over- 

 liming ; he would put on a smaller quantity and put 

 it on more frequently ; he has found this method 

 produces the best results. 



John Brady has a field which he limed fourteen 

 times in fifteen years, putting on nothing else, and 

 has had good crops every time ; there has never been 

 a growth of sorrel as is contended when no lime is 

 put on land. 



C. L. HuNSECKER said when a farm was worn 

 out, how is it to be made productive again? Lime 

 or plaster will make hay and corn, and these in 

 turn when fed to cattle, will make manure, with 

 which the farm's fertility can be kept up indefi- 

 nitely. It is absolutely essential that j'ou have barn- 

 yard manure as well as lime or plaster. It pays 

 farmers within miles of this city to come to town and 

 buy manure for their farms. He has seen farms 

 where nothing but rich manure is put on the land; 

 there was little grain but much straw. Lime was 

 needed to give strength to the wheat straw. 



Sylvester Kennedy admitted lime would bring 

 up a farm, but that had nothing to do with the 

 manure pile. He contended manure of the common 

 sort in conjunction with lime, would be better than 

 all grain fed manure, and no lime. 



Referred Questions. 



" How many pounds of moisture will tobacco take 

 in per hundred pounds, taking dry tobacco as a 

 standard?" 



Henky Kurtz did not know, but he has been told 

 that a ton of dry tobacco will absorb at least 300 

 pounds of moisture. _ He steamed some once himself 

 and the gain was about forty ]>ounds to the case. A 

 packer who was present thought it would gain nearly 

 one-third in weight. 



" What per cent, will tobacco lose in the process 

 of sweating after being cased 3" 



Henry Shiffner thought tobacco will lose forty 

 pounds per hundred after being packed in a damp 

 condition. He saw some that lost twenty percent. ^ 

 of its weight. " 



Washington L. Hershet had some ninety cases 

 reweighed and it lost ten and one-half per cent. 



M. D. Kendig had a lot that lost twelve and one- 

 half per cent. 



Henry Kurtz thought from twelve to fifteen per 

 cent, is the usual loss ; if not sweated properly the 

 loss may be greater. 



" What distance apart should the plants be set to 

 produce the best results?" 



Henry Kuktz thought from 20 to 24 inches the 

 best distance. Some plant from 10 to 20 inches. The 

 rows should be four feet alternating with three feet 

 rows. At these distances he has been very successful. 



John Brady reported a fie'd that was planted in 

 four feet rows with plants 3U inches apart in the 



