i6o 



therefore to say that three times as much dry substance 

 may be produced from a given acre of corn, as from a like 

 acre of grass. Second, the cost of a hundred pounds of dry 

 matter is slightly less in corn than in hay, as the following 

 statement will show : 



Cutting the corn in field, per acre, $2.00 



Loading and drawing to barn, 3.75 



Cutting and packing in silo, 2.40 



Use of engine and cutter, 1.25 



Total, -19.40 



Yield per acre, fifteen tons. Cost per ton, 62| cents. 

 Under more favorable circumstances, as to distance and 

 location, a seven acre field of corn was harvested with the 

 following results per acre : 



Cutting and stocking, §2.16 



Drawing in, 2.56 



Husking corn, 5.00 



Drawing corn to mill, 1.50 



Grinding corn, 1.80 



$13.02 ' 

 While I cannot give the exact figures as to the per cent, 

 of dry matter in each crop, yet there was not above 6,000 

 lbs. in the husked crop as against 7,500 lbs. in the crop put 

 in the silo. One hundred pounds of dry matter, at the 

 time of feeding out, would cost for harvesting alone, twen- 

 ty-five cents in the husked crop, and fifteen and two-thirds 

 cents in the silo. Add to this the greater efficiency of the 

 dry matter, pound for pound, and it is evident that from 

 an economic standpoint the silo has the advantage. In 

 addition to the above statement I have the testimony of 

 many others fully corroborating their truthfulness, and after 

 giving this subject very careful consideration for the last ten 

 years, and corresponding with persons in all parts of the 

 country, I should say that for the country farmer, the corn 

 crop stands at the head. Corn is King even in Essex 

 County. 



