1861. 



(NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



43 



For the Netr England Farmer. 



PLAT EOOFS. 



Sloping roofs cannot, methinks, be much, if 

 any, more economical than horizontal ones. We 

 adopt in building, now, very much, the French 

 style of roof. It must cost nearly, if not quite, as 

 much as it would to build the walls equally high 

 around and put on a flat roof. The upper rooms 

 of a properly constructed flat-roofed house will be 

 more valuable and agreeable than the attics of 

 the best French roof. The horizontal roof affords 

 a convenient and agreeable out-of-door place for 

 a morning promenade and airing and view. Also 

 for an agreeable evening sitting when it is suita- 

 able weather, above the dust and annoyance of 

 insects, and the gaze of the street. It is a sunny 

 spot for the cultivation of plants and flowers. It 

 is far more suitable in summer than the green- 

 house for them. We are not endangered by snow 

 slides from such roofs ; they can, without danger, 

 be cleared of snow. But a coating of snow upon 

 the roof saves somewhat of the fuel used in the 

 house. The wind will remove a light or dry snow 

 and the sun will melt away snow from this roof 

 more speedily than from the steep roof — or the 

 double or four-sided ones. The water from this 

 will flow gently off" in every direction and will 

 wear it less than steep roofs. Such style of hous- 

 es would be pleasing to the eye with a handsome 

 railing around its roof; supported by small iron 

 pillars or suitable frame-work in the ceilings be- 

 neath, it will remain firm and level. With a suit- 

 able coating it will remain impervious to mois- 

 ture, and can be arranged to prevent the descent 

 of the summer's heat into the house. G. o. B. 



Remarks. — Thank you, sir. Roofs are expen- 

 sive, wear away rapidly, and the best material for 

 tnem, as well as the best mode of constructing 

 them, are very imperfectly understood. As it 

 would be a little inconvenient to dispense with 

 roofs in our climate, and as most of us do not 

 hold the key of the exchequer to reconstruct them 

 when we please, we shall be glad if "G. O. B." 

 will let his light illumine our pages again. The 

 subject of farm buildings especially needs discus- 

 sion. 



Shade Trees in Pastures. — Upon the first 

 subject you mention, viz. : "Should shade trees 

 be allowed in pasture fields ?" there may be, per- 

 haps, two opinions, but the one most generally 

 held is against shade, unless it is in the immedi- 

 ate vicinity of water. 



The most important object to be attained in 

 grazing, next to good and plentiful grass, is that 

 the cattle shall be free from any disturbance what- 

 ever, and that they shall take as little exercise as 

 possible. In the first place, then, if the shade 

 trees are at any distance from the water, the cat- 

 tle will collect under them, and in hot weather 

 will often stand there until their drinking time 

 arrives, and then run in a body to the water, where 

 they will push and fight for the first drink, and 

 then run back again to the shade. I have seen 

 them do this often. Then again, one of the 

 greatest enemies to fat cattle is the biting-flv, 

 which loves the shade as well as the cattle, 



and when the latter are huddled together under 

 the shade, they suffer a great deal more annoy- 

 ance and worrying than they do out in the open 

 field. I have seen bullocks smart enough to leave 

 the shade, and stand out in the sun all day, and 

 they seemed to thrive better by it. If, however, 

 a man has a stream running through his field, 

 where the cattle can stand over their knees ip. wa- 

 ter, let him by all means have abundant shade on 

 the banks. His cattle can then stand, their legs 

 protected, and whisk the water over their backs 

 with their tails, and bid defiance to the flies. — K. 

 W. DowNMAN, ill American Farmer. 



For the New England Farmer. 

 OUR QRAWDMOTHEKS. 



Is it possible that "Polly" can believe what 

 she asserts in her last article, viz : "that not one- 

 fourth of our grandmothers could read or write ? 

 That they were merely educated for work, to 

 bake and brew, make and mend," while their men- 

 tal powers were left slumbering ? Why, one 

 would judge from "Old Spinster's" and "Polly's" 

 statements that the ladies of a half century ago 

 were scarcely civilized. It is true that they had 

 not the advantages for education that we have. 

 Ten or twelve weeks of the year at school was 

 thought sufficient. But those few weeks were so 

 well improved that pupils often made more pro- 

 gress in one session, than scholars at the present 

 time make in four. I venture to say that most 

 ladies, fifty years ago, had a more thorough 

 knowledge of the standard English works than 

 young ladies of the present day, although igno- 

 rant of many of the lighter accomplishments. 

 Pianos they could not possess, as there were none, 

 [few — Ed.] but the voice was not left unculti- 

 vated ; singing schools and "Harmonic meetings" 

 were in fashion then as now. I am satisfied, too, 

 that they could appreciate poetry as well as good 

 butter and fine linen. I well remember sitting 

 by the side of our grandmother, whose head was 

 white with the frost of age, but whose heart was 

 all summer, — while she repeated page after page 

 from Young's Night Thoughts. And there is a 

 little treasure-box up stairs, containing time-yel- 

 lowed papers, copies of poems, and letters which 

 compare favorably with those now written. Al- 

 though "Old Spinster" states that our grandmoth- 

 ers were "not educated to paint," &c., I think 

 the old-fashioned paintings upon velvet which we 

 see in so many homes, bear witness that the love 

 of the beautiful was not entirely dormant, and 

 that this God-given talent was not "hid in a nap- 

 kin." 



And not one girl in a hundred can embroider 

 on cambric or silk as neatly and handsomely as 

 did our grandmothers. We know that with all 

 their "rude ignorance," they were the best of moth- 

 ers. Had they been educated as mere household 

 drudges. New England could never boast of such 

 children as Daniel Webster, Charles Sumner, 

 Henry Wilson, and the host of others whose 

 names will never perish. 



I cannot think that "Old Spinster" really be- 

 lieves that a woman who can barely read and 

 write is fitted to faithfully perform life's duties. 

 God would never bestow such intellectual gifts, if 



