1862. 



NEW ENGLAND FAR5^IER. 



91 



himself above producing his portion of the food of 

 plants ; he was made of earthy matter, air and wa- 

 ter, and wastes these daily from himself, in sub- 

 stance for the food of vegetation. "Waste not, 

 want not." 



Gather from the pri\'5\ There is no use, boys, 

 in snuffing. This turning up the nose is of no 

 more value in a young man, than it is in a bloom- 

 ing miss. Pride is peevish, and always out of 

 place among the working world's nobility. Pile 

 in the muck, or loam, with a mixture of plaster, 

 much old rotten chip dirt, and drive away unpleas- 

 ant odors by putting on new layers often ; and 

 carry away a great pile to the corn-field. You 

 may bring it back in gold. 



Gather aK the ashes. Thcj;^ will answer for 

 their application almost anywhere, in "words fitly 

 spoken — like apples of gold, in pictures of silver." 



"Waste not, want not." Gather manure from 

 the mill, scrape up around the shop, take care of 

 cotton waste, waste not old woolens, tax the tan- 

 ner for his refuse truck, make the merchant a fair 

 offer for old brines, call upon the collier for liis 

 charcoal dust, and tax all trades that the farmer 

 feeds ; buy when and what jou cannot save, if it 

 will bring back the gold ; but, man of the muck 

 heap, remember, "waste not, want not." 



Lee, N, IL Comings. 



For the New England Farmer. 



KEMOTTIM-Q LEAVES FROM THE 

 FOBEST. 



]Mr. Editor: — Some writers recommend to re- 

 move the leaves from the forest, for the purpose of 

 bedding animals, mulcliing trees, protecting gar- 

 den plants, &c. 



Undoubtedly they are profitable for all these 

 purposes, but the question naturally arises, "What 

 eff'ect would be produced upon the soil of the for- 

 est should the process of removing the leaves be 

 carried to any considerable extent ? Would it not 

 be impoverished, and the trees retarded in their 

 growth, just in proportion to the amount of leaves 

 removed .'* 



I have upon my farm a slight swell of land, ex- 

 tending nearly from north to south, upon which 

 grew quite a grove of oaks and walnuts ; but after 

 they had attained about one-half their natural 

 size they remained stationary, as it were, for some 

 years, or at least made no perceptible growth ; 

 and why .-* It seems to me it was simply for the 

 want of food ; the leaves in the autumn being 

 blown by the western winds into the valley upon 

 the eastern side of the hill, instead of remaining 

 where they fell, to protect and enrich the roots of 

 the trees which produced them. 



In conversation with an intelligent farmer of 

 Lunenburg, he said he had observed the same re- 

 sult respecting the trees upon several of the hills 

 of that somewhat hilly town. 



It may be very well to secure and save the 

 leaves from shade trees by the roadside, especial- 

 ly in places exposed to the wind, but to deprive 

 the forest of the very food which nature designed 

 for it, for the purpose of feeding other portions of 

 the farm, it seems to me, so far as profit is con- 

 cerned, is very much like taking money from one 

 pocket and putting it into another. 



Leominster, Jan., 1862. A. c. w. 



For the Neic England Farmer. 

 HOW TO SELL FRESH PORK. 



Whether to barrel, or dispose of in carcass, is 

 often a perplexing question to those farmers who 

 are fortunate enough to raise pork to sell. And 

 here, like too many other i)roblems in farming, we 

 are generally guilty of jumping at a conclusion, 

 without any positive knowledge, and using the 

 Yankee prerogative of guessing which is the better 

 way. 



In arriving at a conclusion, reference must be 

 had to price, markets, location, &c., — although the 

 price of pork in the carcass, usually, for the time 

 being, corresponds very nearly to barrel pork. 



In order to aid somewhat in throwing light upon 

 this matter, the writer instituted some carefully 

 made experiments the present season, as to the per 

 centage of side pork, hams, lard, head, &c., in the 

 carcass to which, (such as they be,) the readers of 

 the Farmer are welcome, and which may aid some 

 in determining the question referred to at the 

 commencement. 



First Experiment — Weight of hog, dressed, 296 pounds. 



Weight of side part was 166 lbs. 



" "hams 55 " 



" " lard 28 " 



" " head 14 " 



" " bony pieces, feet, shoulders 33 " 



296 lbs. 

 Secosb Experiment — Weight of hog, 238 pounds. 



Weight of side pork 126 lbs. 



" "hams 49 " 



" "lard 20 " 



" " bony pieces, shoulders, head, &c 43 " 



238 lbs. 

 Thirp Experiment — Weight of carcass, 258 pounds. 



Weight of side pork 135 lbs. 



" " Iiams 55 " 



" "lard 22 " 



" " head, shoulders, bony pieces, &c 46 " 



258 lbs. 



It will be seen from the above that, in each of 

 the three trials, the amount of side pork was about 



00 per cent., of hams 20 per cent., of lard from 8 

 to 10 per cent., and showing an aggregate of 82 to 

 So per cent, of sides, hams and lard, (all about of 

 equal value,) in each animal. The hogs were, a 

 part of them, pure Berksliires, and a part were 

 a cross of Berksliires and Suff'olks ; number 

 2 being one of the Suffblks cross. I might also 

 state that the hams were cut as large as practica- 

 ble, consequently diminishing correspondingly the 

 amount of sides — and the shoulders taken out as 

 small as possible, being governed by the market 

 in so doing. I should judge that in the ordinary 

 way of cutting, 5 per cent, might safely be added 

 to the side, and the same abstracted from the 

 hams. But this is of slight consequence, as the 

 price is usually very nearly equal. 



Let us look again at this, and see how it figures. 



1 could have sold my pork for 6 cents, (I barrelled 

 it.) 



Take Ko. 3, weight 258 lbs. at 6 cents $15,4S 



Gave 190 lbs. sides and hams, worth say 8 cents.. $15,20 



I-ard, 22 lbs., at 8 cents 1,76 



Heads, &c., 46 lbs., at 3 cents 1,38 



$18,34 

 Less 1 barrel, and 1 bushel salt 1,50 



$10,84 



So that, even at this calculation, I should save 

 something over a dollar by packing. But if I 

 could sell my pork without the cask, and weigh it 



