340 



NEW ENGLAJNT) FARMER. 



Jtn-Y 



I have refused one hiiiulreil ilollars for her. Can 

 you give, through j-our vahialile paper, any remedy 

 for her case ? . An Old Sikscuiber. " 



fhrmont, N. II., May, 1871. 



Rkmauks. — Many injuries happen to cows in 

 consequence of their lieing confined too closely in 

 their stalls. When some are lying down others 

 tread upon them, and especially upon the teats or 

 other portions of the udder, and injure them. In 

 some cases one or more teats are entirely ruined. 

 In the case mentioned, it does not appear that there 

 was anj' fever or swelling of the part, or any sore- 

 ness to the touch, so that the cause of a cessation 

 of the usual flow of milk is a hidden one. 



Perhaps some one, having had a similar case, 

 and found the cause and a remedy for it, will be 

 able to inform our correspondoit what that remedy 

 is. Has the cow been overfed on meal ? 



shaky teat. Now I propose to inform him how I 

 cured a cow of a like trouble. 



I liad a valuable cow that came to the yard at 

 night with a hole in one of her teats. After draw- 

 ing the milk, I took a i)iece of court j)laster three- 

 fourths of an inch square (English sticking plaster 

 would probably be better) and pressed it on nicely 

 over the hole ; then a strip of cotton cloth of about 

 the same width, and long enough to reach around 

 tlie teat, and put on a good coat of sticking plaster 

 and pressed it firmly around the teat. It remained 

 for a long time, was no obstruction to milking, and 

 it was a complete success. If the hole is an old 

 one it may be necessarv to scarify or burn. 



Surrij,'K. 7/., May '28, 1871. o. w. 



Remakks. — Thanks for this prompt response. 



HUNCH IN THROAT OF COLT. 



About two years ago a lump appeared in the 

 throat of my colt. It appears to be directly under 

 the skin, and is about twice the size of a goose 

 egg. It is about four inches above the brisket, 

 and might be casil}- moved up to the jaw. After 

 the colt has been excniscd freely it entirely dis- 

 appears, but returns as she cools down. The colt 

 is otherwise healthy and in good flesh. Informa- 

 tion as to cause and cure will greatly oblige 



Waferbvry, Vt., May, 1871. T. Homson. 



Remarks. — In commenting on a case which Me 

 are inclined to think may be similar to that j-ou 

 describe, Professor Law supposed the swelling to 

 be caused by "distension of the sheaths of tendons, 

 and probably rheumatic," and recommended rub- 

 bing with iodine ointment, — one part iodine to ! 

 twelve of lard. Still we are so uncertain as to the 

 similarity of cause in his case and yours, that we 

 should advise you to consult your family physi- 

 cian if there is no veterinary in your neighborhood. 

 The iodine ointment, with bandages at night, if 

 thej' can be applied, may be tried with safety. 



LICENSE. 



Can you infonn me whether the license law, so 

 far as travelling dealers in small wares are con- 

 cemed, has been revoked by the United States 

 Government ? Some (jf my neighbors assure me 

 that the peddling business can now be transacted 

 ■without let or hindrance; while others declare that 

 he who sells small goods without a license is guilty 

 of a crime second onlv to that of high treason. 

 Now, I propose to exchange my farm for a ped- 

 dler's pack, and leave the print of my knuckles on 

 the front door of every house in New England. 

 Can I do so without sulyecting myself to the inter- 

 ference of the Federal authorities ? Please answer 

 this at your earliest convenience; for I am very 

 anxious — finding farming a most unprofitable call- 

 ing — to rub out the old score and begin anew. 



Middleton, Mass., May 2,'>, 1871 ■ Essecker. 



Remarks. — You may try your knuckles as pro- 

 posed on every door in the Union, and unless you 

 offer liquor, tobacco and such, the Federal author- 

 ities will neither molest nor make you expense. 



SIDE ORIFICE IN A COW'S TEAT. 



I see j'ou don't talk very encouragingly to your 

 Topsham correspondent, who has a cow with a 



COMPARATIVE PROFITS OF CORN AND WHEAT 

 GROWING. 



I beg to say a word to your coiTCspondcnt, "K. 

 0.," and to make up a statement, of figures in re- 

 latiim to the cost of crops of wheat and of corn. 

 "His friend" raised 78^ bushels of corn per acre, 

 and 36 bushels of wheat. 



Acre OF Corn. Cr. 



By 78'^ bushels of corn at $1.25 $98 12 



" stover valued at 20 00 



$118 12 



Dr. 



To ploiigfiing and manure $18 00 



" seed 50 



" furrowing by horse and man .... 2 00 

 " board of two «ien and team, hauling 



manure and dunging out 8 00 



" board of man and boy, planting ... 4 00 

 " weeding and hoeing three times ... 14 00 

 " cutting up .and getting in corn .... 5 00 



" husking 78^j bushels 6 00 



" Bhelling 5 00 



$62 50 



Profit on an acre of corn $55 62 



Acre of Wheat. Cr. 



By 36 bushels of wheat at $2.00 .... $72 00 



" 10 tons straw at K. O.'a estimate $6.00 60 00 



$132 0» 



Dr. 



To ploughing and manure $18 00 



" 2 bushels seed wheat, $2.00 4 00 



" sowing and harrowing twice .... 6 00 



" harvesting 6 00 



" threshing hy horse power 6 00 



$40 0) 



Profit on one acre of wheat .... $92 CO 



Showing a profit of $i'36.38 in favor of the wheit 

 crop per acre more than the corn crop, taking tie 

 statement of K. O.'s friend as the basis of our cd- 

 culation. Both crops were certainly- very crediti- 

 l)Ie to the farmer, who probably did not count tie 

 cost of labor on the corn crop. It shows that it 

 costs about the same to get .30 or 40 bushels per 

 acre as it did 78. In the tal>le of figures, I have 

 endeavored to give statements that ai)proximatc 

 the correct cost of raising both crops. They show 

 that cultivated crops are vastly more expensive 



i than small grains. But as K. O. has invited "criti- 

 cism" and admits that I havo "furnished him a 



i text on straw," which he approves and discourses 

 on, yet he would seem to disparage my effort to do 

 some good by adding, "I think that is the only ar- 

 gument of much weight he presents for our con- 

 sideration." 



I did not suppose myself addressing a man ot 

 "siratv," but the more receptive minds of those far- 

 mers of the New England States who are anx- 

 iously inciuiring into tlie matter of growing wheat. 

 If K. O. and your farmer readers will review the 

 communication to which he alludes that was pub- 

 lished in the Farmer for April 8, they will find 

 statements of facts calculated to cncour.age the 

 growth of wheat iu New England, in addition to 



