480 
NATURE 
as well as for horses and bullocks.” But it is only grass 
after all, and we can hardly believe that it can be superior 
to the herbage from which it was made. Pigs and poultry 
will graze in pastures it is true, but the digestive systems 
of these animals demand more concentrated foods. There 
is an evident tendency to “forget the rock from which it 
was hewn,” if we may apply such words to the process of 
ensilage. It is green fodder Preserved until winter. 
Well! if preserved until winter it cannot be eaten in 
summer. If eaten in summer it surely would also have 
been realised. 
It may be better than hay, but we cannot expect from 
ensilage such superlative results above what might reason- 
ably be expected from hay. Such high-flown anticipa- 
tions as are embodied in Prof. Rogers’s book are usually 
doomed to disappointment, and the process of ensilage 
will probably take its place in American and English 
agriculture as it has already taken its place in the agri- 
culture of the Continent of Europe, among other improve- 
ments of the nineteenth century, but without overtopping 
any of them. 
Prof. Rogers does not appear to have informed himself 
as to the state of our knowledge in England upon this 
topic. The process was fully described by the present 
writer for the Royal Agricultural Society in 1874. He 
also drew attention to it in two letters to the Z7zzes in 
1875, when it evoked considerable discussion, under the 
title of ‘‘Potted Hay.” The process was also both de- 
scribed and illustrated by drawings in the Agricultural 
Gazette at the same period. Since then it has been 
repeatedly tried, but in all cases without marked success. 
We are ready to allow that this want of success has been 
due to the experiments having been conducted upon a 
small scale and probably with too much regard to 
economy of outlay. The process is too generally 
successful in many countries to be capable of being 
challenged. So late, however, as 1875 Prof. Tormay 
of Pesth wrote to us that practical men were greatly 
divided as to its value. No doubt the making of 
sourhay deserves further trial, and there is as little 
doubt that it will be largely experimented upon during 
the coming summer. 
that it may be as profitable to eat the herbage when 
growing, as to preserve it 7 any form for the winter. | 
Also that our turnips, swedes, and mangels give us a 
means of producing meat in these countries which is 
not possessed by American agriculturists. Turnips and 
hay are probably a better combination of succulent and 
dry food for winter feeding than turnips and ensilage 
would be. In this matter we prefer to suspend judgment 
for a while upon the uses of ensilage to the British farmer. 
It must, however, be remembered | 
particularly useful in the Eastern States of America, | 
where the soil and climate are unfavourable to the growth | 
of roots and favourable to the growth of maize. On this 
point we have abundant testimony in Prof. Rogers’s book. 
A special attraction towards ensilage is that it can be 
carried out without delay in any weather, and that it 
saves the anxiety of haymaking. 
Those who have tried it in this country complain that 
it is very difficult to keep the pit good when it has been 
once opened. Still the process is worthy of more extended 
trial, and if carried out without too much fear of the 
| employment of the mind.”’ 
initial expense and risk of failure, may be shown to be 
of service to English agriculturists. 
JOHN WRIGHTSON 
OUR BOOK SHELF 
-Another Book of Scraps, principally relating to Natural 
With thirty-six Lithographic Illustrations 
History. 
from Pen and Ink Sketches of Wild Birds. 
Charles Murray Adamson. 
Reid, 1882.) 
Mr. ADAMSON has been so much amused by the prepa- 
ration of his first “‘Book of Scraps” that he has prepared 
another, and invites our opinion uponit. We cannot say 
By 
(Newcastle-on-Tyne : 
through his letterpress, although we perfectly agree 
with him that the study of natural history, which he 
advocates, “opens out a wide field for the profitable 
But the thirty-six illustra- 
tions which form the main portion of the book certainly 
show that the author has studied the forms and habits of 
wild birds to some purpose, although in an artistic point 
of view, perhaps, it would not be difficult to criticise the 
surroundings amongst which he places them. The 
drawings are a little rough, as Mr. Adamson himself 
confesses, but no naturalist can turn them over without 
recognising at once the species which are intended to be 
portrayed. We have seen pictures inthe Royal Academy 
of which the same remark could not truthfully be made. 
| Mr. Adamson is evidently most at home on the sea-shore. 
His sea-birds are best. With his woodcocks and par- 
tridges we are notso well satisfied. But “ Another Book 
of Scraps” will make a nice addition to a drawing-room 
| table. 
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 
[The Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions expressed 
by his correspondents. Neither can he undertake to return, 
or to correspond with the writers of, rejected manuscripts. 
No notice is taken of anonymous communications. 
[Zhe Editor urgently requests correspondents to keep their letters 
as short as possible. The pressure on his space ts so great 
that it is impossible otherwise to insure the appearance even 
of communications containing interesting and novel facts.] 
Incubation of the Ostrich 
I HAVE received the following letter from Mr. J. E. Harting, 
and with his permission send it to you for publication. I do so 
partly in justice to Mr, Harting himself—the letter having been 
originally written to the Spectator in vindication of his own 
accuracy, and having been rejected by the editor—and partly 
because I think it desirable that the point in natural history 
which it discusses should be definitely cleared from the erroneous 
views which, as I shall pre-ently show, are still prevalent with 
regard to it. 
ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE 
To the Editor of the Spectator 
S1r,—I have just read in your issue of February 3 a letter 
from Mr. G. J. Romanes to which a long editorial note is 
‘ : ae | appended, and which raises an interesting question relating to 
At the same time we cordially agree that it is likely to be | 
the incubation of the ostrich. As my name is mentioned as 
having written something on the subject, perhaps you will allow 
me to offer a few remarks. 
Briefly stated, the point under discussion is this: Mr. Ro- 
manes, in his recently-published work on ‘f Animal Intelli- 
gence,” has observed that in the case of the ostrich the task of 
incubation is shared by both the sexes. 
In reviewing this work your critic alleges that ‘‘ female 
| ostriches take #o part in the duty of incubation ”—that is, they 
do not assist the male. 
Whereupon Mr. Romanes cites his authorities for the state- 
ment made by him, and refers amongst other sources to my book 
on ostriches, published in 1876, wherein (at p. 41) I remark 
that ‘‘the males are polygamous, each associating with three or 
four hens, all of which lay their eggs in one large nest scooped 
| March 22, 1883, 
4 
| that we have derived much information from looking — 
