April io, 1891.J 



SCIENCE. 



207 



ground), with bran and some preparation of oil-meal. The pro- 

 portions varied from time to time, but was always the same for 

 all the animals. No molasses was used, nor condiments of any 

 sort. 



The coarse fodder was principally mixed hay (timothy and 

 clover), relieved by roots (mangels, turnips, etc.), corn-ensilage, 

 cut grass or corn, and in the early part by pasture. During the 

 first summer they were on pasture a large part of the time for 

 about four months, too long for their best good. The last sum- 

 mer they were out from May 17 to June 6, and rested from grain. 

 This resulted in a temporary loss of weight, but a real advantage 

 to the steers. 



The results of this experiment seem strongly to confirm the fol- 

 lowing : — 



I. The amount of food consumed is no index of the amount of 

 gain it will produce; that is, to its profitable use and conversion 

 into meat. 



3. Neither is the total gain secured, nor the rate of gain, a sure 

 guide to the economical use of food by the animal. 



3. Large gains are not necessarily economical ones, nor medium 

 ones necessarily costly. 



4. Age is the all-controlling circumstance that decides the rate 

 of gain. The ration necessary to sustain the gain increases with 

 age in about the same proportion as the weight of the animal, but 

 the gain remains absolutely about the same. 



5. That " baby beef " is not inconsistent with high quality. 



6. That nervousness is not necessarily a sign of a bad feeder. 



7. That great development in size is not a necessary condition 

 to profitable feeding nor to quality. 



8. That the " type " of an animal has much to do with his ability 

 to use food to good advantage in the production of meat. In this 

 sense there is a distinction and a difference between the breeds for 

 beef purposes. 



9. Those nearest the " dairy type" made less gain to the food 

 consumed, and it consisted more largely of fat on and about the 

 internal organs. This type was also characterized by coarser ex- 

 tremities ; a longer, flatter rib ; more shrinkage of meat in cooling ; 

 and a higher percentage of cheap iiarts. 



10. As between the beef breeds, Mr. Davenport thinks no one 

 can here suggest marked differences that cannot be sufficiently 

 explained on other grounds. As in all experiments of this kind, 

 greater differences are noticeable within the breeds than between 

 them. The two Herefords are in this experiment nearly at ex- 

 tremes in every thing but type, and in that respect as far apart as 

 is allowable among Herefords. Aside from the Holsteins, no two 

 animals of the lot differed more than did the two Herefords. Very 

 close upon them came the two Galloways, with marked differences 

 in build. 



II. Knowing these animals as he did, Mr. Davenport thinks he 

 may safely say. that as they, irrespective of breed, aijproached a 

 certain stocky, blocky form, designated as the "meat type,"' in 

 the same degree they proved good feeders and economical con- 

 sumers of food within a reasonable age. On the other hand, as 

 they approached the coarser or more loosely built organization, 

 betraying a circulation more largely internal and less diffused, in 

 about the same proportions were they less profitable consumers of 

 food for meat purposes, and turned out a less desirable carcass for 

 the block. If this be true, it is a question of type rather than of 

 breed ; and that breed that affords the largest proportion in mem- 

 bers of this type is, all things considered, the best, if any one 

 thinks he knows which breed or breeds that may be. 



In saying this, Mr. Davenport believes that he only follows the 

 teachings of this and all other experiments. Nor does it work 

 any injustice to other types selected for and excelling in other 

 special lines. All will make some beef. Only a few will make 

 the best or the cheapest. The strong teaching in this is, that mod- 

 erate gains are not inconsistent with profit, nor lack of age incon- 

 sistent with quality. 



An experiment of this kind is attended with much expense and 

 labor. Many a careful thought and laborious hour go to secure 

 what passes into a few tables. If only it shall assist a little in the 

 establishment of knowledge and of truth, and not at all in foster- 

 ing an error, then every one will be well paid. 



OUTLINE OF THE HISTORY OP COMMERCIAL FER- 

 TILIZERS.' 



The history of commercial fertilizers practically dates back to 

 the time when bones were first applied to the soil, and their value 

 as a fertilizer was recognized. Fertilizing with bones was first 

 practised in England. Probably the first instance of their exten- 

 sive application was in the case of the farmers living near Shef- 

 field, England, who applied to the land the bone and ivory clip- 

 pings which were waste products of the knife and button 

 factories of Sheffield. These clippings amounted to about eight 

 hundred tons a year, and were regarded, until about a century 

 ago, as a nuisance, the disposal of which was a serious problem to 

 the manufacturers. 



In 1774 the agricultural use of bones was first publicly recom- 

 mended by Hunter, and successful experiments were made with 

 bone-dust. 



About 1814, Alexander von Humboldt called public attention to 

 the use of guano as a fertilizer, which he had seen used by the 

 natives of Peru. 



About 1817 the first super-phosphate is believed to have been 

 made by Sir James Murray. 



It was not until after 1820 that the use of phosphates assumed 

 any great commercial or agricultural importance, and not even 

 then was it appreciated what gave bones their value as ferti- 

 lizers. 



About 1830, Peruvian guano began to be imported into Europe 

 as a fertilizer, and, a few years after, into the United States, 

 especially at the South. 



About 1840, Liebig published the results of his researches, and 

 suggested that plants must obtain materials for their growth from 

 the soil as well as from the air and water, which alone were pre- 

 viously supposed to furnish plant-food, and hence that the proper 

 life of a plant can be benefited by furnishing those elements that 

 are necessary. It was shown that the phosphate of lime in bones 

 gave them their value, and that by dissolving bones with sul- 

 phuric acid they were made much more effective. The demand 

 for bones then outran the supply. Other sources were looked for, 

 and in 1843 a new source of phosphate of lime was found in 

 Spain, consisting of a rock which contained considerable amounts 

 of phosphoric acid. On trial, this rock was found to be a substi- 

 tute for bone. 



In the United States, farmers first used bones about 1790. The 

 first bone-mill was built about 1830, and super-phosphates were 

 first used in 1851. The discovery of the so-called South Carolina 

 rock was a great boon to those using commercial fertilizers, as 

 this was found to take the place of bones. 



The investigations based upon Liebig's theory showed that other 

 elements in addition to phosphorus must be used to secure the best 

 results, and gradually commercial fertilizers containing other ele- 

 ments came to be manufactured and offered for sale. 



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR. 

 Ohio State University. 



By the recent passage of the Hysell Bill in the Ohio Legislature, 

 which levies a tax of one-twentieth of a mill on every dollar of 

 taxable property in the State, some attention has been turned to- 

 ward this institution. 



The institution was founded in 1863. At that time the State 

 received from the United States 680,000 acres of land ; and now 

 the fund from the sale of this land is neai-ly §.540,000, and yields 

 an income of over $33,000. 



The legislature has made liberal appi-opriations from time to 

 time, but the trustees and faculty have hesitated to lay out very 

 extensive plans, for this support was not entirely sure ; but, now 

 that this can be depended upon, plans for increasing the facilities 

 of the institution will be carefully considered. The tax will bring 

 the university |90,000 each year, which, together with what it 

 receives from other sources, places Ohio on her feet in the educa- 

 tional race; and she will soon be in advance of her weaker sisters, 



' From Bulletin No. 26 of the New York Agricultural Eiperiment Station. 



