^Quarterly Reports of the Chemical Committee, 1883. 379 
rthe ground sample is out of tliis bag. I need not say that iiuder no circum- 
stances should 1 have used a bit of tlie cake after receipt of your analysis, 
wliich came to hand on Sunday, the '23rd, just after the three bullucks had 
■died. To this one particular feed on Friday, the 21st, I attribute my loss, as 
I can confidently state that on that day all were exceedingly blooming in 
appearance, and that in none of the remainder, similarly fed, has there been 
the slightest illness. Perhaps it seems a work of supererogation to analyse 
the unground sample given you by Mr. Shave, but under all the circum- 
.stances I have decided to have both the ground and unground samples 
analysed, and I would ask you in your aualysis to look out specially lor 
•distinct poison as well as fungus or other impurity. Enclosed you will tind 
cheque for \l. — Believe me, yours very faithfully, 
. . TT 1 1 Carrixgton Smith. 
Ur. Augustus Voelcker. 
Dr. Voelcker's analysis of these two samples gave the follow- 
ing results : — 
I. 
Moisture 10" 15 
Oil 15-26 
*Albuminous compounds .. .. 38' 37 
Mucilage, &c 20-21 
Woody fibre 10-46 
Ash 5*55 
II. 
11-45 
10-60 
38-62 
24-60 
9-23 
5-50 
100-00 100-00 
* Contaiuing nitrogen ,. 6 14 6 '22 
In sending the above analytical results, Dr. Voelcker wrote 
-as follows : — 
October 3rd, 1883. 
Dear Mr. Smith, — I have made careful analyses of the two samples of 
Texas cotton-cake which Mr. Shave placed into my hands for examination, 
and have specially tested them, each sample for metallic and other mineral 
poisons, but cannot detect any poisonous matter in either of the two cakes, 
nor have I been able to detect with the microscope any poisonous seeds which 
might have been accidentally mixed up with the cake. The ground and the 
imground samples differ somewhat in composition, as you will see by the 
analyses. No. 2, that is the ground suspected cake, contains cotton-seed 
husks in a much coarser condition than the husks occur in No. 1 cake. 
I doubt not this has contributed to the injurious effects which the ground 
cake No. 2 produced. The cotton-seed husks in this cake are so coarse that 
I do not think the cake can be safely given to stock. You call No. 2 ground 
• cake, but if you have given the cake in the same rough state as linseed, in 
pieces as large as the sample sent, I could have told you beforehand that you 
would not be able to feed your bullocks or cows for any length of time 
without their getting seriousl}' ill. 
The long and the short of the matter is that none of the three samples of 
Texas cake which you sent me, when broken up roughly like linseed cake, 
can be safely given to bullocks, cows, or sheep. The effect of the indiges- 
tible coarsely-ground husks and hard-pressed kernels in the shape of badly- 
broken cake, of inferior cotton-cake, like the three samples of cotton-cake 
■you sent me, is to cause at first constipation of the lower bowels, and subse- 
quently inflammation of the whole intestines and stomach, and violent 
purging. I need scarcely say that these ill-effects are not noticed for some 
time, especially if the bullocks are supphed with moderate quantities of cake. 
— Yours faithfully, Augustus Voelcker. 
