314 ON THE COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGES OF RAW 
TABLE OF EXPERIMENTS. 
Horses fed on 
Horses. 
Weight on 1st 
March. 
Weight on 1st 
May. 
Loss of weight! 
on Boiled J 
Grain. 
Loss of 
weight on 
Raw Grain 
Unbruised 
Gain on 
Raw Grain 
Bruised. 
Cwt. 
qr. 
lb. 
Cwt. 
qr. 
lb. 
Qr. 
lb. 
Qr. 
lb. 
lb. 
r k 
11 
1 
12 
10 
2 
0 
3 
12 
i 2. 
10 
0 
14 
9 
1 
4 
3 
10 
Boiled Grain. 
J 3- 
1 4. 
11 
10 
1 
3 
14 
0 
10 
10 
3 
1 
14 
19 
2 
1 
0 
9 
/ 5 - 
11 
3 
0 
11 
0 
0 
3 
0 
' 6. 
11 
1 
24 
11 
0 
0 
1 
24 
( 7- 
10 
3 
5 
10 
0 
9 
o 
24 
Raw Grain, 
J 8 - 
10 
2 
0 
9 
2 
9 
# § 
0 m 
3 
19 
unbripsed. 
) 9 - 
10 
2 
9 
10 
0 
14 
. . 
. . 
1 
23 
(10. 
9 
3 
0 
9 
2 
23 
•• 
•• 
0 
5 
Raw Grain, 
UL 
12 
1 
4 
12 
1 
14 
10 
bruised or cut. 
(12. 
10 
0 
0 
10 
0 
0 
•• 
By this table the results were as follow : — 
Total loss of weight of 6 horses fed on boiled cwt. qr.lb. 
grain 3 2 27 
Total loss of weight on 4 horses fed cwt. qr. lb. 
on raw do 2 0 15 
Deduct gain by one cwt. qr.lb. 
horse 0 0 10 
Same state one do.. . 0 0 0 
0 0 10 
2 0 5 
Average loss on each horse fed on boiled grain 0 2 14 nearly 
Average loss on each horse fed on raw grain, 
bruised and unbruised 0 1 12 do. 
The girths of the horses were taken, but it is not deemed ne- 
cessary to state them. One or two of the horses fed on boiled 
grain perspired rather more in their work than the others, and 
they drank less water. Their dung was a little softer in con- 
sistence, but there was no tendency “to purge or become 
washy.” The four horses fed on barley were more severely 
worked than the others, and therefore required the heavier grain. 
It will be seen that horse No. 10 lost only 51b., although fed 
the same as the other three. This is accounted for by the fact, 
that he usually keeps in better condition than any of the others. 
If he is left out of the calculation, it is found that the average 
weight lost on both sets of horses, the one fed on unbruised raw 
