VoL. II. AUGUSTA, GA., JUNE 12, 1844. No. 12. 
DANA’S PRIZE ESSAY ON MANURES. 
(Continued from page 82.) 
Section Seventh. 
Of the Cirmmstances which affect the Q^uality and 
Q,nanlity of Animal Dung. 
That we may reduce to some general princi- 
ple, easily understood and easily remembered, 
the facts scattered up and down among the 
mass of writers and observers about the differ- 
ent quality of manure afforded by different ani- 
mals, or the same animals at different times, let 
me, reader, request your company while I walk: 
into a new department of your chemistry. You 
may not understand the reasons of this differ- 
ence in manures; why, foT instance, fattening 
cattle give stronger manure than working oxen, 
without going a little into the mode how animals 
are nourished. The whole may be stated in 
plain terms thus : All food serves two purposes. 
The first is to keep up the animal heat, and this 
part of food disappears in breathing or in form- 
ing fat ; that is, after serving its purpose in the 
animal body, it goes off in the breath or sweat, 
or it forms tat. It is so essential to the action 
of breathing, that we will term it food for breath- 
ing, or the breathers. The second purpose an- 
swered by food is to build up, sustain, and re- 
new the waste of the body. 
Now all this is done from the blood. To form 
blood, animals must be supplied with its mate- 
rials ready formed. They are ready formed in 
plants ; and animals never do form the mate- 
rials for making blood. We may, therefore, 
term this kind of food the blood-formers. We 
4iave then two classes of food, the breathers and 
the fat-formers, and the blood-formers. If we 
look to the nature of these different classes, we 
find that sugar, starch and gum, are breathers. 
Now there are three principles found in plants 
exactly and identically the same in chemical 
composition with white of egg, flesh, and curd 
of milk. Now these three principles exactly 
alike, whether derived from animals or from 
plants, are the only blood-formers. 1 shall not, 
reader, tax your attention further upon this sub- 
ject, than to beg you to remember these impor- 
tant facts First, all food for breathing and 
forming fat, contains only these three elements 
—oxygen, hydrogen, and carbon. Secondly, all 
food for forming flesh and blood, in addition to 
these, contains nitrogen. 
This is the gist of the whole matter, so far as 
relates to manure. Bear in mind as you go on 
with me, reader, this fact, that of all the food ani- 
mals take, that alone which can form flesh and 
blood, contains nitrogen. The door is now open 
for explaining why age, sex, kind of employ- 
ment, differenee of food, difference of animal, 
can and do produce a marked difference in the 
value of different manures. And first, let us 
consider how the quantity is affected. This de- 
pends on the kind of food. The analysis of cat- 
tle dung, which has been given, is that of cows 
fed on hay, that is, herds-grass, red-top, &c., (or 
whaf is usually termed English hay,) potatoes 
and water: the cattle kept up the year round. 
An animal so treated, consumed in seven 
days — 
Water, 611 lbs. 
Potatoes, 87 “ 
Hay, 167 » 
During this time she dropped clear dung 599 
lbs., or very nearly a bushel of dung a day. 
Every attention was here paid to accuracy of 
measurement and weight. The annual amount 
of dung from one cow exceeds, by this account, 
that which is usually assigned. But, as it is a 
matter of some importance for the farmer to esti- 
mate what the produce of his stock may be in 
dung, the following statement, containing the 
results of a large establishment, will probably 
give that average. 
At this establishment the cows were kept up 
the year round for their dung. It was collected 
tor use from litter, and measured daily into large 
tubs of known capacity. The average number 
of cows kept was fifty-four for nine and a half 
years. During that time, they consumed of 
beets, meal, and pumpkins, brewery grains, corn- 
stalks, turnips, potatoes, carrots and cabbages, 
912,436 lbs., giving an average of green fodder, 
tor each cow per year, 1,837 lbs. Average con- 
sumption of hay tor each cow per annum, 8,164 
lbs. The total dung for nine and a halt years 
was 120,520 bushels, or per cow per annum, 235 
bushels. This gives a daily consumption of 
green food, 5 lbs., and 22 lbs. of hay per cow, 
and two and a half pecks of dung per day, or 
about 56 lbs. per cow. 
But according to some experiments made to 
determine how much the quality of the food af- 
fected the quantity of dung, it appears that the 
solid and fluid excrements partially dried, were, 
compared with the food, as follows : 
In Cattle. Sheep. Horses. 
100 lbs rye straw gave d’§ 
do hay do 
do potatoes do 
do mangel-wurtzel do 
do green clover do 
do oats do 
do rye do 
lbs. 
43 
44 
14 
6 
9J 
lbs. 
40 
42 
13 
Si 
49 
lbs. 
42 
45 
51 
53 
My own experiments on this subject gave for 
100 lbs. of hay and potatoes as above, estimat- 
ing both as dry, or free from water of vegetation, 
32,9 lbs. of dung; and this estimated as dry, is 
reduced to 5.6 lbs., or 26 lbs. ofidry food gave 14 
los. of dry dung. But as a general fact, we may 
say, that well-cured hay and the grains give 
one-half of their weight of dung and urine ; po- 
tatoes, roots, and green grass, about one-tenth. 
It will be easily understood why the quality 
of food should affect the quantity of dung. The 
more watery, the less in bulk is voided, because 
there is actually less substance taken. And as 
the animal requires this to form its flesh and 
blood and fat, and to keep up his breathing, so 
will he exhaust more completely his food. 
More going to support him, less is returned by 
the ordinary channels. So when much vegeta- 
ble fibre exists, as in chopped straw and hay, 
then, as it goes but little way towards support- 
ing breathing or forming blood, a greater bulk 
is rejected. Ingrains, on the contrary, which 
afford much of all that the animal requires, more 
is extracted and less voided. 
The Quality of Dung, 
It is affected first, by the season ; second, by 
the age ; third, bv the sex ; fourth, by the con- 
dition; fifth, by the mode of employment; sixth, 
by the nature of the beast; seventh, the kind of 
food. 
1st. The season. It is because digestion is 
worse in summer than in winter, a general fact, 
that summer manure is best. And where cat- 
tle are summer-soiled, it is said the manure is 
worth double that from stall-fed winter cattle. I 
do not think much is to be attributed to the 
worse digestion in summer, but the cause of 
this great difference in value is to be found in 
the fact that soiled cattle generally get a large 
proportion of blood-torming food. 
The wear and tear of their flesh is little, and 
hence, requiring little of th.eir food to keep up 
their flesh, a greater portion goes off in dung, 
which thus becomes rich in ammonia. The 
green plants, rich in nitrogen, afford abundance 
for milk, which, being rich in all the elements 
of cream, should afford large returns of butter. 
2J. Age. From the fact, that young and 
growing animals require not only food to form 
flesh and blood, to repair the incessant waste 
and change taking place in their bodies, as in 
older animals, but also a further supply to in- 
crease the bulk of their frame, it is evident that 
their food will be more completely exhausted of 
all its principles, and that also less will be re- 
turned as dung. All experience confirms this 
reasoning, anddecides that the manure ofyoung 
animals is ever the weakest and poorest. 
3d. The sex. Tnis is one of the most power- 
ful of the causes which affect the strength of 
dung. From the remarks which have been al- 
ready made, and which I trust, reader, are now 
fresh in your mernory, of the important part act- 
ed by nitrogen in dung, it must be plain why 
sex should exercise such influenee. 1st. In all 
food, as we have explained, that only which 
contains nitrogen, can form flesh and blood, or 
substances of similar constitution, that i.s, re- 
quiring a large proportion of nitrogen, as milk. 
Hence an animal with young, that is, a cow be- 
fore calving, requires not only materials for its 
own repair, but to build up and perfect its 
young. Hence the food will be most complete- 
ly exhausted of its nitrogen, and consequently 
the dung become proportionably weaker. 2d. 
The young having been formed, then milk is 
required for its sustenance. Milk contains a 
large proportion of nitrogenous or blood-forming 
elements, and so the cause which originally 
made the dung weak, continues to operate during 
all the time the animal is in milk. Sex, then, 
it is evident, affects materially the quality of 
the dung. 
4th. The condition. If the animal is in good 
condition, and full grown, it requires only food 
enough to supply materials to renew its waste. 
Hence the food (supposing that always in 
sufficient quantity) is less exhausted of its ele- 
ments, than when the animal is in poor condi- 
tion. In the last case, not only waste, but new 
materials must be supplied. If the animal is 
improving in flesh, (and here, reader, I would 
have you bear in mind the distinction between 
flesh and fat,) then the manure is always less 
strong, than when he is gaining fat. There is 
no manure so strong as that of fattening ani- 
mals. An animal stall-fed, kept in pJ’oper 
warmth, requires but little of his breathing food 
to keep up his heat. All the starch, gum, su- 
gar, &c., go to form fat. Having little use for 
his muscles or flesh, that suffers little waste, 
and the nitrogen which should go to form flesh, 
is voided in dung. Ifitisashe, no milk is 
given during this period, for a cow in milk fats 
not. 
Thedung, then, of fatteninganimals, contains 
more of all the elements of food for plants, than 
at any other period, and is peculiarly rich in ni- 
trogen. I trust, reader, it is not so long since 
you have met the word ammonia, that you have 
