1878.] 
AMERICAN AG-RICIJJATUIRIST 
331 
What About the “Cow Milkers.” 
It is very desirable to have some appliance for 
lessening the disagreeable work of hand-milking. 
We have been looking and hoping for such an im¬ 
plement more than a score of years as Editors, and 
more than twice that time as owners of cows. 
With a drove of cows to milk before and after 
school hours, when on the paternal farm, we tried 
to devise something that would draw the milk, es¬ 
pecially from kicking and sore-teated animals. 
Straws, quills, and wooden tubes, with carefully 
smoothed ends were used, but discarded after 
one of them drew blood, and a fractious cow ran 
away with another and pushed it entirely into a 
teat. A frieadly eye and ear have always been 
turned to those bringing to this office anything 
that gave the least promise, of success. Probably 
not less than twenty devices have been examined, 
and we have travelled many a mile to look into and 
test various contrivances. Some have appeared 
feasible at first, but continued practical testings 
have always brought some unfavorable results. 
We mention this experience to let it be known 
that the first party who will bring out a good prac¬ 
tical cow milker will have the earnest good will of 
this Journal, and all the help it can give him. Such 
an implement, indeed, is one of the great wants of 
the day.* If seeking new business, we would give 
more for the patent of a successful, trustworthy 
implement that would milk the millions of cows than 
for a machine for any other purpose we this mo¬ 
ment think of. From our earliest recollections of 
farm work, onward, only one more tiresome, dis¬ 
agreeable work comes to mind, viz., raking bearded 
barley from before an old-fashioned threshing-ma¬ 
chine ; that capped the climax! We say thus much 
to stimulate inventors to continue their efforts. 
What of the Milkers now in Use P 
During two or three years past, sundry tubes 
have been brought out—hard rubber, ivory, boue, 
silver, silver-plated ; tubes to be used singly, and 
those united by flexible rubber pipes. They have 
been tried by three of our Editorial Staff, and by 
other trustworthy gentlemen. As these have been 
made so carefully as to seem to be incapable of 
doing direct injury, and as those of our Staff who 
have tried them have found them useful with sore 
teats, have discovered no direct injury in their own 
experience, and have not been able to say there is 
a decreased flow of milk from their continued use, 
we have allowed them to be advertised in the Ameri¬ 
can Agriculturist —not with great confidence in their 
having much value, but partly because of the good 
faith of the advertisers, partly because they seemed 
incapable of injury in careful hands, and especially 
because, being inexpensive, we have hoped a wide 
trial of them might result in their favor. But we 
are not prepared to unqualifiedly recommend any¬ 
thing we have yet seen. Some recent reports have 
come of direct injury, shown by blood, when used 
by unskillful persons, proving that they can not be 
entrusted to the ordinary run of milkmen, or milk¬ 
maids. Careful, skillful owners are warranted, we 
think, in having one set on hand for temporary use 
for badly sore, or cracked teats, and we hope they 
will secure and personally experiment with them. 
An irnpoi tant question is yet to be settled. The nat¬ 
ural process is, suction by the calf, accompanied by 
the pushing, “ bunting ” motion. Milking by hand 
partly supplies this natural action. But, will coivs 
generally continue to secrete and yield a full supply of 
milk, if it is drawn away quietly through milking 
tubes, supposing it to be always done with care. 
•The U. S. Census for 1870 reported 8,935,382 mileh cows ; 
the American Cyclopedia gives for 1874 a total of 10,906,800. 
There are doubtless at least 12.000.000 Milch Cows now, 
(probably nearer 15 millions). To milk 12 million, twice a 
day, with an allowance of only five minutes for each milk¬ 
ing, requires a daily expenditure of time equivalent to 
2 ,000,000 hours, or 200.00 > persons to be constantly milk¬ 
ing 10 hours a day. Allowing every person who milks at all 
to have, on the average, 3 cows, not less than four million 
persons go through the operation of milking twice every 
day, good cows, and bad, and indifferent. If good milking, 
by hand even, could be secured continuously, the product 
would be increased at least five per cent—an enormous sum 
in the aggregate—to say nothing of unpleasant work, 
spoiled tempers, and spoiled cows. 
Some assert that they will. That is the question now. 
We are anxious to believe that it will be so, but 
frankly confess we are yet much in the dark. To 
settle this question, it will be necessary to have 
a long continued, thorough trial, upon a consider¬ 
able number of cows, of known milk yield capa¬ 
bilities—part milked with and part without the in¬ 
struments, and with such care in feeding, and other 
items, as to leave no questionable elements to vitiate 
the results. The trials, to be of value, must be 
made under the careful supervision of persons of 
good judgment, and entirely disinterested in any 
milking-machine, or patent. The Patentees of one 
or more of these milkiug-machines, if they have 
confidence in them, and we are sure some of them 
appear to be confident, ought to be able to secure 
such thorough tests. We think the subject of 
sufficient importance to warrant its being taken up 
by some State Agricultural Society, or trustworthy 
Dairy Association. Though not involving a 
chemical question, would it not be a legitimate 
work for the Conn. Agr. Experiment Station, for 
example ?—having the trial say on Mr. Webb’s 
farm, under the supervision of Prof. Johnson and 
his assistants ? Other Institutions at the West and 
South might make similar experiments. 
Very Gratifying Figures, 
Any farmer, or any business man, who produces 
and sells more than he buys, is by so much improv¬ 
ing his financial condition, provided he keeps up 
the productive capacity of his farm or business, and 
does not diminish his stock on hand. The same is 
true of a Nation. That the productive ability of the 
United States is increasing, despite some “ wearing 
out of the soil,” is evident. Millions of new acres 
are annually brought into cultivation ; and there is 
also a yearly large increase of live stoek, imple¬ 
ments, machinery, etc. The statistics of our for¬ 
eign trade have just been completed for the year 
ending July 1st, 1878, for the entire country, and 
they stand thus : 
July isl, 18 11 , to JitneWth. 1878 . 
Exports of Produce and Manufactures. $694,884,200 
Exports of Gold and Silver. 83,733,2)5 
Total Exports . $728,617,425 
Imports of Merchandise, etc. $437,051,538 ) 
Imports of Specie. 29,8 21,S13 S 
Total Imports . $466,8 72,846 
Excess of Exports over Imports. $261,744,579 
That is, during a single year past we have sent 
$30§,744,57!> more to other countries, than 
we have received from them, and are so much 
richer, even though the money went to pay up 
our indebtedness abroad. During the previous 
year (ending July 1st, 1877), the excess of exports 
was $166,539,917, or a total excess for two years of 
$43@,3S4,;»J>0. During Jive years, ending 
July 1st, 1878, the total exports of products, includ¬ 
ing gold and silver, amounted to $3,242,634,153, and 
the total imports, gold and silver included, were 
$2,585,415,658; excess in our favor, $657,218,495, 
or an annual average of $131,443,699. This total 
excess of exports over imports for five years nearly 
equals one-third of our entire National Debt. An 
annual excess of exports equal to that of the past 
year, would in eight years about equal the whole of 
the National Debt, allowing only for the principal. 
Science Applied to Farming.—XIV. 
The Ville Formulas and System of Manuring'. 
Of the numerous formulas for fertilizers for spe¬ 
cial crops, no others have attracted more attention 
than those of Prof. George Ville of Paris, whose 
investigations at the Experimental Farm at Vin¬ 
cennes during the past 25 years or more, have 
been discussed, and whose writings are read the 
world over. These formulas form a part of a sys¬ 
tem of manuring explained in Ville’s books, sev¬ 
eral of which have been translated into English. 
An early one which covers part of the ground, and 
includes most of the bad and many of the good 
points of Ville’s doctrines, has been lately repub¬ 
lished in the form of a pamphlet, with the title 
“ High Farming without Manures—Six Lectures on 
Agriculture.” Another, later and more complete, 
is called “Chemical Manures.” A third gives a 
brief exposition of the system, iu the form of a dia¬ 
logue, and has, I think, been translated under the 
name of “The School of Chemical Manures.” 
Ville’s fundamental proposition is : “ The profit 
from farming depends upon the quantity of fertil¬ 
izers given to the land.Without fertilizers 
the yield is small, the profit nothing, and the final 
result loss. With abundant manuring, the yield is 
increased, and the profit certain, for the excess of 
expense is but the half or the third of the price of 
the excess of the harvest crop.” 
The great problem for the farmer then is to get 
manure. The cattle he wants and can profitably 
keep for other purposes will not generally supply 
enough. More stock will be a burden, and the 
manure costly. Ville proposes chemical manures 
instead. In what he calls “ The System of Agri¬ 
culture which ought to Prevail,” instead of cattle 
kept as a necessity for making manure for grain 
and other crops, he recommends to “buy manure, 
and raise such crops and keep as much or as little 
stock as will be most profitable.” 
The Essential Ingredients of Manures.— 
“ Complete Manures.” 
According to Ville, of the dozen or more consti¬ 
tuents of dung, four— nitrogen, phosphate of lime 
(phosphoric acid), potash, and lime, which consti¬ 
tute about one-tenth of its weight—are “ the regu¬ 
lators par excellence of production, and the only ones 
with which agricultural industry need occupy it¬ 
self.” His formulas for “ complete manures ” sup¬ 
ply these four ingredients, the nitrogen as nitrate of 
potash (saltpeter), nitrate of soda, or sulphate of 
ammonia ; the phosphoric acid in the form of super¬ 
phosphate ; the potash, in either nitrate of potash, 
or other potash salts, and the lime as sulphate of 
lime (land plaster). He says, that “ the mixture of 
these substances has the same properties as dung.” 
The “ complete chemical manure is to the barn¬ 
yard manure, what the metal is to the ore.” “ It 
is farm-yard manure divested of all useless matter.” 
The formulas which are made for different crops, 
based not upon the composition of the plant, but 
upon its assumed capacity for getting its food from 
air and soil, and the effect of the different materials 
upon its growth. “ Each of the four regulating in¬ 
gredients has its own functions which are of more 
or less relative importance, according to the nature 
of the plant to which it is applied....” No one 
can do any good without the cooperation of the 
other three (though if either is supplied in abund¬ 
ance by the soil, it need not be included in the ma¬ 
nure.) Give the others, and each has its own pre¬ 
dominant action for a certain list of crops. 
“Dominant Ingredients.” 
Ville gives “ the name dominant to the ingredient 
which, for a given crop, plays a more important 
part than the others.” Thus : 
“ Nitrogen is the predominant ingredient for the 
cereals as Wheat, Barley, Rye, Oats, and for Colza, 
Sugar beet, Hemp, etc.” 
“ Potash has an especial influence upon Peas, 
Beans, Clover, Lucern, Flax, Potatoes, etc.” 
“ Phosphoric acid is especially beneficial for Tur¬ 
nips, Ruta-bagas, Radishes, Indian Corn, Sugar- 
Cane, etc.” 
“ Lime seems to exert no especial preponderating 
action upon any plant, but is necessary for all.” 
The practical inference is that in preparing a fer¬ 
tilizer for a given plant, we must reduce the subor¬ 
dinate ingredients as much as we can, and put in a 
good deal of the dominant. To sustain his proposi¬ 
tions, Ville cites a great many experiments; some 
made by himself iu pots or in the fields of the Ex¬ 
perimental farm at Vincennes, and others by farmers 
in France and elsewhere. In an experiment on 
wheat, for instance, one plot received a “ complete 
manure from another the lime (sulphate of lime) 
was omitted, while the third had no potash, etc. 
Fertilizer. Yield of YHieat per Acre. 
Nothing. .. . 15.88 bushels. 
“ Complete Manure,” . 56.44 
“ Complete Manure,” without “ lime ”.... 53.33 “ 
“ Complete Manure,” without Potash. ... 40.44 “ 
“ Complete Manure.” without Phos. Acid. 34.00 “ 
” Complete Manure,” without Nitrogen.. 18.18 “ 
The wheat suffered more from lack of nitrogen 
than from lack of any other ingredient. Again, 
with sugar beets, starting with a complete fertil¬ 
izer which supplied 360 lbs. of superphosphate, 180 
