1878 .] 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST. 
375 
j 
by either foreleg—never by the head. The best 
tether is a rather stout chain (uot less than 1-inch 
iron with 2-iuch links) with rings and swivels at 
each end. This is most conveniently attached to 
the leg by a well-fitting fetter. I had sets of fetters 
sometime ago which were excellent, but they be¬ 
came rusty and were finally beaten and broken. 
Since then I have used an inch and a quarter to an 
inch and a half strap, passed twice around above 
the pastern joint, each time through the ling, and 
buckled just so snug that it will not slip over the 
joint, and yet so loose that it will slip around the 
leg. The tethered animal must be led to the end 
of the tether before it is set free, and then watched 
a little so that it shall not start oil with a rush in 
the opposite direction and be brought up too sud¬ 
denly. I have never had any difficulty with horses 
—they seem to comprehend the situation at once. 
Cows are tethered in precisely the same way, but 
by the hind leg. They will sometimes kick ex¬ 
citedly for a while, but no harm ever comes of 
it. To avoid this I usually attach the chain, and 
then lead the cow some distance to get her accus¬ 
tomed to the burden upon her leg, and to let her 
see that it will do her no harm. 
Standard Fowls. 
BY I. K. FELCn. 
The numerous poultry papers teem with adver¬ 
tisements of “ Standard Fowls.” How is this term 
to be understood ? We have seen the practice con¬ 
demned on the ground that no bird is a standard 
fowl unless in every particular it fills the descrip¬ 
tion of the Standard of Excellence. In that sense 
there are no standard birds, for none are perfect. 
But it is unfair to take this extreme view. The 
writer holds the opinion that one has the right to 
use the term “standard fowls” if it be true that 
the stock he offers will scale 85 points or more ; for 
the standard places the minimum number of points 
a first prize bird shall scale at that figure. Those 
opposing the use of the term claim that amateurs 
are misled by it. But ought they to be so misled ? 
We think not; for there has not as yet been re¬ 
ported a perfect specimen. Although there has 
been, through the facetiousness of a judge, one or 
two specimens scaled close up to 100, yet it has 
never been our lot to see one better than 96 points, 
unless the excess was the result of credited weight. 
So long as not one bird in five thousand scales 95 
points, .we deem the term a legitimate one when 
used to designate fowls acknowledged as first-class. 
Horses with and without Shoes. 
The European papers are discussing the question 
of shoes or no shoes for horses, with the argument 
apparently in favor of those who advocate bare- 
feet. The fact is cited that wild horses, necessarily 
unshod, always have fine feet, as also do the horses 
of most savage and barbarous peoples, even in 
rocky and moun¬ 
tainous countries. 
Against the as¬ 
sertion that the 
hard, macadam¬ 
ized, and paved 
roads of cities and 
towns demand a 
metallic shoe, is 
opposed the fact 
that in Porto 
Rico, at least up 
to 1840, no shoes 
whatever were 
used, yet the 
streets are paved 
and macadam¬ 
ized. The races of 
St. John even, where horses go a mile in less than 4 
minutes, are run on the stone paved streets of the 
town of San Juan ; and a writer in the “ Live Stock 
Journal,” (Eng.), who spent many years in that 
island, says that he almost never saw a sore-footed 
horse there. But the celebrated veterinarian, Mr. 
Fig. 1.— HOOF FITTED FOR 
CHARLIER SHOE. 
Fleming, comes out strongly in the “Veterinary 
Journal” against bare feet, claiming that their 
moist climate and hard roads demand a metallic 
protection to the hoof, as proved by experience. 
At any rate the new-old idea 
is attracting attention, and 
some horse owners have 
adopted it in practice. After 
removing the shoes, the 
horse is driven only a short 
distance daily, on a hard 
road, increasing gradually 
to from four to six miles in 
the course of a week. Wa¬ 
ter is not avoided, but grease 
Fig.2. CHARLIER SHOE. iS) a£ . then nature ia imi . 
tated the closest. Until the nail-holes have disap¬ 
peared, i. e., grown out, the hoof will look rough, 
and crack off more easily than afterwards. The re¬ 
sults of the trials reported seem favorable to the 
shoeless practice. At first the hoof chips off bad¬ 
ly, but soon becomes bard, and the horse seems to 
like it as much as the urchin likes his bare-footed- 
ness. But the experience of generations of shod 
horses, and the facts and arguments in favor of no 
shoes, suggest a middle ground, viz.: for paved or 
stony streets and roads, a metallic shoe; and no 
shoes for smooth, even hard roads, for country 
roads free from stones, and for field work, es¬ 
pecially on prairie and other farms where there 
are no stones, or very few. We are not familiar 
with any instance in America where the use of 
horses without shoes has been thoroughly tried, 
but considering the great saving and possible bene¬ 
fits that might ensue, we suggest that the question 
is worthy of careful consideration, as it is certain 
that at no time is the horse’s foot in so healthy a 
condition as when unshod. A near approach to na¬ 
ture, which allows of the foot resting squarely on 
the ground, yet at the same time protects the hoof 
from injury, is the Charlier system of shoeing, 
which now finds considerable favor in Europe. 
The method is fully described in the excellent work 
on “Horse-shoeing,” by Mr. Fleming,* who says : 
“ Leave the hoof in a natural condition, so far as 
frog, sole, and wall, are concerned, and imbed a 
narrow rim of iron, no thicker than the wall, around 
the lower circumference of the foot—that exposed 
to wear—like the heel of a man’s boot, and we ob¬ 
tain an idea of the method.” 
The crust or wall is beveled off with the rasp, and 
by means of a knife with a movable guide, a groove 
is made to receive the shoe, as illustrated in fig. 1. 
The groove is a little shallower than the thickness 
of the sole, and somewhat narrower than the thick¬ 
ness of the wall, “ not extending beyoud the white 
line separating the sole from the wall.” The shoe 
is a narrow but deep band of iron, narrower at top 
than atthe bottom, and so forged that its front sur¬ 
face follows the slope of the hoof, as seen in fig. 3. 
Its upper inner edge is rounded by the file, and a 
little of the horn is removed from the angle of the 
groove in the hoof, which prevents undue pressure 
of the shoe against the soft horn at that place. In 
strong hoofs, the shoe is almost buried in the 
groove ; but with flat soles and low heels, it is not 
safe to imbed it so deeply. Four to six light nails 
are used ; with light driving horses four are suffici¬ 
*“ Practical Horse-shoeing,” by G Fleming. Publish¬ 
ed by Orange Judd Company. Price 75 cents, post-paid. 
ent, placed wide apart at the toe, and close to the 
heel, as in fig. 4. Fig. 2 represents the shoe. It 
cannot be used on all feet, and to make the groove 
and shoe fit well requires some care ; but when 
once understood by 
the farrier, the 
shoeing is said to 
be very simple. 
Tire advantages 
are: leaving the 
foot in its natural 
condition as to frog 
and sole, “the 
small number and 
size of nails re¬ 
quired, lightness of 
the shoe, and se¬ 
curity to the horse 
in progression,” as 
it places the foot 
fairly upon the 
ground. It is used on horses at all kinds of work, 
and it is said that the combination of hom and 
metal stand an astonishing amount of wear for so 
light a rim of iron. These shoes are usually ap¬ 
plied to only the forefeet, as the hindfeet are 
thought to be not so well adapted to them. 
Fig. 4.— MANNER OF NAILING. 
The Cultivation of Wheat. 
Much interest is manifested in improved meth¬ 
ods of managing the wheat crop. Hitherto the 
preparation of the soil and the sowing of the seed 
have comprised the whole work, and natural influ¬ 
ences have been left alone to modify the results for 
better or for worse. But of late, the idea has 
arisen and been gaining in favor, that by making 
use of the same methods employed to forward the 
other crops, we could largely increase the yield of 
wheat; that by cultivating the grounds and destroy¬ 
ing the weeds, the plants would be much strength¬ 
ened and increased in productiveness. That this 
idea is correct, admits of no doubt; it is reason¬ 
able, and ample proof of its practicability has 
been given by both experiment and practice. In 
England, France, and Germany, it has been com¬ 
mon, for many years past, to hoe the wheat, and 
to remove the weeds by hand ; and of late years, 
horse-hoes have come into use for this purpose. 
The articles published in the American Agricul¬ 
turist, have given rise to numerous requests for 
further information and discussion of this matter. 
It is obvious that mechanical cultivation can be ap¬ 
plied only to crops planted in rows, aud that only 
drill-sown wheat can be worked by either hand oc 
horse-hoes. It is impossible, in this country, to 
use hand labor profitably for hoeing wheat on a 
large scale, on account of its high cost. Horse¬ 
power only can be used, and the implement must 
be made to cover many rows at once. The drills 
must be separated by such intervals as will permit 
the safe passage of the hoes between them, and the 
machiue must be carefully guided. In practice it 
has been found that 9 to 12 inches is the best dis¬ 
tance. The defect in most drills as now made, of the 
spouts being too uear each other, may be remedied 
by tying two of them together, or by removing each 
alternate one—thus doubling the width of the 
spaces between the rows. There is then ample 
room for cultivation. The illustration (see next 
page) shows the working of an implement such as 
the Travis hoe. As the frame which carries the 
hoes is loose, and oscillates somewhat, it is easily 
managed so as to avoid cutting the plants. The 
wheat-plant has two sets of roots ; one springing 
from the seed, and another which starts from an 
enlargement of the stalk near the surface. The 
latter form the permanent roots, and as these spread, 
new spires appear above the ground, each of 
which throws out roots for itself and forms an in¬ 
dependent plant, and this in turn increases in the 
same manner. By separating these new plants 
from the parents, and transplanting them, repeated 
several times, as many as 500 vigorous and distinct 
plants have been produced from one seed. It is 
thus seen with what facility the wheat-plant will 
spread when the best conditions for the exercise of 
