1881.] 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST. 
391 
solid mass of boulder bulged out with full 
exposure of mossy surface. It seemed to me 
easy to decide which of these two specimens of 
rockwork was best, but my friend must evi¬ 
dently differ with me, or why these palms 
and coleuses. I had an idea that nature did 
such work best, and that the illustration of 
the second way of treating rockwork was 
good, because it was done, not exactly in 
imitation of nature, but in the same spirit, 
and after the same methods. 
The reader, I think, will also agree with 
me. Most people would agree if the matter 
was properly presented to their minds. 
Manure Made Under Cover. 
BT PROF. G. C. CALDWELL, CORNELL UNIVERSITY, 
ITHACA, N. Y. 
A writer in a recent number Of the “ Milch 
Zeitung,” bases a plea for building stalls with 
movable cribs, so that the manure can be 
allowed to accumulate under the animals for 
three or six months, on the results of an 
analysis of some manure so stored. It con¬ 
tained of dry substance, 27.5 per cent; Nitro¬ 
gen, 0.67 per cent; Phosphoric Acid,. 0.22 
per cent; and Potash, 0.88 per cent. This 
manure was made by seventy large cows of 
an average live weight of 1,100 lbs., and on 
the following daily consumption of fodder : 
Hay, 700 lbs. ; Roots, 2,800 lbs. ; Chaff, 280 
lbs. ; Barley and Oat Straw, 420 lbs. ; Wheat 
Bran, 210 lbs. ; Malt Germs, 105 lbs. ; and 85 
lbs. of Linseed Cake. In addition about 100 
lbs. of Rye Straw were used daily for litter. 
The quantity and composition of the manure 
which this ration should yield can be calcu¬ 
lated, approximately. German experiments 
have shown, that in the case of milch cows, 
about half of the dry substance of the fodder 
appears again in the manure, and, of course, 
all of the litter remains incorporated with it. 
This daily ration for the whole herd would 
contain about 1,840 lbs. of dry substance, of 
which half added to the 900 lbs. of dry sub¬ 
stance of the litter would give a total of 
1,820 lbs. of dry substance of the manure. 
With allowance for the average proportion 
of water in fresh manure, and for the partial 
decay that would take place in the bed, it is 
estimated that this quantity of dry substance 
would make about 5,300 lbs. daily of the 
manure as drawn out. Taking the average 
composition of the above mentioned ingredi¬ 
ents of the daily ration and litter, as given 
in Wolff’s tables, it is estimated that together 
they would contain a total of 37.6 lbs. of 
Nitrogen, 17.9 lbs. Phosphoric Acid, and 
46.6 lbs. of Potash. The daily product 
of milk was 700 lbs., and of growth 55 
lbs. for the whole herd, which together 
would contain by estimate about 5 lbs. 
of Nitrogen, 2 lbs. of Phosphoric Acid, and 
1.2 lb. of Potash. These numbers represent 
the quantities of these substances abstracted 
from the ration by the animal, and which 
would, therefore, not appear in the manure. 
Deducting them from the totals given above, 
we find that, if the estimates are correct, our 
5,300 lbs. of fresh manure should contain 32.6 
lbs. of Nitrogen, 15.9 lbs. of Phosphoric Acid, 
and 45.4 lbs. of Potash, which, calculated for 
100 parts of manure, would give the following 
percentages : Nitrogen, 0.62; Phosphoric 
Acid, 0.30 ; and Potash, 0.85. 
This result, calculated from the average 
composition of the several articles of fodder 
entering into the ration, the average draft 
made on the constituents of the ration for 
animal production, and the average change 
which manure suffers when kept firmly 
packed under cover for several months, agrees 
quite as well as could be expected, especially 
with regard to the Nitrogen and Potash, with 
the results of the actual analysis of the ma¬ 
nure given in the beginning. As to the Phos¬ 
phoric Acid, it appears that sufficient allow¬ 
ance was not made for the demands of milk 
production and increase in live weight, since 
our calculated result so much exceeds the 
actual percentage, and there could have been 
no loss of this substance in the manure bed. 
With respect to the Nitrogen, it is shown that 
this method of preserving the excrements in¬ 
volves little if any loss of a manurial con¬ 
stituent of the fodder, which is at the same 
time the most valuable and the most liable to 
be lost by careless management. While 
Phosphoric Acid and Potash can only be 
leached out by too much water, Nitrogen 
compounds may also be dissipated into the 
atmosphere from a dry pile of manure under 
a hot sun. 
That this manure is of unusually excellent 
quality, is shown by comparison with Wolff’s 
estimate for the average composition of the 
manure of cattle, with the litter ; he allows 
of Nitrogen only 0.34 per cent; Phosphoric 
Acid 0.12 per cent; and of Potash 0.4 per 
cent. It is almost equal to good horse ma¬ 
nure. In May, 1880, Professor Johnson, of 
the Connecticut Experiment Station, report¬ 
ed the results of an analysis of New York 
stable manure, showing 30.7 per cent of dry 
substance, 0.69 per cent of Nitrogen, 0.67 per 
cent of Phosphoric Acid, and 0.63 per cent of 
of Potash. As to Nitrogen and Potash, this 
manure was a little poorer than the average, 
as given for horse manure with litter, but it 
was remarkably rich in Phosphoric Acid, 
since the average given in all works is less 
than 0.2 per cent. 
The greater expense of the construction of 
stalls for this method of disposing of the 
manure, requiring, as it does, a tight en¬ 
closure for the manure five feet or more in 
depth, and movable cribs, is, as another 
writer claims, the only objection that can be 
raised against it; but he affirms that it can 
be shown by actual calculation, that this 
greater outlay in the beginning is nearly or 
fully covered by the lessened cost of labor in 
handling the manure, and that, therefore, the 
improvement in the quality of the manure is 
so much clear gain. It is also claimed that 
one-fourth more manure is drawn out in the 
spring under this mode of management, 
although we find no careful measurements in 
proof of this statement; but in support of it, 
as well as of the claim of better quality, an 
instance is given of eleven years’ trial of the 
system on a large estate in Germany, where 
the quantity of the manure and the produc¬ 
tiveness of the farm were so much increased 
as to excite general notice, and almost aston¬ 
ishment. It is stated in the same connection 
that similar results were observed on smaller 
farms in the neighborhood where the system 
was adopted. Like results have been ob¬ 
tained in England by Dr. Voelcker in com¬ 
paring the effect of manure made in open 
yards, and in covered yards,. where it was 
both protected from the weather and com¬ 
pactly trodden down by the animals. Lord 
Kinnaird, in one of the first volumes of the 
“ Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society,” 
gives the results of an application of manure 
of box-fed animals, and of the open yard. 
The manure was applied directly on potatoes, 
and the crops with open-yard manure on two 
separate plots were 14,600 and 15,700 lbs., and 
with box manure 23,700 and 23,200 lbs. In 
the following year the two sets of plots 
yielded of wheat 41 and 42 bushels, and 55 
and 56 bushels, respectively, omitting frac¬ 
tions of bushels. In a later volume Mr. Law¬ 
rence gives the analysis of open-yard and 
box manure; in the dry substance of the 
former Professor Way found 1.7 per cent 
Nitrogen, 0.26 Phosphoric Acid, and 0.8 
Potash; in the latter, 2.37 of Nitrogen, 
0.3 Phosphoric Acid, and 2.0 Potash. One 
English farmer on using covered-yard ma¬ 
nure for the first time, and applying as 
much as he had been accustomed to use 
of open-yard manure, had his crops so lodged 
by over luxuriant growth that they were 
nearly ruined. Another farmer, as the result 
of a long experience, stated, perhaps with 
some extravagance, that a load of covered- 
yard manure was equal to two loads of open- 
yard manure. 
Of course all the advantage of making ma¬ 
nure in covered yards, may be secured by box 
feeding, with less outlay for roofing, since 
more space must be allowed for a given num¬ 
ber of animals turned loose together, than 
when confined in stalls; it is the protection 
from rain and sun, the abundant use of litter, 
and its thorough incorporation with the ex¬ 
crements, and the exclusion of air by com¬ 
pact treading, which go to make the superior 
manure; all these features of the method 
work against the loss of valuable plant food. 
Nor does box feeding and constant accumula¬ 
tion of the manure under the feet of the ani¬ 
mals necessarily imply offensive stalls. Mr. 
Lawrence, above quoted, said that everybody 
noticed the general sweetness of his stalls; 
it is only essential that enough litter be used 
to absorb all liquids, and this absorption is 
more effectual if the straw is cut up. 
One method or the other, box-feeding or 
covered yards, should be adopted by every 
farmer who lives where manure is worth 
saving, and who finds himself compelled to 
supplement his stable manure with commer¬ 
cial fertilizers. Stable manure must not be 
lost sight of, in this increasing interest in 
these concentrated fertilizers, for we cannot 
produce our crops and have enough for our¬ 
selves and others, without its aid ; and there 
is nothing in all the list of commercial mix¬ 
tures, which give so good an average return 
for the money invested in it, as well-made 
stable manure. 
Aslies as a Fertilizer. —Unleached 
wood ashes contain all the constituents of 
plant food that the ordinary or worn out soil 
needs, except nitrogen. By their chemical 
action, they render much of the inert nitro¬ 
gen in soils available, and in that way may 
be said to furnish nitrogen. This is true of 
lime, and on this power of making nitrogen 
available, the greatest value of lime, when 
applied as a fertilizer, depends. Ashes also 
have a good mechanical effect upon the soil, 
especially heavy clay soils, which are made 
lighter and more porous, so that air and wa¬ 
ter circulate more freely. Ashes do not suffer 
waste by being washed out, to the extent that 
is true of the more soluble and concentrated 
fertilizers sold in the markets—their effects 
are therefore more lasting. 
