AMERICAN AG-MCULTORtST. 
215 
187S.J 
Raising Calves without Milk.— “ J. A. S.,” 
Dracnt, Mass., gives the following hints as to raising 
calves without milk. I find oil meal preferable to either 
meal, find feed, or shorts, first boiling tho oil meal in wa¬ 
ter before mixing with theekim milk,and taking especial 
care that the “porridge” he of the temperature of new 
milk, and commencing at first with a tablespoonful of the 
oil meal. Giving porridge of any kind to calves, warmer 
than new milk, will be almost sure to “ scour ” them. 
Soiling Cows.— “ J. B. W.,” Westminster, Mass. 
Directions for growing fodder crops are given at the 
proper season in Hints for Work. Those hints should be 
read carefully every month, as they are intended to give 
information on most farm operations that will meet all 
except very unusual cases. “Quincy on Soiling” is the 
only book on this subject. This system of feeding will 
pay best where manure and fodder are the dearest. 
Grass without Plowing,- “ S. W.,” Seneca 
Co., Ohio. Meadows may he improved by harrowing and 
sowing fresh seed, and using some fertilizer or fine ma¬ 
nure. It is not always necessary to turn under a sod to 
re-seed with grass. In the majority of instances it may 
be done better in the way indicated; but. it should not be 
left until the grass is totally destroyed in large patches 
and the ground occupied with weeds. It may be done 
at any time before July', and if 200 lbs. of artificial fertil¬ 
izer, 20 or 30 bushels of wood ashes, or a few loads of 
fine manure, be harrowed in with the seed, the catch will 
be made successful even in unfavorable weather. 
Cats In the Poultry House.— “ J. S. W.,” 
Suspension Bridge, N. Y. It is difficult to keep cats out 
of places where fowls can enter. There may be a method 
of excluding them known to some of our readers which 
we should be glad to hear of. A cat that will suck eggs 
should be executed. 
To Utilize Bones without a Mill.— “J. N. 
H.,” Palatine, W. Va. Where there is no mill to grind 
them, bones can only be made useful as a fertilizer by 
burning; the burned bone contains all the valuable por¬ 
tions except the nitrogen, and as that can not he saved, 
the loss must be borne as unavoidable. In many places 
it might pay a miller to have a bone mill. 
Mustard as a Crop.— “ J. W.,” Eau-Claire, Wis. 
There is very little demand for mustard seed for grind¬ 
ing, and as a fodder crop it has some disadvantages 
which make it undesirable when there are so many other 
kinds that are unobjectionable. Mustard may be sown 
early in the spring and may be pastured, or cut green, 
when about ready to blossom. If left longer, some 
seeds will mature to stock the ground and make it weedy. 
Materials for Compost.— “E. Y. X.,” Trappe, 
Md. Marsh sod, lime, and wood's earth, either by them¬ 
selves, or mixed with barn-yard manure, will make an 
excellent compost; saw-dust added would make it too 
dry. The best use of the saw-dust would be to make 
litter or an absorbent of liquid manure of it. It might 
then be used in the compost to better advantage. 
Tlie Uilly Butter Worker was exhibited at the 
International Dairy Fair in December last, and attracted 
much attention. In the hurry of arranging the details 
of this exhibition, no premiums were awarded to Butter 
Workers, an omission to be regretted, and one which 
will no doubt be remedied another year. The makers 
of the “ Lilly ” at the time, complained of the neglect, as 
they claimed that their machine did the best work of any 
on exhibition. At the time, we prepared an item to this 
effect, but it was crowded out by press of other matter. 
It is but just to say that the “ Lilly Butter Worker” has 
sustained the reputation for which we gave it credit, in 
Jan. 1878, being simple, easily worked, readily cleaned, 
and doing good work with a motion closely approaching 
that of the hand ladle. The Lilly Butter Worker is now 
made by C. H. R. Triebels, Philadelphia. 
t< Plymouth Rocks.”— Though a recent breed 
of fowls, the Plymouth Rocks have already attained suffi¬ 
cient importance to have a work devoted to their history, 
characteristics, etc. Mr. F. H. Corbin, of Newington, Ct. 
tells the story in a neat volume of nearly 100 pages, 
which also gives designs for poultry-houses, and useful 
hints upon poultry management in general. Sent post¬ 
paid from this office for 75 cts. 
Garget.—" S. P. R.,” Richmond Co., Ga. Garget is 
a disease that requires immediate attention. Directions 
for managing this trouble have been frequently given in 
the American Agriculturist, and there is not a recent vol¬ 
ume without many items in regard to it. The disease is 
almost always caused by neglect, and may be easily pre¬ 
vented. When it occnrs, the treatment is, to give the 
cow a strong saline purgative, such as 12 to 16 ounces of 
Epsom Salts, and 1 ounce of Saltpeter the next day; the 
udder should be rubbed with the hand and fomented 
with hot water, and if the milk is clotted, a solution of 
one teaspoonful of baking Soda in a teacupful of water 
should be injected into the affected teats by means of a 
small syringe, and milked out soon after. The udder 
should be treated in this way until it returns to its nat¬ 
ural condition; meanwhile, the feeding should be light 
and the reverse of stimulating. Prevention consists in 
watching the cow as her time approaches, feeding lightly 
and drawing the milk, if the udder is full, before calving. 
Jersey Red Sivine.— Mr. John L. Collins, Moores- 
town, N. J., already well known as a dealer in small fruits, 
is also engaged in the breeding of the Jersey Red Swine, 
which have long been known in portions of New Jersey, 
and further south, aud are now receiving attention else¬ 
where, as remarkable for great weights at an early age. 
Salt on Wheat. —“T.,”Ind. See the American 
Agriculturist for last October, page 394, for the effect of 
salt on land, and how to apply it. To increase your 15 
bushel per acre wheat crop, salt is not a very good fertil¬ 
izer, because, while it may increase the crop for a single 
year, it will tend to exhaust the resources of the soil. 
(.Basket Items continued on page 339.) 
The Department of Agriculture. 
When he appointed Gen. William Le Due as Commis¬ 
sioner of Agriculture, the President succeeded in thor¬ 
oughly surprising the whole agricultural community. It 
was natural that the placing of a man, before absolutely 
unknown in agriculture, as the official representative of 
the most important interest of the country, should cause 
astonishment, and for a while “ who is Le Due ? ” was 
the conundrum of the day. When tne appointment was 
made, it was adversely criticised, and the new Commis¬ 
sioner denounced in advance. At that time, Aug., 1877, 
we said: “ So far as the American Agriculturist is con¬ 
cerned, we welcome him to the office with our best wishes 
for a successful career, and he shall have our support un¬ 
til he proves himself unworthy of it.” If we have said 
little about the Commissioner, it was because there was 
little to say. The papers, mainly the daily papers, by 
their Washington correspondents, have made themselves 
distressingly funny over the Commissioners proposition 
to cultivate tea in this country. These gentlemen did 
not think it worth while to ascertain what was proposed, 
but at once denounced the whole scheme. Now in look¬ 
ing over the career of this present Commissioner, about 
the only good thing we find in it is the fact that he gave 
publicity to the suggestion of one of his subordinates 
that, under certain conditions, and for certain uses, the 
tea plant might be properly introduced in those parts of 
the country where it is hardy. For so much we give the 
Commissioner credit. For the rest we find little to say. 
We have kept ourselves pretty thoroughly advised as to 
the interior of the Department, and know that it has been 
during the present as it has been through former admin¬ 
istrations. There is, as there has been, an excellent work¬ 
ing force; the subordinate places or heads of departments 
have been, as a general thing, filled by men capable of 
whatever work may be required of them. The depart¬ 
ment has been well equipped in every respect, and only 
wanted a head to enable it to do good work. As we have 
understood the case, it has been thus: The Commis¬ 
sioner, aware that he knew nothing himself about agri¬ 
culture and the collateral sciences, was jealous of his 
subordinates who did know something, and fearful that 
they should get some credit apart from himself, found 
means to make the positions of these subordinates very 
uncomfortable. We have for some time heard the rumb¬ 
lings of the storm that has broken out in the resignation 
of the Entomologist, Prof. C. Y. Riley. It is the old 
story of Watts and Doct. Parry over again. A man ont of 
place as Commissioner, did not know that in becoming a 
subordinate, a man of science did not sell his independ¬ 
ence or give up his claim to be treated as a gentleman. 
There is much talk about the forced resignation of Prof. 
Riley, and great sympathy expressed for him. For our 
part, we are glad that he is not buried in the Department 
of Agriculture, but is where the country may still have 
the benefit of his valuable services. The Washington 
correspondents state that the enforced resignation of 
Prof. Riley will lead to a Congressional investigation. 
We don’t think that Riley will care much for this, but 
we think that the leading seedsmen of the country will 
like it. The seed distribution as it has been heretofore 
and is now managed, is simply an outrage. Why should 
the seed-trade, of all others, be selected for the opposition 
of the great TJ. S. Government, and these goods be given 
away, while all other trades are allowed to sell their 
goods without Government interference? But if seeds 
are to be given—or thrown—away by the Government, 
why should not all seedsmen have a chance in supplying 
them ? Seeds went from a former Commissioner’s own 
farm. Are anybody’s “sisters and their cousins and 
their aunts” now furnishing seeds? This seed-tracto 
has been a stumbling block heretofore ; how is it now? 
If there is to be a Congressional investigation—and we 
hope there may—it need not bother itself much with the 
present Commissioner. The matter lies deeper than that. 
The Department was established, if we mistake not, in 
1862. It has had a trial of 17 years—What has it done ? 
We do not array the sums that have been appropriated— 
for we hold that had they been ten times as large, they 
would have been well expended had they helped agricul¬ 
ture at all. If there is an investigation, let the investiga¬ 
tors start at the bottom and first, ask—Do we need a De¬ 
partment of Agriculture—if so, what for? What shall be 
its duties, aud how shall the Department be made useful ? 
The agriculturists of the country have a right to demand 
that if the Government meddles with agriculture at all it 
shall do so in a manner that will not belittle their pur¬ 
suit. They do not want a Department that seems to he 
run for but two ends—to afford an asylum for some 
nobody, and to send out poor seeds at public expense. 
Thus far the affair has been simply ridiculous. The first 
Commissioner was Newton, ex-milk-man, who held his 
place through kitchen influence at the White House—the 
story connected therewith doing more credit to Mr. 
Lincoln’s heart than to his judgment. Then followed 
Col. Capron, who for the time he held the place at least 
made it respectable, but the Emperor of Japan called 
louder than Uncle Sam, and he went. Then we had Mr. 
Watts appointed, it is said because he was hospitable to 
the then President while he was on a fishing excursion. 
Watts was great on the signs of the Zodiac, and when he 
took his pen in hand the English language had to “get 
up and git.” We never knew how Watts went out, but 
he went—Le Due came in, and there we stop. 
- - m m -—• 
Pearl Millet. — Peter Henderson. — The 
“Planter and Granger.” 
— 
The American Agriculturist catches it I A paper called 
the “Planter and Granger,” published at Atlanta, Ga , 
gives us, bo to speak, “ a piece of its mind ” — not open¬ 
ly, but over the back of Mr. Peter Henderson. As a 
general thing, when such journals attack us, we feel like 
the blacksmith whose little wife used to beat him ; when 
a friend remonstrated with him for allowing such domes¬ 
tic relations he replied: “ It doesn’t hurt me, and seems 
to do her lots of good.”—When such attacks are made we 
usually ignore them altogether, the thing of all others 
most annoying to the assailants. In the present case we 
might pursue the same course were not our contributor, 
Mr. Henderson, attacked instead of ourselves. The ai ti¬ 
de in question says that Mr. Henderson “is making a 
great blow about his ‘Pearl Millet.’ He has written 
marvellous accounts of its wonderful productiveness and 
richness, and is selling seed in fancy paper packages at 
$1.60 per pound. * * * The Pearl Millet is nothing 
in the" world hut the well-known ‘ Cat-tail Millet.’ * * * 
Any quantity of the seed can be bought of-, Atlanta, 
for 20 cents a pound, something of a saving over $1.60 a 
pound. This Millet can be cut four or five times a year. 
The writer has raised it for several years, having a small 
patch in drill for cutting green for cattle. Now Mr. Hen¬ 
derson i>? making a good thing out of it. He has by sharp 
management, big blowing, and judicious advertising, 
gotten up a sensation and a big run on it. It. is an old 
thing-under a new name. It. is this sort of clap-trap busi¬ 
ness that, does harm to agriculture. Pearl Millet is treated 
by Mr. Henderson as a new forage plant when it is an old 
one. * * * We hope our exchanges will explain this 
and all such similar frauds, that people may not he de¬ 
luded. The Cat-tail Millet is a fair forage plant, and every 
farmer should have a patch for green soiling. But let no 
one be simple enough to pay Mr. Henderson his extrava¬ 
gant fancy price for seed under a fancy, spurious name, 
when the same tiling under its proper name can be bought 
for one-sixth the price.”—This is the “Planter and 
Granger’s ” rather rambling and incoherent indictment 
against Mr. Henderson. It is a well known rule,/also in 
uno, /also in omnibus— false in one, false in all. We can 
test the strength of the indictment by examining a single 
clause. This writer says: “Pearl Millet is treated by 
Mr. Henderson as a new forage plant when it is an old 
one.”—Let. ns see about this. Mr. Henderson’s first pub¬ 
lication concerning this plant appeared in the American 
Agriculturist in Nov., 1878, p. 420. His article begins: 
“Pearl Millet has been cultivated for some years as a 
forage plant in some of the Southern States, as ‘ African 
Cane,’ ‘Egyptian Millet,’ ‘Japan Millet,’ and in some 
places as ‘ Horse Millet;’ but little was known of it at the 
north before l ist year.”—Does this look like treating it 
as a “ new forage plant ? ”—Were it worth the while, we 
could show the falsity of other statements. The article 
charges that Mr. Henderson offers the seed under a 
“spurious name.”—We are interested in that charge, for 
so far as we are aware, we were the first to publish the 
name “Pearl Millet.” In January, 1878, we gave an en¬ 
graving and description of the plant; we had five names 
by which the plant was known in different localities from 
which to choose, three were geographical names, which 
are also applied to other plants, and thus confuse ; ono 
was “ Horse,” of no special fitness, and the other “Pearl,” 
having reference to the appearance of the seed, and that 
