138 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST. 
[May, 
who cut and slash to do a great day’s work. 
In doing up the fleece, the inner side of the 
wool must he out, and there must be no con¬ 
cealed dirt within. The shrewd wool buyer bur¬ 
ies his nose in the snowy fleece,like a dog after 
game, and external purity will not serve to con¬ 
ceal dishonesty and filth lurking within. Be¬ 
fore the sheep are turned away they receive the 
owner’s mark upon the side. Use a mixture of 
spirits turpentine, linseed oil, and lampblack. 
Turpentine facilitates the drying, but used in 
excess, the mark washes off too easily. The tar 
bucket must be on hand, and a dab on the nose 
is supposed to be a sovereign remedy to pre¬ 
vent all future ailments. With fine wool sheep 
which lamb in May, docking and castrating the 
lambs may be performed at the time of shearing, 
but if the lambs are earlier it may be best done 
while the weather is cool. They suffer less 
while they are small and there are no flies to 
attack the wounds. The tail should be cut off 
at the first joint, leaving the skin long enough 
to cover the stump. 
Notes on the April Agriculturist. 
BY A WESTERN FARMER. 
“ Value of Blood in Animals." —Yes. I believe in 
blood-in/ofe, even, as well as in cattle, pigs, or poul¬ 
try; and breeders of stock will never get any thing 
right, and certain , until they pay attention to it. 
But what do yon mean, Mr. Editor, when yon say, 
“ Our breeders of thoroughbred cattle, of all the 
improved breeds, commit a great error in holding 
their bull calves at so high a price as to prevent 
sales, and finally, as is often done, making stags of 
them rather than sell them at a low price. If they 
would even give away the bull calves which they 
do not wish to keep, and which are not worth a 
very high price, on condition, &c. ” A total mistake, 
Mr. Editor. Cost nothing, worth nothing. If a 
man can see no better quality in my bulls and cows, 
which cost me two, three, or five hundred dollars a 
piece, than in his own dirty scrubs, and dunghills, 
worth twenty, he is not fit to have one of them. 
I’ve tried all this thing for thirty years, or more, 
and know just what it amounts to. No Sir; my ex¬ 
perience is—and I am not called a stingy man, 
either—I’ll make meat of a calf, pig, sheep, chick¬ 
en, goose, duck, turkey, or pigeon, before I’ll give 
the first hair, or feather of either to one of those 
unappreciative non-improvers, who will insist upon 
it, that, unless he can beg, borrow, or more likely, 
steal the services of my male thoroughbred things, 
his own plebeian wretches are as good, or a little 
better than mine. Just practice on your own ad¬ 
vice a year or two, and if you don’t change your 
mind, I’ll say that myself, and not you are mistaken. 
ation of losing their fruit is more than they are 
worth. They are all hard to transplant, successful¬ 
ly. The American Chestnut is a princely tree in 
size and appearance, and we have scarcely one more 
useful. The beech is refractory to transplant; and 
the birch capricious in its choice of soils. A cool 
moist soil suits it best; White Willows grow every 
where, and Horse Chestnuts thrive in any tolerable 
soil,- and are easy to transplant and live. 
Advertisement—“Something New." —“Dr. Brown’s 
patent baby tending machine!” “ Saves from $100 
to $300 peryear in any family where there is a baby!” 
Well; that will do—for an “Advertisement.” Now, 
Dr. Brown, in that “ saving ” of $100 to $300 you 
tell a tough story! I know scores of families 
counting their children by the dozen, hardy as coons, 
and saucy as chip-monks, whose parents were 
never worth three hundred dollars, and never will 
be. Tough, stout, athletic youngsters—boys, and 
girls, as likely to be “somebody” in the world some 
day or other, as any body’s children—and no “pa¬ 
tent’’about them either. A tree “gum” split in 
two, or ten feet of rough boards box shaped, with 
a hewed rocker under each end, and your “baby,” 
after a full draft of a healthy mother’s milk, is equip¬ 
ped in all its wants. Folks that don’t know any 
better than to raise children at three hundred dol¬ 
lars apiece for a “ baby jumper,” may buy your ma¬ 
chine. We don’t do it in our country. Josh. 
‘ ‘ Patent Office — Agricultural Department. ’ ’—A hum¬ 
bug—and nothing else! as it has been heretofore, 
conducted. Abolish the thing at once, or put a 
sensible, honest, agricultural man at the head of it, 
instead of the charlatans who have occupied it pret¬ 
ty much ever since it was established. Its books 
have been—trash; its seeds, nine out of ten—worth¬ 
less. A Congressman’s “ tub,” to his constituent 
“ whale.’J I could talk an hour about it to prove 
my assertions, were it necessary to establish the 
proof. I hope Congress will not vote another dol¬ 
lar to support it, unless the whole thing is thor¬ 
oughly reorganized. 
“ Hints on Tobacco Culture." —Folks willcHew and 
smoke and snuff—talk as much as you please of 
their immorality, unwholesomeness, and expense... 
As for the nastiness of the habit, let those whom it 
troubles, settle it. At all events, tobacco is used as 
much as ever, and probably will be so long as the 
users can get the means to pay for it. Such, then, 
being the fact, let those whp grow the weed, pro¬ 
duce the best article, and at the cheapest rate. 
“ Where did it Come from? —A most suggestive 
article. A chapter occupying half your paper might 
be written on it, and not half exhausted. Some 
years ago, a certain Doctor, editor of one of our agri¬ 
cultural papers, and late an editor of a Georgia pa¬ 
per of like character, used to hold, that according to 
the system—or rather, no system—of our American 
agriculture, our soils were ‘ all going to pot.’ The 
fact is, our soils, where they have been thirty, or 
forty years under intelligent cultivation, are grow¬ 
ing bett-erT But it is too long a story, and if I 
once go into it, I shall not know where to stop. 
Any thinking man can cypher out the reasons to 
support any asserted/«e<. 
“ Chester County Pigs."— A good breed of large 
hogs, no doubt. But why “ Chester” County? I 
assert, and ask for proof to the contrary, that they 
are nothing but a composite style, not breed of hogs, 
made up of Leicester, Yorkshire, and every other 
sort of stout, good-looking white hogs that the 
breeders of them fancied as the material to make 
up the thing they choose to call “ Chester County.” 
Show me the pedigrees, accurately traced back to 
the originals, and then we’ll talk further about it. 
I have seen the predominating characteristics of at 
least three or four good breeds of pig in the “Ches¬ 
ter’s some more, some less, but not uniform, 
either in the whole breed, or in a single litter. 
When I see half a dozen so-called thorough bred 
bows breeding from one boar a lot of pigs looking 
as much alike throughout as so many white kid¬ 
ney beans, I’ll believe in the purity of their blood— 
and not before.... 
“ Six best Shade Trees (Deciduous ).”—You have 
not got the “ six best,” Mr. Editor. The “ White 
Elm ” is good—the best of any—grand, thrifty, and 
enduring. The sugar maple is good, but too sym¬ 
metrical, and formal, for picturesque effect. Yet I 
would have it, in moderate numbers. The several 
varieties of white, red, and other soft maples are 
better. They are hardy, thrifty, and throw, and 
dash, and wave their spray around with a freedom 
and grace that the sugar maple knows nothing 
about. I would have at least three of these soft 
to one of the sugar. As to the “ oaks ”—among 
shade or lawn trees they are like our American In¬ 
dians when allied to civilization. The association 
kills them. The oaks, compared with most other 
of our native forest trees, are not hardy. They are 
difficult to transplant, and live. They grow com¬ 
paratively slow, when they grow at all. They leaf 
out late, and have little beauty in their autumnal 
garniture, which I think a great merit in all shade 
trees. Still, a few well selected oaks, scattered in 
with other trees, look well, for variety; but I 
would recommend no one to plant a row of them. 
The “majesty, and grandeur ” of a full grown white 
oak I concede; but as for the timber, they are bet¬ 
ter grown in a forest. I’ve grown thousands of 
them, and have them now, from the cane-sized sap¬ 
ling to those fit for the keel of a ship. My expe¬ 
rience is: plant them very sparingly as shade trees. 
The “ Linden”—good—either the European, (“Tilia 
Europaf) or the American “Bass wood.” They are 
beautiful, grand, and stately; early to leaf, and 
late to fall; easy to transplant, and thrifty to grow. 
The “white ash” is a noble tree, but too late in 
leafing out, and too early to shed in the fall. Still, 
for a variety, I would have a few, only. Like the 
oak, a valuable timber tree, and better in the woods 
than elsewhere. The “Cucumber” is a fine tree— 
when yon can get it—but it is difficult to grow, and 
if in a windy position, very apt to grow one-sided. 
Yet, one, or two for variety are well enough. Bet¬ 
ter fill up your other varieties with Birch, Willow, 
and Horse Chestnuts. The Tulip, or white-wood is 
a noble tree, of good symmetry, but a hard one to 
transplant and live, unless reared in the nursery. 
I never yet saw an avenue, or row of them, even in 
a white-wood country. Another thing: they will 
thrive only in a free, well drained soil. “ Button- 
woods” are all diseased, and have been throughout 
the United States for the past thirty years. I know 
of but one truly healthy one within miles of my 
home, and I have many on my own grounds—cut¬ 
ting them away every now and then for the reason 
of their diseased unsightliness. As to the nut- 
bearing trees you name, be sure they will be pro¬ 
tected from the ravages of “ the boys,” or the vex¬ 
Concentrated Manures, or Articles sold as 
Such. 
We received just too late for our April issue, an 
article from Dr. Evan Pugh, President of the Agri¬ 
cultural College of Penn., giving the results of 
the analysis of several artificial manures. The 
analyses were made under his own direction, and 
all the samples except those marked in the table A, 
K, and L, were obtained by a responsible member 
of the Philadelphia Agricultural Society, from the 
respective manufacturers of each, or their agents, 
without their knowing for what purpose they were 
procured. Mr. Lawes sent Dr. Pugh a tun of his su¬ 
perphosphate (A), and half a tun of his sulphate of 
ammonia manure (K), and from these the samples 
analyzed were derived. We are obliged to condense 
Dr. Pugh’s communication somewhat; the follow¬ 
ing is the main substance of it. We do not fully 
endorse all the estimates, but let the Doctor give 
his own views: 
ESTIMATION OF THE VALUE OF MANURES, ETC. 
Manures are mainly valuable for the phosphoric 
acid, nitrogen and potash they contain. Sulphuric 
acid is much less valuable, and other constituents 
may be neglected [in high priced fertilizers]. All 
these substanses are much more valuable when in 
combinations soluble in water, than when in insol¬ 
uble combination. Thus: potash in wood ashes, 
is more valuable than in powdered glass. Phos¬ 
phoric acid, in superphosphates, is more valuable 
than in raw or burned bones. Nitrogenis more val¬ 
uable in a salt of ammonia than in leather or horn. 
It is easy to fix a price upon all these substances 
by seeing at what price substances, containing 
known quantities of them, can be purchased in the 
market. We thus find the values of 
Phosphoric acid, insoluble (as ii 
burned bone phosphates.) 
Phosphoric acid in combinations, soluble it 
water (as in superphosphates). 
Nitrogen in combinations easily soluble. 
Sulphuric acid. 
Different agricultural chemists have assigned 
values varying slightly from the above,* which, 
with the exception of the last, were adopted by 
Prof. Johnson, of Yale College, in his able report 
to the Connecticut State Agricultural Society.! 
In the statement of the analyses, the figures in the 
principal horizontal lines indicate the percentage 
composition or number of pounds of each ingredi¬ 
ent in 100 pounds, and immediately below each is 
its market price. In estimating the selling price, 
the tun is regarded as 2000 pounds. Thus : in 100 
pounds of Lawes’ superphosphate (A), 13.77 lbs. i 
