54r 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST, 
[February, 
and distribute it in small heaps on the land 
where it is to be used during the next season. 
The practice of carting manure directly to the 
field where it is to be used is becoming more 
and more common and spreading it broadcast, 
to be plowed under or harrowed in in the spring. 
The efforts of agricultural chemists and agricul¬ 
tural writers during the first fifteen or twenty 
years of the existence of the science of agricultu¬ 
ral chemistry,were devoted chiefly to an endeavor 
to discourage this latter practice. They insisted 
that the loss by evaporation was so great that 
the farmer could hope for only a tithe of the 
benefit t#>be derived from a more careful use of 
his fertilizers. During the past ten years, how¬ 
ever, agricultural WTiters have had their eyes 
opened to the fact that this opinion with regard 
to loss by evaporation was probably wrong. 
The very careful experiments made by Dr. 
Voelcker at the Royal Agricultural College at 
Cirencester in England, prove clearly that the 
very best place in which manure can be put, 
both to prevent loss and to insure the even dis¬ 
tribution of its soluble and fertilizing parts among 
the particles of the soil, is on the surface of 
the field where it is to be used, spread as evenly 
as possible, and without regard to loss by evap¬ 
oration, it being a fact that there are very few 
volatile substances developed in the decomposi¬ 
tion of manure, except w T hen it is thrown together 
in such masses that its decay is attended with 
the evolution of sensible heat. Of course, it 
would be folly to apply manure in this way on 
lands which slope so rapidly as to suffer se¬ 
riously from surface washings, or on fields so 
situated that they receive surface wash from 
other lauds lying above and adjacent to them. 
The best receptacle for manure, until it can be 
hauled out and spread as recommended, is a 
cellar directly under the animals; the next best, 
a well-covered shed behind them; the next, a 
well-built heap so situated as to receive no water 
except the actual rain fall upon it. Almost the 
worst of all is a barn-yard where the manure is 
being constantly turned over and disturbed by 
the tread of cattle, exposing freshly decom¬ 
posed parts to loss by evaporation; and the 
very worst of all is under the drip of a bam 
roof, especially where there is a conveniently 
arranged gutter to carry into the highway, or on 
to a neighbor’s field, or even upon one place on 
our own fields, the brown liquor which con¬ 
tains the most valuable constituents of the heap. 
Wisconsin Cattle Stables. 
A correspondent of the American Agricultu¬ 
rist, Mr. G. B. Gray, of Green Lake Coun¬ 
ty, Wisconsin, sends us a drawing and de- 
boards. The dimensions, or essential points, are 
given on the sketch ; there need be no division 
between them, the cross board nailed on the top 
to support the front being sufficient. A feed box 
for bran or meal is shown by the dotted lines in 
the front view, figure 1. I claim the method of 
tying as peculiar, and not patented that I know 
of. This I have found not only convenient, 
Fig. 1.— WISCONSIN COW STABLE. 
scription of the mangers in his cow stable, 
showing also his method of tying. The 
peculiar advantage of the plan is that no di¬ 
visions between the stalls are needed, and it 
is impossible for cattle to throw the fodder 
out of the manger. Ho writes as follows: 
“ I send you a plan of mangers, such as we are 
using here. They aro made of common inch 
Fig. 2 .— MANGER SEEN FROM ABOVE. 
cheap and secure, but comfortable for the cat¬ 
tle. It requires about eight feet of five-eighths 
inch rope. The bight of the rope makes a noose 
by having a hard knot on one side and a loose 
knot on the other; the hard knot is pulled 
through the loose one, so as to enlarge the 
noose, which is put over the cow’s horns, the 
hard knot drawn back outside, the loose one 
pulled tight, and the cow is last. No matter 
how much one cow may be disposed to hook her 
neighbor, she cannot do it; at the same time her 
head is free, and she can feed and lie down com¬ 
fortably. Instead of the noose, a leather strap 
or a chain with a strap to fasten to a neck-strap 
would be better, but a little more expensive. 
“ Figure 1 exhibits a view of the manger from 
the rear of the stable. Figure 2 is a view drawn to 
the same scale representing the mangers as seen 
from the floor above looking directly down.” 
- — --- * -- 
High Farming. 
American agricultural writers have, perhaps, 
been too chary of their discussions on the sub¬ 
ject of High-farming. While it is well to present 
to country readers chiefly such matters as are 
of the most vital daily interest to them, we 
think that it is time that a decided reform in 
this direction were instituted, and we propose 
to make good our opinion by laying before the 
readers of the' Agriculturist some of the facts 
about what is known as “ High-farming,” and 
some of the reasons why it should be the 
goal toward which all farmers should aim. 
High-farming is always good farming, but 
good fanning may exist without being high- 
farming. The idea on which high-farming is 
based is, that every dollar a farmer has invested 
in his business, whether it is in land, imple¬ 
ments, soil-improvements, live stock, or facilities 
for some special cultivation, should be made to 
produce the largest possible yearly income, 
both in the form of money received and in the 
increased value of all stock in 
trade. As an clement of its suc¬ 
cess it must include a compre¬ 
hensive and carefully detailed 
system, which allows no single 
dollar’s worth of produce or of 
opportunities to fail to produce 
the largest result. This is all 
that the expression “ high-farm¬ 
ing” really comprises; and truly 
there is no item in the specifica¬ 
tion which can be objected to 
by any farmer in the land. The extent to 
which any individual may apply this criterion 
to his own business must depend almost entirely 
on his location, his capital, and his circum¬ 
stances. A farmer in North-western Missouri 
lacks many of the advantages which only a 
large and near market can give, and which are 
necessary, to enable him to reap the largest re¬ 
turns from his business. The tenant of a hired 
farm, or the occupant of a new one, will un¬ 
doubtedly find himself deprived of a majority 
of those conveniences for the management of 
his operations, which would be necessary to 
enable him to adopt the system of high-farming 
in its completeness. And almost all of us, in 
this country, lack the capital which is the mo¬ 
tive-power of all high-farming. 
Having suggested what we be¬ 
lieve high-farming to be, let us 
now state what we are quite 
sure that it is not. It is not the 
sort of cultivation and manage¬ 
ment that is usually adopted by 
gentlemen of wealth, who retire 
from business in the city and go to the country to 
take up farming as an amusement. These men, 
too frequently with little knowledge of farm¬ 
ing, but with a superabundant capital, com¬ 
mence their improvements by the construction 
of very expensive and needlessly elegant farm 
buildings, by the laying out of a good part of 
their grounds in an ornamental manner, by the 
purchase of very expensive but not very judi¬ 
ciously selected live stock, by the employment of 
managers and laborers who are either not suf¬ 
ficiently skillful, or not sufficiently industrious 
to be well suited for their work, and by the pur¬ 
chase of a general assortment of improved im¬ 
plements, while they lack either the lmowledgo 
or the firmness to compel their managers to keep 
them in constant and profitable use. 
Such men generally flatter themselves that 
they are “ high-farmers,” and that they are con¬ 
ferring a great benefit upon the country, or at 
least upon their own neighborhood, by setting 
an example of improvement. In our opinion, 
they are doing nothing of the kind; and while 
we have no sympathy with the sneers that old- 
fashioned people are disposed to bestow upon 
real improvements, we heartily concur with 
them in their opinion concerning this class of 
men. If a man has a large fortune, it is, of 
course, nobody’s business but his own how much 
of it he spends in agricultural experiments, fool- 
islily or otherwise; but he goes a little too far 
when he expects sensible, practical men to ac¬ 
cept his conduct as an example for themselves. 
High-farming requires, at least, three things: 
1st. A perfect soil. 2d. Buildings and imple¬ 
ments exactly adapted to their uses. 3d. Good 
means for disposing of the soil’s products. 
The soil should be, first of all, well drained, 
either naturally or artificial!}', it matters not 
which. No crop should find its roots checked 
in their downward passage in search of mois¬ 
ture or nutriment by a subsoil which too much 
■water makes impenetrable by them. Nor should 
the rapidity of their growth during the growing 
season be lessened by the chilling influence of 
the evaporation of water from the surface 
of the land. Furthermore, when the time 
comes to plow, to plant, to harrow, to cultivate, 
to hoe, or to harvest, the farmer should never bo 
prevented for more than one or two days after 
the heaviest storm from performing the work be¬ 
cause the land is too wet for it. If he is so pre¬ 
vented, the whole plan of his season’s -work is 
thrown out of gear; and he not only fails to 
make a profitable use of the days immediately 
succeeding the storm, but work which should 
then be done interferes with other work which 
should be done on subsequent days, and it re¬ 
quires more time in the doing of it. For in¬ 
stance; take the case of the first hoeing of corn. 
As soon as it is in condition for this treatment, 
it should receive it; if the land be undrained, it 
not uufrequently happens that a heavy fall of 
