1869. ] 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST. 
207 
effects on his health and ability to work. In order to an¬ 
swer those questions we have looked up all the analyses of 
these two grains that we can find, and after all discover 
no two that can he compared. Chemists who have ana¬ 
lyzed oats, instead of taking them as they are used, grains 
and hulls together, took the pains to separate them, thus 
making their work nearly valueless to practical men. 
However, the value of this grain varies exceedingly ac¬ 
cording as it is light or heavy, and it would be a very 
complete series of analyses that would really be useful. 
In common experience, corn is more heating and fatten¬ 
ing than oats, and requires more care in feeding to 
horses. We know that horses are capable of enduring 
great fatigue when fed alone upon corn in the ear ; that 
they will bear the steady hard labor of the farm, fed with 
cut hay and Indian meal, and that many horses are more 
inclined to sweat when fed in this way than when fed 
dry hay and oats. We think horses used for fast work 
or much on the road do decidedly better on oats in warm 
weather, and in cold weather too, if they are liable to be 
driven so as to sweat much. For all moderate labor 
we prefer corn meal, and if the horse has not much to 
do we practise light feeding, using one-third linseed 
meal. Horses are thus kept in good order very econom¬ 
ically, and feel well. Herbert says two quarts of old 
corn may be fed sometimes instead of three of oats, and 
that new corn should never be fed to a horse. 
Bee Notes.— By M. Quinby. 
As June is the swarming month, and as the extent of 
swarming can now be controlled, it is proper for some 
bee keepers at least to decide which they will have—an 
increase of colonies exclusively, surplus honey solely, or 
a moderate quantity of both. Bees that are multiplied 
to the utmost ought not to be expected to store up sur¬ 
plus honey, any more than the lied that produces the 
greatest possible number of chickens can furnish a 
great number of eggs. It is well to know that when we 
have the movable combs, we can take our choice, if the 
flowers yield honey at all. If it be decided that the bees 
shall devote all their energies to storing box honey, and 
give off no swarms, first, if not already done, find the 
queen and clip one wing. Place in front of the hive the 
yard heretofore described, to prevent her leaving ; then 
place in dose contact with the combs of the hive,- boxes 
to hold at least 150 lbs. All queen cells, preparatory to 
swarming, must be removed once a week. The boxes 
should be prepared with guide comb, attached as near 
the entrance as practicable. If it be wished to do a 
little at both—increasing the stock and storing surplus 
honey—the management is similar. I would clip the wing 
of the queen in any case, and keep oft' queen cells until 
the bees are well started in the boxes, and if it has been 
decided to have only one swarm, it is well to have it 
strong. Nothing is lost by waiting until the season is 
well advanced, if there is only room for all to work in 
the boxes. If there are bees enough for two'good colo¬ 
nies at the time of division, they may be expected to finish 
up any number of boxes half full, in ordinary seasons. 
When the time arrives for making two of the one stock, 
take the middle of the day for it, as it is the best time. 
Procure an empty hive, as near like the old one as pos¬ 
sible. Move the old hive one foot to one side of the old 
stand, set the empty one the same distance the other 
side, take out half the frames, open the full hive, and 
transfer half the contents—combs, bees, and boxes—to the 
other, fill out with empty frames and boxes, close the 
hives, and stand at one side to see the returning bees 
enter. If one is getting the most, move it further away 
from the old stand, until the other seems more like home. 
If at last one has much the most, take out a comb or 
two, and give to the weaker one. This management will 
do when colonies are to be multiplied exclusively, un¬ 
less they are divided about the time they would be 
strong enough to go into the boxes. When divided 
as here recommended, one part of the original colony, 
of course, will be without a queen. At the time of oper¬ 
ating, if any cells containing young queens are discover¬ 
ed, try to see into which part the old queen goes, and 
remove all from that division; leave only one in the 
other to hatch, unless the supernumeraries are wanted 
somewhere else. Should there be no such cells, two days 
afterward you will find several commenced in the hive 
without the old queen. If we wish to multiply bees to 
the utmost, we must bear in mind that there is loss every 
hour that a colony with combs is without a laying queen. 
An arrangement to provide laying queens for all these 
occasions is a good investment. In rearing queens arti¬ 
ficially, the best success is attained by selecting brood 
not more than three days from the egg, and in combs 
that are new. If obliged to take that, which is old and 
tough, cut off the ends of the cells with a very sharp 
knife, leaving them not over one,fourth of an inch in 
depth, and the lower edge still less. Use not less than 
three combs, and put the brood in the middle one, TheBe 
combs may be 0 inches square, or of full size for hives. 
Put in honey to last three days. When all is ready, get 
a quart or less of bees—young ones, that have never been 
out of the hive, if possible. (When most of the old ones 
are out at work in the middle of the day is a good time 
to obtain them). Shut them up for 48 hours, in a dark 
place, moderately cool. Let them out just at evening. 
On the 10th day some of the queens may hatch. Very 
often several cells are built. If you want to iqalte the 
most of them, open the box or hive, whichever it may 
be, and carefully cut out all but one. One of these may 
be inserted into the combs instead of brood, for other 
nuclei—-a gain of ten days in time. After the queen 
hatches, if fair weather, she may be expected to lay in 
eight or ten days, when she may be introduced. 
The TJse and Abuse of Barn-yards. 
There is no doubt that all farm animals are 
benefited by exercise in the open air, and by 
basking in the warm sun on pleasant winter 
days. Therefore, every barn should have con¬ 
nected with it dry, pleasant, and well-sheltered 
yards; and the use of barn-yards ought to-be 
confined pretty nearly to this single purpose. 
When the barn-yard is made to serve as a 
feeding rack and as a manure cellar, the use de¬ 
generates into an abuse. Probably three-fourths 
of the cattle and sheep in the United States, or 
at least of those which are sheltered in any way, 
are fed mainly in open racks in the barn-yard; 
and on farms where corn is grown, bundles of 
stalks are thrown to them, and they are allowed 
to eat the leaves and the softer tops—the main 
body of the stalk, which, under proper use, is a 
valuable fodder, being trampled under foot and 
mixed with the manure. Stalks thus treated 
require a good part of the ensuing summer to 
bring them to a proper condition for application 
to the land. Of the hay thrown into the racks, 
the best part is eaten and the coarser parts 
wasted. It being the custom to feed in this way 
during the coldest and stormiest weather, cattle 
are obliged to stand exposed out of doors while 
consuming their fodder, and generally while 
chewing the cud. Thus, not only is fully one- 
half of the product of the field practically 
wasted, but that which is consumed is expended 
largely in making up for the loss of heat which 
the animal necessarily undergoes under such 
exposure. In the better farmed counties of 
Pennsylvania, where enormous stone barns are 
bursting with the produce of rich acres, and 
where the barn-vards are usually enclosed by 
high, cemented stone walls, it is not unusual to 
find, towards spring, a deposit five or six feet 
deep, over which the stock are constantly tram¬ 
pling, and which contains certainly more than 
one-half of the' valuable fodder that has been 
wastefully thrown out for them to consume. 
These farmers boast of the immense quantities 
of manure that they manufacture and apply 
yearly, and certainly the results of the applica¬ 
tion are good. At the same time, the manure 
is very generally, even for use in the succeeding 
autumn, too coarse to be neatly spread over the 
soil; and its cost, considering the expensive 
material of which it is made, must reach an 
amount which, if it could be reduced to dollars 
and cents, would appall the farmers who use it. 
Probably even the best farms where this prac¬ 
tice prevails would be able to winter from fifty 
to one hundred per cent more stock, if every 
thing that is raised were simply cut and care¬ 
fully fed in mangers in the barn; while the re¬ 
sulting manure would be so much shorter, and 
ready for use so much earlier, that the system of 
farming might almost be revolutionized. If, in 
addition to cutting, the forage were also 
steamed, the result would be even better. But 
assuming as a basis that, by cutting alone, fifty 
per cent of the fodder would be saved, we see 
that by a slight expenditure of labor—for with 
the use of a horse-power cutter, the labor would 
be very slight—the income derived from the use 
of forage crops would be fully doubled, and 
this with no appreciable addition to the interest 
on capital or to the cost of labor. Furthermore, 
the condition of the stock, the vigor and thrift 
of their progeny, the quantity and richness of 
milk, and the quality and quantity of wool, 
would be greater, with a smaller expenditure of 
material. There are many farmers who cannot, 
of course, for the want of suitable buildings, 
and from the real or supposed inability to em¬ 
ploy sufficient help, adopt this process of cutting 
food, or even of feeding under cover; but we 
suggest to sucb, that it would be an advantage to 
be able to do this, and that its accomplishment 
should be one of the objects at which they aim. 
There is a widely prevalent notion that ani¬ 
mals are rendered hardier and more healthy by 
exposure, b} r having to “ rough it.” This is 
nonsense, as will be readily acknowledged by 
any man who will compare the stunted animals 
of the colder regions of New England, whose 
principal shelter in winter is often the lee-side 
of a fodder stack, or a soft bed under a snow¬ 
bank, with the well-housed and groomed ani¬ 
mals of any well-managed dairy farm. These 
latter keep in better condition, are much less 
subject to pneumonia, garget, and abortion, pro¬ 
duce richer milk and finer calves, make more and 
better beef, and are, in all respects, nearer to the 
type which every farmer should desire to attain. 
mi t — n c nn I n 
Butter Making.—How to Get a High 
Price. 
A very brief and correct solution may be 
given to the problem, “How to get a high 
price.” It is, make very superior butter, and 
consign it to very good parties in New York, or 
other equally good market. Everybody who 
makes butter wants to get a high price. The 
highest prices, like high prizes in a lottery, fall 
to very few people; but, unlike them, are at¬ 
tainable by many. Were the quantity of the 
best qualities of butter to be ten times as great 
as it is, the price would hardly be affected. 
Great care, discrimination, and the neatest and 
most skillful manipulation, the best salt, the 
best packing, and lastly, the best cows, all com¬ 
bined, will not always produce the very best but¬ 
ter, or that which will bring a high price. There 
are natural butter regions in this country, and 
others in which the best butter is neither an ar¬ 
tificial nor a natural product. The best dairy 
women of the favored districts utterly fail upon 
the others, and it has been repeatedly proved 
that the conditions for making good butter 
are beyond the control of the farmers, with 
the knowledge we now have. Prevailing habits 
of dairy folks in some parts of the country 
capable of producing most excellent butter 
damage this product. Overworking , alluded to 
in the April number, is a not uncommon fault. 
Poor salt spoils much butter. There is no better 
salt in the world than that which may be made 
at Syracuse, N. Y. Professor Johnson says of 
it (See American Agricultural Annual, 1868): 
“The purest salt made in this or any country, 
that the writer is acquainted with, came some 
years ago from Syracuse, N. Y., when the in¬ 
genious processes of Dr. Goessmann were then 
employed. If, as we suppose, the same proc¬ 
esses are in use now, the ‘ Onondaga Factory 
Filled Salt’ must take rank second to none,” etc. 
Nevertheless, there is a lack of uniformity in 
