1875 .] 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST. 
131 
bo to a person with whom farming is only a second¬ 
ary occupation. 
Ilere is another letter, of a sort to set one think¬ 
ing. A young man in New York writes : “I have, 
and always have had, a strong desire to bo a farmer, 
but not having had a practical experience, can not 
myself judge what is best for me to do. I am 
engaged here as clerk, am healthy hut not strong, 
age twenty-five, brought up here and in my present 
position, and have never done any hard physical 
labor. Would you think that under these circum¬ 
stances I could succeed ? Please advise what you 
would do in my case. What is a farm in complete 
working order worth in the New England States ; 
and what is the average return on amount invested ? 
Which is the best place to go to, the New England 
States, or the West?” 
Twenty years ago I should have gone to see this 
young man ; 1 should have taken him by the hand, 
and should have advised him, without hesitation, 
to give up his stupid and uninteresting life of a 
clerk, and “ to go out into the free fields and be a 
man.” Iam twenty years older now than I was 
then, and I decline to take any such responsibility. 
On general principles, I should say that a man who 
has grown into a good position as a clerk, at the 
time he is twenty-five years old; who, though 
healthy, is not strong ; and who has not done any 
hard physical labor in all his life, should be ex¬ 
tremely cautious how he exchanges his situation 
for one where strength afid experience, and the 
ability to labor with the hands arc most important. 
But when it comes to his next proposition, I have 
no hesitation, for if I were twenty-five years of 
age, and a clerk in a store in New York, 1 should 
leave and strike for the country as soon as I could 
draw my weeks’ salary. I might regret it, and 
probably I often should, for there come dull times, 
aud dead chickens, and aborting cows, to the best 
of us ; but, -with all my knowledge of these things, 
I do not hesitate to say that given twenty-five 
years of age and an opportunity, I should go to 
farming, instanter, and take my chances. 
While I am prepared to give this young man no 
absolute advice, I will advise him with an “if ” to 
his heart’s content. If he is “bound to be a farm¬ 
er,” (and on this point he must make up his own 
mind), there is but one prudent course for him to 
pursue ; that is, to scrape together all the money he 
can, and put it in a good saving’s bank, anjl say 
good-by to it for at least two years, and then start 
for a good farming region at the East, (I should go 
to Delaware or Chester county, Pa.), offering his 
services for board alone if necessary, to the best 
farmer he can get to take them, and there stick, 
without regard to discomfort and annoyance, 
until he has worked his way into that farmer’s 
respect and confidence, and has learned all he can 
teach him, and all beside that an active and intelli¬ 
gent and educated mind can gather from observa¬ 
tion. He should, at any sacrifice, keep accounts 
and memoranda of everything going on on the 
farm, until he has familiarized himself with all the 
details of his business. Such conduct, and such a 
way of taking hold of his work, is sure to gain 
the confidence and interest of his employer, and 
the chances are a hundred to one that he will find 
his life and associations cheerful and happy. 
After two years of such work and preparation, 
he will be ready to buy or to hire a farm, and to set 
up on his own account, without great risk of losing 
money. If he went at it without a preparation, it 
would not be a risk at all, it would be a certainty. 
Farming can not be learned except by experience ; 
neither can strength he acquired except by exer¬ 
cise ; nor can the habit of hard labor be drummed 
into the human frame, save by a process that takes 
time; and so long as one can secure food and 
clothing and shelter, if he gets these valuable 
requisitions, he gets capitally well paid for two 
years of hard and persistent work. It would be 
safe to say that any young man of intelligence, 
who will go through such a course as is here laid 
down, is morally certain to succeed when he finally 
takes up farming on his own account; but without 
this preparation, and this trial, it would be ex¬ 
tremely unpromising for any one to adopt the 
profession with the hope of reaping profit from it. 
Concerning the last three questions asked, it is not 
safe to say much. It now looks as though the 
thickly settled regions at the East were as promis¬ 
ing a field as any other for intelligent farming. 
The question of the deep setting of milk for 
butter, is awakening a good deal of interest. My 
old criticiser, Mr. Eastburn Reeder, remains uncon¬ 
vinced, and is having a lively discussion on the 
subject with Mr. Hardin, of Louisville. 
I get frequent letters on the subject, which throw 
further light tending to the solution of the ques¬ 
tion. J. II. Beattie, Argyle, N. Y., says: “Last 
spring I made several deep cans, 8 inches by 20 
inches, in which I strained my milk, and set it in 
cold water until ihe animal heat was out. Twenty- 
four hours after straining, I skimmed it; let it 
stand twenty-four hours, and skimmed it again. In 
both skimmings I have taken off five inches of 
cream, at the best. The average was four inches. 
I am highly pleased with the system ; it enables 
me to make much more butter, and a great deal 
better. Hot weather has no effect on the can. 
How much salt should be used to the pound of 
butter ?’’-—For immediate use, i oz. to i oz. per 
lb.; for packing, I oz. to 1 oz. per lb.—with well- 
worked butter the smaller quantities are preferable. 
F. Folger, Fort Miller, N. Y., says: “I have 
adopted your plan of setting milk in deep cans the 
past season, and, from five cows, am sure I have 
made 100 pounds more butter, than I could have 
made by the use of the common pans, under the 
most favorable circumstances.” 
H. B. Gurler, De Kalb, Ill., made the following 
experiments, with cans 8 inches by 19 inches, and 
with common shallow pans : “ May 16th, it took of 
milk set in deep cans, 30 lbs. for 1 lb. of butter, set 
in shallow pans, 29 5 /ia lbs. for 1 lb. of butter, 21 
per cent more milk being required in the cans than 
in the pans. May 26tli, 1873, it took 24.8 lbs. of 
milk in the cans, and 24 lbs. in pans to make 1 lb. 
of butter,—a difference of 31 per cent, in favor of 
shallow pans. The cans were set in a vat of water, 
kept at a temperature of 60°, and the temperature 
of the cellar was kept at 60° for the shallow pans. 
At that season of the year there is little difficulty 
in having the temperature of the cellar right, but 
later in the season, it is much more expensive to 
control the temperature of a cellar, than of a vat 
of water. I aim to keep the temperature as high 
as I can, and have the milk keep sweet the neces¬ 
sary length of time. I have used the cans two 
years, and am pleased with them. So are the women 
folks. The labor of caring for the milk and uten¬ 
sils up to churning, is not more than one-half as 
much as it was by the old system. It also requires 
much less room than the pan system. Can you 
tell me the amount of nutriment in 100 pounds of 
corn, 100 lbs. of oat-meal, and 100 lbs. of bran? 
What I want is, the comparative value for feeding 
purposes, mainly for cows.”—Corn and oats are 
of about equal value, but a mixture of the two 
would be better than either one alone. Wheat 
bran is of about half the value of these grains, but 
is better than either of them in its effect on the 
manure. It is estimated that the manure from a 
ton of each kind of food is : corn §6.65, oats §7.70 , 
wheat bran $14.59. The correctness of these figures 
would depend on locality and prices, but the pro¬ 
portions between them would remain the same. 
Mr. H. Temple, of Marshal ton, Chester Co., Pa., 
writes: “ As you ask for experiments with deep 
cans for setting milk, I propose giving you mine. 
Some time back I made an experiment with the 
following results. The cans were 8 inches in 
diameter, the pans were the common kind and 
size. After mixing the milk, I put 152 pounds in 
four cans, setting it 12,13, 14, and 15 inches deep 
in them ; put the same amount in pans, from 4 to 
41 inches deep, and placed them all in spring 
water of 52° ; but I think the cans did not have as 
much cold water pass around them as the pans, as 
they had to be put in a box in which cream cans 
were kept, and of course the milk did not cool so 
quick. After standing about 36 hours, the cream 
was taken off and churned. Butter from cans 5 
lbs. i- oz., from pans 5 lbs. 3i oz. Not as much 
difference as the Solebury Farmers’ Club made in 
their experiment. I weighed and measured it 
myself, and know it to be correct. The cream in 
the cans was about 2 inches deep by measure. 
What is your opinion about it, did I lose some of 
the cream from the cans by it not being cooled as 
quickly as it was in the pans, or from some other 
cause?— We thought the butter was better made from 
the cans, as there was less surface exposed to the atmos¬ 
phere, .”—This is a very different showing from that 
made by the Solebury Club, and is more nearly in 
accordance with my own ideas. I have never claimed 
that there was any material difference in quantity 
in favor of the deep setting, but have claimed a 
decided superiority in quality. In this case the 31 
oz. lost by the use of the deep cans, was doubtless 
much more than compensated for by the superior 
quality, though, I think, of course, the difference 
would have been much greater if the experiment 
had been with cans in water and pans in the open air. 
Edward Farnham, Providepce, R. I., has used the 
deep can system during the past year, and has had 
neither sour milk in August nor frozen milk in 
January. He concludes that he saves three-quarters 
of the labor of taking care of the milk, and has a 
marked improvement in the quality of his butter. 
He.has sometimes doubted if he has got so much 
butter by this system, would have tried comparative 
experiments, but dreaded to return to the extra 
trouble of the pans. Did make an experiment the 
last week in February, when he got 7‘/ 2 lbs. of but¬ 
ter from 162'/ 2 lbs. of milk in cans, and S'/fibs. of 
butter from 120 1 /.. lbs. of milk in pans, or from the 
cans, 1 of butter from 21 2 / 3 of milk, and from pans, 
1 of butter from 23 of milk. His positive conclu¬ 
sions are, that, though his new dairy was expen¬ 
sive, it saved much trouble and many steps, and 
decidedly improved the quality of the product. 
In Mr. Hardin’s last article on the deep setting of 
milk, he says that he has experimented on all in¬ 
termediate temperatures from 10° to 85°, and has 
come to the conclusion that 49° Fahr. is the proper 
temperature for the proper rising of the cream. I 
have never been able to experiment at that tem¬ 
perature, not having been so situated that I could 
use ice under my own constant supervision, but the 
Swedish experiments which first called my atten¬ 
tion to the subject of deep cans, were made with 
milk set at a much lower temperature than this, 
often below 40°, and experiments showed that as 
much butter was made in that way as in any other. 
A correspondent in New York State comments 
on my statement in the February number, that the 
sickness and death caused by a neglect of proper 
drainage, is to be considered as coming not from 
the act of God, but from the act of man ; and he 
goes on to say that God has established certain un¬ 
changeable laws which cannot be violated with im¬ 
punity. This was precisely my own meaning, and 
I thought I had suggested it with sufficient clear¬ 
ness. The only point for which I contend is, that 
it is in the last degree stupid, when we lose a friend 
by typhoid fever, to accept the loss with resigna¬ 
tion, as an act of special Providence committed for 
some inscrutable purpose. It is, of course, a re¬ 
sult of our violation of an established law, but the 
purpose is by no means inscrutable, and, as a death 
could have been prevented by a proper regard for 
our own responsibilities, and a proper attention to 
our own duties, it seems to me entirely proper to 
say that it was caused, so far as anything in the 
world can be caused, by the act of man. The law 
being established, we disregard it at our own risk, 
and must accept the penalty as a punishment for 
our own fault, coming in a way by no means in¬ 
scrutable, indeed only a miracle could prevent it. 
J. G. E , Camden, N. J , has a liquid manure vat 
twelve feet square and five feet deep, dug in stijf 
clay and lined with boards. In this are accumula¬ 
ted the liquid manure of his staples, and all of the 
liquid drainage from bis bouse. This liquid he 
pumps up and sprinkles on ]iis grass, times the 
