BREEDING OP ANIMALS—PEDIGREE, &c. 
We have received from a correspondent who sig'ns 
himself “A Young Farmer,” of Virginia, a communi¬ 
cation of several sheets, on the subjects indicated above. 
While in many things we agree perfectly with the opin¬ 
ions expressed by the writer, there are others from which 
we as decidedly dissent, and which moi-e experience and 
reflection will doubtless enable him to correct. As the 
length of the essay renders its insertion entire i mpracti- 
cable, we have concluded to give the substance of it in 
extracts, omitting those portions irrelevant to the sub¬ 
ject, or which might be considered personal by others, 
and perhaps adding a few remarks of our own at the close. 
After a few introductory paragraphs, giving a brief 
review of the financial condition of the country, and urg¬ 
ing the necessity of examining the causes that have led 
to this state of things, as well as enforcing the duty of 
economy in management, and improvement in all the de¬ 
partments of agriculture, the writer goes on to say; 
“I am a young farmer, and have for a few years bred 
Short Horns on a small scale, and write now with the 
view of having more light and information on the breed¬ 
ing of stock, rather than with the view of intruding my 
own opinions. From the remarks of sorhe of your corres¬ 
pondents, and occasionally editorials, it appears to me a 
beginner has poor encouragement in trying to improve 
Iris stock. One writer asserts that if we begin with the 
common breed of cattle We shall never succeed in effect¬ 
ing improvement to any extent, and another that if we 
were to take the best common stock, and the best Short 
Horn bull, and breed for 20 years, we should be no near¬ 
er the object aimed at, than when we set out. If such is 
the fact, it affords poor consolation to those who in the 
laudable spirit of improvement, have been induced to 
give several hundred dollars for a Durham bull, since 
according to this theory, unless with the bull they have 
obtained the great secret or talisman of breeding, they 
may go on for 20 years, as an Irishman would say, with¬ 
out advancing a step.” 
The difficulty here, or the want Of success which has 
attended the efforts of some bi-eeders, our correspondent 
supposes to exist in the greater attention paid to pedi¬ 
gree than the real qualities of the animal, and illustrates 
his opinion by the following dialogue supposed to take 
place between a farmer who wishes to purchase stock, 
and a breeder, who has invited, the farmer to pass through 
his 3 'ards and examine his improved stock: 
“ B. Here are some beautiful animals; just look at their 
pedigree; handle them, never mind their looks, walk 
around them, and tell me if you ever saw such a lot of 
animals: all Herd Book, selected with the greatest care 
L’om the finest herds in England, animals that have taken 
there the prizes for many years. These animals inherit 
iheir virtues they prefixed, and will descend to their off¬ 
spring, for like will produce like.” 
‘‘ F. Well, but Mr. Breeder, stop; how is it with this 
bull here, of which the price is $1,000. You must ad¬ 
mit he has a coarse head, is very hollow in the back, and 
is deficient in the rump; where does.he get these defects, 
and will he not be apt to perpetuate them in his progeny, 
and carry them to his grave?” 
“ B. My dear sir, I see you are ignorant of the busi¬ 
ness of breeding; look at his pedigree. His grandsire 
the famous-, was sold for one thousand pounds; 
I obtained the dam as a particular favor for $800, and 
was offered that sum for this very animal when he was a 
calf. Handle him; he is like satin. He is a superb bull; 
what an eye, what a fore arm, what a splendid brisket; 
all my cows are in calf by him, and you must permit me 
to say if you do not like him, you certainly do not know 
what you want.” 
“F. Excuse me, Mr. Breeder, I do not profess to 
knovy much about stock, and nothing about that Herd 
Book, though I have raised more or less stock for 40 
years. I have a dairy of 60 cows, and hearing you had 
some fine animals, called to see them, and if possible to 
purchase a bull and two or three cows, to improve my 
own stock. But I am afraid your cows will not milk 
well, and indeed I do not like your bull. Have you no 
other stock, and at lower prices? Ah, yes; I see a fine 
large cow in the next yard, that the girl is'milking, and 
what a pail of milk, some 30 quarts, aird about to run 
over! Will you sell her?” 
” B. Why sir, the stock in that yard are not my best 
stock, but only a few I retain to supply my family with 
milk and butter. I value them slightly since I have pro¬ 
cured the improved stock. She is quiet, orderly, and a 
good breeder. Her two heifers stand in that corner, and 
the dairy woman says are nearly equal as milkers to their 
mother.” 
“ F. I will give you $100 for the three; and if I can 
procure the sire of those heifers, I think I will dispense 
with the Herd Book and pedigree for the present.” 
My .object in this dialogue, is not to decry imported 
or improved cattle, but to enforce the opinion that cattle 
should be prized for their intrinsic, i-ather than extrinsic 
qualities. We have all known animals that would hardly 
be taken as a gift, command a high price solely on ac¬ 
count of something written on a piece of paper, and call¬ 
ed a pedigree, with high sounding names recorded in the 
Herd Book. We have known too, animals truly valuable, 
deep milkers, excellent feeders, condemned with a sneer 
solely on account of a black nose. Who has not known 
animals sell for $50, which if they had had pedigrees, 
would have brought $500? In old times, the proof of 
the pudding used to be in the eating; the proof of the 
cow in the pail; and that of the bullock inside of him. 
ft is this question of real vmlue in different breeds that 
THE CULTIVATOR. 09 
requires examination. Farmers do not love to be led 
away by mere names; truth is what they need. 
“ If a number of eminent men, by giving their minds 
to the subject, and by careful selection and skillful breed¬ 
ing through a long course of years, have at last succeed¬ 
ed in fastening upon a stock certain excellencies of shape 
and of properties, which will be of course imparted to 
their progeny if they are unrivaled for the pail or the 
shambles, then it would be unreasonable to complain of 
the great outlay necessary to secure their advantages for 
our herds. The Short Horns, as a race, are no doubt en¬ 
titled to their high reputation, as combining more valua¬ 
ble qualities than any other breed. These qualities are 
transmitted by the pwre bloods to their issue, while that 
result would be uncertain from part blood. Now what 
is a pure blood Short Horn? To the improver of stock 
this is an important question. It must be admitted that 
the Durham is a made up breed; that is, one based on 
common stock and skillfully bred up to its present per¬ 
fection. No one pretends, that as it exists at present, it 
is an original breed. A pure bred Short Horn, I sup¬ 
pose is one who has so many crosses in him, that the 
valuable qualities of the breed are permanent, and there 
is no danger of breeding back to the original ancestry; 
and to determine this point is said to be the great value 
of pedigree and the Herd Book. Now I want to know if 
an animal is coarse and ill made, how much better he is 
for having a pedigi-ee, and being in the Herd Book? It 
appears to me from what little experience I have had, 
that in this case the pedigi’ee detracts from, instead of 
adding to his value. Where did he get his bad points? 
Probably from some of his ancestors, for he is so pure 
bred that they cannot be traced to the common stock, and 
if so, does not the pedigree fasten the defects on him, 
and make it more than likely he will transmit them to 
his progeny? Is he not more likely to breed bad stock 
than a part bred bull would be, of better shape, if the 
latter were home raised, and bred with care and judg¬ 
ment? Are we not too apt to be satisfied with a pedi- 
gi-ee. Without considering that there is such a thing as a 
good pedigree, and such a thing as a bad one? * * * 
'‘It will scarcely be denied by any man who is ac¬ 
quainted with the various importations of cattle from 
England within the last 10 or 15 years, that some of them 
with long tailed pedigrees, are not the exclusive posses¬ 
sors of great beauty and excellence; that neither Herd 
Book or pedigree is a certain test of superiority; that 
some have disgraced their owners and breeders, and in 
all probability only saved from the knife by their rela¬ 
tion to English aristocracy. If an animal commands a 
high price, it ought to be because of some intrinsic ex¬ 
cellence, some positive merit, some palpable superiority. 
Much is said of white and black noses, color, &c., but are 
these of any consequence any farther than they represent 
or indicate quality or merit? So pedigree, I maintain, 
has no value in itself, unless accompanied with some¬ 
thing better. ******* 
“ I very much fear that in some instances in which 
high prices have been paid for Short Horns, we have 
been paying not for the animal, but for the pedigree, 
which when paid for, was often worth but little. I can¬ 
not help thinking that in this Short Horn excitement, 
there is something of the tulip mania in Holland, or the 
multicaulis fever of our own country. May I not ven¬ 
ture to predict that similar results will ensue with the 
first as with the last; indeed it is not perhaps too much 
to say that in this country, highblown pedigrees, and 
$500 animals, are sleeping “that sleep that knows no 
waking.” It may be said, that in England prices are 
nearly as high for the improved Short Horns as at their 
first introduction, and that the demand for them is con¬ 
tinually increasing and keeping up the price. It is e- 
nough to answer that there wealth is concentrated in a 
few, and labor performed by the man)', and between 
these two classes there is a much wider and more distinct 
separation than in this country. There a monopoly of 
any favorite or fashionable breed is easily effected; here 
it would be impossible. There to buy an animal of 
Lord A., the celebrated Earl of B., or the noble Duke 
of C., gives both buyer and beast no little eclat, and the 
name of the breeder covers a multitude of sins. Here 
we are such good republicans, that we care but little 
whether we purchase of a rich or poor man, provided 
the animals please us. Prices are, and must be regula¬ 
ted by the facility of supply and extent of demand. The 
ground worlc or basis of the one can be easily come at; 
the latter will depend ultimately on the actual and intrin¬ 
sic worth. In carving into a juic)' sirloin, or in tasting 
butter, we care nothing for pedigree, or for native or im¬ 
ported cattle. The butcher and the dairy maid must be 
the judges at last of the value of breed,s, and a decision 
built up against their verdict must in the end come to 
nothing. 
“ The result of my own observations is, that with some 
exceptions, as a dairy stock, the Short Horns are more 
valuable for the purpose of crossing, than for their own 
capacity for milk and butter. Their history shows that 
these were lost sight of by the early breeders, in their 
endeavors to obtain other desiderata, large size, early 
maturity, combined with neatness of form, and facility 
of fattening. That they possess these in an eminent de¬ 
gree, no one can doubt; and that certain families of them 
are good milkers, and at the same time retain some of 
these valuable qualities of the breed, my own experience 
has satisfied me. I believe milk can be bred into them, 
by the exercise of care and skill, but where this is the 
case, some of the points otherwise desirable, must be 
sacrificed. Among my full bred Durhams are some ex¬ 
traordinary milkers, but they were purchased for me un¬ 
der directions to pay attention to this quality particularly, 
and to consider all other points as secondary, and they 
would probably be condemned by the iirofessional ama 
teur. Every person knows there is an inconsistency in 
supposing that the easy taking on flesh, barrel shaped, 
square, heavy thighed Durham, can be a deep milker. 
Can we expect a deep milker without a capacious udder, 
and is there room between the thighs of the thick fleshed 
Durham to carry such a bag? My opinion then is, that 
the Durhams as a breed are not milkers, and that the ex¬ 
ceptions only go to prove the rule. To say that it will 
not do to cross the Durham with our common stock, ap¬ 
pears to me preposterous, and is contradicted by experi¬ 
ence already. If we live in a dairy district, let us pur¬ 
chase the best common stock, deep milkers, that we can 
find. Select a pure bred Durham bull, if possible, de¬ 
scended from a milking dam, or procure a bull whose off¬ 
spring have already proved to be milkers. Let us be con¬ 
tent with a flatter rib and lighter thigh, and be satisfied 
if we can engraft on the progenj' the early maturity and 
neat form of the Durham, with the milking properties of 
the dam. ******** 
“ One of the improved methods of judging animals, of 
recent introduction at least in this country, is the point 
called handling. This is defined to be a certain indefina¬ 
ble, peculiar, soft, delicate, fine, elastic touch or feeling 
of the cellular membrane, indicating great excellence. 
It is now admitted to be the most important and essen¬ 
tial of all criteria of judgment, and however well shaped 
and promising an animal may be in other respects, if he 
is deficient in this point, it is the “ unpardonable sin.” 
I have known experienced breeders pass by with con¬ 
tempt the most faultless shape, after merely touching 
them in one or two places with their fingers. It is 
openly avowed that daylight is not necessary to view 
stock, feeling being substituted for seeing. As I am a 
young farmer, and anxious to be informed on all matteis 
relating to breeding stock, I have tried to be a handler, 
and to learn from older and wiser heads what good hand¬ 
ling indicates. I am told b)’ one, “that mellow hand 
ling shows a kind and easy feeder, that will mature ear¬ 
ly, and on a small consumption of food.” If told that 
experience shows that there are many harsh handlers 
that both feed easy and mature early, we are answereel 
“ that good handling only indicates better feeders.” But 
will the butcher pass by unnoticed, those fine animals 
with the beef placed on the mosi profitable points for 
cutting, to purchase those who have been bred solely 
with reference to handling? The answer is, he will 
find the latter to be the best inside, the flesh will be bet¬ 
ter mixed with the fat. And this introduces the ques¬ 
tion, whether the Short Horns are the best breed'for beef. 
In the Smithfield market pure Short Horn beef is not 
ranked in the first class, it having too much muscle un¬ 
mixed with fat. In this country, the bufcheis great ly 
prefer half or three quarter blood, that is, one or two 
crosses of Durham on the native stock. They have bet¬ 
ter proof; yield more tender and saleable meat; and the 
flesh is more intermixed or marbled with fat. The cross¬ 
es too have generally outweighed the full breeds. The 
fine animals of Tonkins, in New Jerse)', were not more 
than three-fourths Durham blood. A judicious selection 
of some of the best common stock crossed once or twice 
with the Short Horn bull, appears to make just such an 
animal as is wanted by the butcher, and one that will 
generally be preferred by him to the pure blood. 
“Another breeder has urged upon me the importance 
ot handling a.s 3.n evidence of good milking properties; 
but I satisfied him there is no necessary connection be¬ 
tween them, by showing him in ni)' yard a couple of 
cows making nearly 30 lbs. of butler a week, who he 
said hanijled like buffaloes; and in another case, a su¬ 
perb handler, that could not raise her own calf. A third 
person has said that good handlers are of gentle disposi¬ 
tion, quiet and tractable, which h.as been contradicted 
by my experience. 
“What then is handling, what does it mean? If it 
would not be too presuming in a ‘ Young I'arraer,’ I 
should say, that in forming an opinion as to the beauty 
or excellence of an animal, there are man)’ points to be 
looked at and considered, that these are balanced against 
each other, and since no animal is perfect, that one in 
which the greatest number of good points predominates, 
is the best, and that among these points handling is one; 
but I cannot consider it as ever)’ thing, or of more con¬ 
sequence than all others. An animal good in other re¬ 
spects, is not to be condemned for a rather heavy head, 
a too flat rib, or a defective rump, neither shouhl they 
be for harsh handling alone. 
‘‘These remarks have been made more with the view 
of eliciting a coi’rect understanding of the subject from 
those better able to give it than myself, more with a 
view to inquire than instruct. The things stated are such 
as appear to me would strike any one young and inex¬ 
perienced; and I hope these apparent inconsistencies in 
determining the value of cattle, which have been no¬ 
ticed, may be susceptible of explanation. My only ob¬ 
ject is to promote the public benefit, and if the views 
here presented are correct, however it may affect the in¬ 
terests of other breeders, the effect will not fall lightly 
on the pocket of A Young Farmer.” 
We have but a single remark to make in this place, on 
the foregoing, and that is in reference to what he says 
as to our affording poor encouragement to efforts for im¬ 
proving our domestic animals, in our “occasional edi¬ 
torials.” We must have been truly unfortunate in ex 
pressing ourselves, if we have said one word that could 
be construed into a discouragement of effort; for we are 
firm believers not only in the propriety, but in the prac- 
