1 84 
THE  RURAL  NEW-YORKER 
March  19 
The  Cow  as  a  Chemist. 
I  wonder  how  any  man  who  ever  fed  a  cow  a  variety 
of  food  and  had  charge  of  the  resulting  product  could 
for  a  moment  entertain  the  idea  that  a  quart  of  milk 
from  a  given  cow  would  contain  just  the  same  amount 
of  fat  whether  her  food  was  meadow  hay  and  bran  or 
clover  hay  with  cotton  seed,  linseed  or  gluten  meal.  It 
won’t  do  to  believe  all  the  scientists  tell  us.  I  often  think 
of  the  answer  a  neighbor  gave  several  years  ago  when 
I  told  him  1  saw  in  my  paper  (The  Rural)  that  analy¬ 
sis  showed  Learning  Corn  to  be  somewhat  richer  feed 
than  Stowell’s  Evergreen.  He  said,  “My  cow  don  t 
analyze  it  so.”  Scientists  have  done  a  great  deal  of 
good  by  leading  people  to  think  and  experiment  for 
themselves;  but  I  question  whether  we  would  not  be 
better  off  without  them  than  by  accepting  all  their 
statements  as  true  without  carefully  proving  them. 
The  small  dairy  I  have  is  devoted  to  the  production 
of  butter  for  nearby  retail  trade.  I  have  many  times 
thoroughly  tried  the  so-called  “balanced  rations’ 
recommended  by  the  experiment  stations  and  by  noted 
feeders;  but  I  have  never  failed  to  secure  a  larger 
profit  by  changing  to  a  grain  ration,  half  cotton-seed 
meal,  the  other  half  either  gluten,  linseed  or  corn  meal, 
preference  being  given  in  the  order  named,  the  feed 
being  of  the  same  money  value  as  the  “balanced  ra¬ 
tion  ”  fed  with  stack  hay,  Timothy  or  oat  hay.  I  wish 
any  butter  maker  who  reads  this,  who  is  feeding  any 
ration  composed  in  part  of  shorts  or  bran,  would 
change  as  indicated  above,  and  after  a  trial  of  three 
weeks,  report  the  results  in  The  Rural. 
Who  will  answer  this  question?  How  much  grain 
can  be  profitably  fed  to  a  cow  whose  butter  product 
does  not  exceed  275  pounds  per  annum,  the  product  to 
be  sold  for  30  cents  per  pound  ?  I  hold  that  such  a  cow 
receiving  one  quart  each  of  cotton-seed  and  gluten 
meal  and  plenty  of  good  hay  is  more  profitable  than 
she  will  be  if  more  grain  is  fed.  I  have  fed  much  more 
as  an  experiment,  but  did  not  find  it  profitable.  In 
many  of  the  tests  of  wonderful  cows  “reported  in  the 
papers,  the  cost  of  the  ration  fed  left  less  profit  than 
would  be  received  from  a  “  pound-a-day  ”  cow  at 
pasture.  cow  feeder. 
Leavings. 
The  R.  N.-Y.  No.  2  Wet. — After  trying  the  R.  N.-Y. 
No.  2  l’otato,  1  cannot  agree  with  those  who  praise  it  as 
a  good  potato.  On  dry,  sandy  loam,  with  manure  the 
first  year,  in  northern  Michigan,  1  raised  at  the  rate 
of  1,900  bushels  to  the  acre  ;  but  could  not  eat  them  as 
they  were  too  soft.  The  second  year,  on  the  same 
ground,  with  no  manure,  1  had  a  very  large  yield,  but 
could  not  eat  them,  though  they  were  very  fine-look¬ 
ing  potatoes.  The  third  year,  with  no  manure,  they 
did  not  yield  so  well.  I  shall  have  to  feed  them  to  my 
neighbor’s  cows,  as  we  have  no  cow  and  cannot  eat 
them  ourselves — too  wet,  too  wet.  w.  f.  mcCOMBIE. 
Food  for  the  Strawberry. — A  sample  of  the  un¬ 
reliability  of  the  older  scientific  conclusions  is  well 
illustrated  in  my  own  researches  for  the  necessary 
supply  of  fertility  on  a  strawberry  farm.  The  Rule 
Hook  says  the  berries  contain  no  nitrogen.  The  Horti¬ 
culturist  at  our  Maryland  Station  sends  me  Wolfe  and 
Goessman’s  analyses  of  the  plants,  which  give  them  no 
nitrogen  either.  I  concluded  that  clover  is  not  greatly 
needed  in  my  rotation,  but,  behold,  along  comes  a  reply 
to  the  query  in  The  Rural,  which  shows  that  the  doc¬ 
tors  disagree  wonderfully.  Could  any  sensible  man 
think  that  bit  of  information  is  not  worth  to  me  alone 
a  life’s  subscription  to  The  Rural  ?  chas.  t  .sweet. 
Some  Desirable  Trees. — In  early  spring  we  are 
anxious  to  see  Nature  put  on  her  livery  of  green  and 
the  flowers  to  greet  us  with  bloom,  and  there  is  nothing 
on  which  the  eye  can  rest  with  such  pleasure  as  on 
trees  of  the  Chinese  Magnolia  in  its  perfection  of 
blooming  flowers.  As  they  are  the  first  so  we 
prize  them  the  most.  Later  in  the  season  other 
trees  and  plants  in  great  variety  adorn  the  lawn 
and  beautify  our  homes.  I  have  in  mind  a  fine 
tree  of  Magnolia  stellata,  the  earliest  of  all,  we 
planted  some  20  years  ago  and  which  was  then 
called  Hall’s.  It  is  properly  a  bush  now  seven 
feet  high,  with  nine  feet  spread  of  limbs,  and  when 
in  bloom  no  tree  I  have  seen  attracts  so  much  admira¬ 
tion.  The  flowers  are  fragrant  and  in  number  surpris¬ 
ing.  It  is  a  slow  grower  surpassed  by  the  other  varie¬ 
ties.  Conspicua  is  rather  tender  with  me  and  of  less 
value  than  the  Soulangeana,  the  most  frequently 
planted  and  in  all  respects  the  best.  Lennei  has  not 
such  a  profusion  of  bloom,  but  its  large,  deep,  red 
flowers  make  it  a  desirable  companion  to  Soulange’s. 
The  lover  of  variety  will  plant  Norbertiana  and  some 
others  blooming  later,  and  the  new  variety  Ilypoleuca, 
very  fragrant,  but  as  yet  high-priced  and  scarce.  Our 
native  Magnolia  acuminata  is  one  of  the  most  sym¬ 
metrical  of  our  shade  trees,  equal,  I  think,  to  the 
Tulip  or  White-wood,  improperly  called  in  some  parts, 
Yellow  Poplar.  It  is  a  noble  shade  tree.  No  poplar 
is  its  equal,  and  when  after  it  attains  some  age  it  is 
ornamented  with  brilliant  scarlet  seeds  in  autumn,  it 
has  no  equal  in  attractiveness.  If  planted  with  care, 
with  plenty  of  roots,  and  mulched  for  a  few  years,  it  is 
not  very  difficult  to  make  the  Magnolias  live.  But 
frequent  soaking  will  rot  the  roots  and  they  will  die 
of  course.  isaac  hicks. 
An  Ohio  Small  Orchard. — My  orchard  of  acre 
is  well  fenced  with  a  wire  and  picket  fence  five  feet 
high,  and  in  it  is  my  chicken  house.  We  keep  30  Light 
Brahma  hens  through  the  winter,  and  through  the 
summer  raise  about  200  chicks.  I  have  an  earth  floor 
and  bed  my  chickens  with  nice  clean  straw  every  few 
weeks,  and  clean  out  the  house  as  often,  and  put  the 
manure  around  the  trees.  We  are  getting  about  one 
dozen  eggs  every  day,  and  get  25  cents  per  dozen  for 
them.  Now  that  pays  a  big  profit  on  a  small  business. 
Don’t  you  think  these  hens  will  keep  insects  out  of 
the  trees,  without  spraying  them?  The  trees  are  10 
years  old  and  very  fine.  The  orchard  is  in  clover  now, 
and  last  year  it  afforded  pasture  enough  for  one  cow 
during  the  entire  summer.  I  have  one  old  pear  tree 
that  has  borne  40  bushels  in  one  year.  It  is  called 
the  Miller  Pear  and  is  an  immense  tree.  J.  M. 
[We  do  not  believe  the  hens  will  do  all  the  work  of 
insect  killing.  We  should  expect  that  spraying  would 
pay. — R.  N--Y. 
ANSWER  TO  CORRESPONDENTS. 
[Every  query  must  be  accompanied  by  the  name  and  address  of  the 
writer  to  Insure  attention.  Before  asking  a  question,  please  see  If  It  Is 
not  answered  In  our  advertising  columns.  Ask  only  a  few  questions 
at  one  time.  Put  questions  on  a  separate  piece  of  paper.] 
Canning-  Milk  for  Family  Use. 
N.  M.  71.,  Canisteo,  N.  Y. — Will  somebody  tell  us  of 
his  experience  in  canning  sweet  milk  for  future  use 
when  the  cow  goes  dry  ? 
Ans. — We  shall  be  glad  to  hear  from  any  who  have 
tried  this.  Prof.  L.  L.  Van  Slyke,  of  the  Geneva  Sta¬ 
tion,  sends  the  following  note  : 
“I  have  had  experience  in  partially  sterilizing  milk 
in  order  to  keep  it  longer  in  hot  weather,  but  have 
never  attempted  to  can  it  for  long  preservation.  I 
see  no  reason  whatever  why  milk,  held  at  212  degrees 
Fahrenheit  for  30  minutes  and  then  sealed  up  air-tight, 
should  not  keep  perfectly  for  an  indefinite  period. 
The  only  practicable  objection  that  presents  itself  to 
my  mind  is  that  the  cream  would  rise  to  the  top,  and  it 
would  be  difficult  to  emulsify  it  again,  if  it  were  de¬ 
sired.  In  heating  milk  up  to  212  degrees  Fahrenheit, 
the  best  plan  would  be  to  set  the  vessel  containing  it 
into  another  containing  water,  to  be  kept  at  the 
boiling  point.  One  would  need  to  use  a  thermometer 
and  be  careful  to  hold  the  milk  at  212  degrees  Fahren¬ 
heit  for  fully  30  minutes,  in  order  to  make  sure  of  de¬ 
stroying  all  bacteria  and  spores.  Perhaps  this  length 
of  time  might  not  be  necessary  with  milk  freshly  drawn 
in  the  best  of  hygienic  surroundings.” 
What  Plants  Take  from  Air  and  Soil. 
J.  M.,  Sagiiuiw,  Mich. — We  clear  off  our  forest  lands 
covered  with  hard-wood  timber  of  all  kinds,  the  growth 
of  centuries.  We  find  the  soil  rich  and  productive. 
These  lands  have  had  no  manure,  no  fertilizing  save 
only  the  waste  from  plant  and  tree  growth.  The  great 
oak  and  maple  stand  with  rich  soil  around  their  roots. 
How  have  they  been  fed  and  built  up  ?  You  will  say, 
from  the  soil  and  air.  Granted.  What  I  want  to  in¬ 
quire  is  why  do  these  lands  become  less  fertile  by  cul¬ 
tivation  and  cropping  ?  The  crops  draw  the  large  per¬ 
centage  of  support  from  the  air  and  other  plant  growth, 
and  the  small  percentage  from  the  ground.  The  fact 
remains  that  land  constantly  cropped  produces  less 
growth.  Is  this  because  we  do  not  return  the  entire 
waste  to  the  land,  and  if  we  did  make  such  return, 
would  its  fertility  be  kept  up  ?.  We  use,  of  course, 
the  ripe  grain,  but  does  not  the  plant  food  drawn 
from  the  air  exceed  what  is  used  for  seed  or  grain 
product?  Does  the  draft  upon  the  soil  to  produce 
wheat  exceed  that  for  oats  ?  Suppose  the  entire  straw 
and  waste  of  a  crop  of  wheat  spread  evenly  over  the 
ground,  would  the  return  made,  plus  plant  food  taken 
from  the  air,  keep  up  its  productive  powers  ?  What 
would  be  the  effect  of  spreading  a  coating  of  straw, 
say  two  inches  thick,  over  wheat  sown  last  fall  ? 
Would  it  smother  the  wheat  or  promote  it  growth  ? 
If  put  on  immediately  after  the  seeding  last  fall,  would 
it  not  have  protected  the  plant  from  the  dry  weather, 
and  if  on  now,  would  it  not  lessen  injury  from  the 
ground  freezing  and  thawing  in  the  spring  ? 
Ans. — To  answer  the  above  inquiries  in  detail  would 
require  the  space  of  the  entire  R.  N.-Y.  for  several 
weeks.  Our  friend  rightly  considers  that  the  great 
bulk  of  plant  food  comes  from  the  air.  Carbon,  for 
example,  forms  about  one-half  the  dry  substance  of 
plants,  and  this,  for  the  most  part,  is  supplied  by  the 
air.  So,  too,  hydrogen  and  oxygen  form  a  large  part 
of  plants.  They  together  form  water.  Now  the  soil 
supplies  the  inorganic  constituents,  potash,  lime,  phos¬ 
phates,  silicates,  sulphur,  etc.,  as  shown  by  the  ash  of 
plants,  all  the  rest  being  supplied  from  the  air  either 
directly  or  indirectly.  If,  therefore,  we  remove  every 
season  crops  from  the  land,  it  becomes  poorer  by  just 
the  amount  of  minerals  removed  in  those  plants.  We 
must  therefore  supply  them  from  season  to  season  or 
resort  to  the  slow  process  of  waiting  for  Nature, 
through  chemical  action,  to  do  it  for  us.  If  we  return 
to  the  land  all  the  inorganic  elements  which  plants 
carry  away,  the  soils  will  be  as  fertile  at  the  end  of 
time  as  they  now  are,  except  that  nitrogen  must  be 
supplied  either  by  the  decay  of  vegetable  matter  or 
by  the  atmosphere.  The  grain  of  grasses  is  rich  in 
ash  elements,  but  they  come  from  the  soil.  No,  if  the 
entire  straw  of  a  crop  of  wheat  were  spread  evenly 
upon  the  soil,  it  would  grow  poorer  by  the  amount  of 
mineral  elements  carried  off  in  the  grain. 
The  effect  of  spreading  two  inches  of  straw  upon 
wheat  would  be  to  protect  the  soil  from  freezing  and 
thawing,  which  is  known  to  be  injurious  to  the  roots 
of  wheat.  The  straw  would,  after  decay,  enrich  the 
soil  by  its  own  food  content.  We  have  great  faith  in 
mulching  wheat,  though  it  is  still  a  question  in  how 
far  a  mulch  of  straw  would  be  profitable,  considering 
the  value  of  the  straw  and  the  cost  of  spreading  it. 
We  doubt  if  a  spread  of  two  inches  in  thickness  last 
fall  would  “  smother  the  wheat.”  It  would  serve  to 
retain  moisture,  equalize  the  soil  temperature  and 
keep  it  in  a  mellow  condition.  The  R.  N.-Y.  would 
recommend  that  you  read  such  books  as  Johnson’s 
Ilow  Crops  Grow  and  Feed,  and  Greiner’s  Farm  Chem¬ 
istry. 
Some  Neglected  Institute  Questions. 
S.  R.,  Marion ,  Wayne  County ,  N.  Y. — 1.  A  statement 
was  made  at  a  recent  farmers’  institute  that  there  is  a 
feeding  value,  in  roots,  which  chemical  analysis  does 
not  show.  May  not  the  same  be  true  in  regard  to 
other  feeds  ?  2.  Does  the  rapidity  of  agitation  shorten 
the  time  required  in  churning  in  proportion  to  the 
force  of  concussion  given  ?  3.  Do  butter  globules  all 
form  into  butter  at  the  same  time  when  churned  to¬ 
gether  ?  If  not,  is  there  not  danger  of  loss  by  stop¬ 
ping  the  churn  as  soon  as  granulation  appears?  4. 
Some  corn,  when  taken  from  the  crib,  was  discolored  ; 
it  presented  an  appearance  like  some  1  saw  in  a  neigh¬ 
bor’s  silo.  Tt  had  lost  in  weight :  had  it  lost  in  value  ? 
5.  Is  it  a  fact  that  the  wholesomeness  of  a  food  is  in 
proportion  to  the  ease  with  which  it  is  digested  ? 
Ans. — 1.  The  feeding  value  in  roots  which  is  not  shown 
by  chemical  analysis,  is  that  of  succulency.  No  one 
will  question  that  better  results  will  be  reached  with 
100  pounds  of  grass  than  would  be  attained  were  the 
grass  dried  and  then  fed,  yet  analysis  would  show  no 
practical  difference  in  the  feeding  value  ;  nothing 
would  disappear  from  the  grass  but  water.  This  ex¬ 
plains  why  ensilage,  when  properly  grown  and  pre¬ 
served,  has  so  many  advantages  over  the  same  food 
dried — it  has  more  succulence.  2.  We  should  think 
not,  though  we  do  not  know  of  any  scientific  tests 
having  been  made  . to  settle  this  question.  3.  If  the 
churn  is  properly  constructed,  the  butter  will  practi¬ 
cally  all  come  at  once.  This  is  shown  by  repeated 
tests  of  buttermilk  in  large  butter  factories,  where  the 
churning  always  stops  when  the  butter  reaches  the 
granular  stage.  The  llabcock  test  shows  that  there  is 
practically  no  butter  left  in  the  milk.  4.  If  the  corn 
had  been  kept  dry,  we  do  not  think  it  had  lost  any  of 
its  nutritive  value.  Nothing  but  water  had  left  it.  5. 
No.  A  food  may  be  perfectly  wholesome  and  require 
three  hours  for  digestion,  while  others,  no  better,  re¬ 
quire  2  or  1)4.  As  a  rule,  other  things  being  equal, 
the  foods  that  are  digested  most  easily  are  to  be 
preferred,  as  there  is  less  liability  of  gastric  disturb¬ 
ances,  such  as  indigestion,  flatulency,  etc. 
Difference  Between  Larg-e  and  Medium  Clovers. 
C.  N.  R.,  Canton,  Pa. — Is  there  any  difference  in 
the  tendency  of  the  large  and  medium  clover  to 
“catch;  ”  that  is,  will  either  kind  make  a  stand  where 
the  other  might  be  apt  to  fail  because  of  poor  soil  or 
unfavorable  weather? 
Ans. — Clbver,  though  not  usually  so  considered,  is  a 
most  variable  plant.  The  stems,  flowers  and  leaves 
vary  in  color,  size,  pubescence,  and  in  power  to  with¬ 
stand  drought.  Some  are  much  earlier  than  others. 
Some  are  erect  in  habit,  others  sprawl  over  the  ground. 
Our  ordinary  clover,  Trifolium  pratese,  ought  not  to  be 
called  “Medium”  Clover.  That  name  should  be  given  to 
the  Pea-vine,  Mammoth  or  Giant  Clover,  T.  medium. 
This  large  clover  is  less  hardy  than  the  other,  as  it  is 
more  liable  to  heave  in  the  spring  (Beal,  Vol.  1st  page 
346)  and  often  grows  so  rank  as  to  smother  itself.  It 
will  give  more  pasture  or  hay,  though  of  a  coarser 
quality,  and  more  seed.  We  know  of  no  experiments 
