1892 
THE  RURAL  NEW-YORKER. 
395 
Killing  the  Young  Horn. 
The  result  of  the  great  battle  over  the  merits  and 
demerits  of  dishorning  cattle  has  been  to  prove  that 
horns  are  of  no  value  to  live  stock  and  that  the  best 
time  to  attack  them  is  while  they  are  small — to  “  nip 
them  in  the  bud,”  so  to  speak.  This  is  much  easier, 
cheaper  and  better  than  to  saw  them  off  after  they  are 
full-grown.  There  is  therefore  but  little  demand  now 
for  saws,  while  trade  in  the  various  fluids  for  killing 
the  horn  is  very  brisk. 
Mr.  L.  H.  Adams,  of  the  Wisconsin  Experiment  Sta¬ 
tion,  has  made  some  interesting  experiments  with 
these  horn-killing  fluids.  The  pictures  shown  at  Figs. 
180  and  181,  are  taken  from  his  report.  He  says  that 
credit  for  preparing  the  first  compound  for  killing  the 
horns  belongs  to  John  March,  of  Wisconsin.  Mr. 
Adams  used  March’s  compound  and  also  the  “  Mulley 
Maker,”  sold  by  Lewis  &  Bennett,  Bloomington,  Wis. 
The  following  notes  are  taken  from  Mr.  Adams’s 
report : 
“  It  was  found  in  a  majority  of  instances  that  the 
best  results  were  reached  when  the  compound  was  ap¬ 
plied  as  soon  as  it  was  possible  to  locate  the  little  horn 
button  on  the  calf’s  head,  which  can  be  usually  done 
when  it  is  but  three  or  four  days  old.  From  our  ex¬ 
perience  it  would  seem  that  the  dishorning  compound 
should  be  fresh  and  the  contents  of  the  bottle  well 
mixed  before  it  is  used  ;  otherwise  only  partial  success 
may  be  reached.  The  hair  should  be  clipped  from 
about  the  embryo  horn  with  scissors,  and  the  chemical 
applied  with  the  rubber  cork  wet  with  the  fluid  and 
rubbed  hard  over  the  button  until  the  application  has 
penetrated  the  horn  germ.  When  the  germ  has  be¬ 
come  soft,  having  an  inflamed  appearance,  sufficient 
material  has  been  applied.  Care  should  be  taken  that 
no  fluid  runs  down  the  calf’s  head,  for  the  material  is 
very  caustic. 
In  our  tests,  in  several  instances,  the  fluid  was  ap¬ 
plied  to  but  one  horn  button,  the  other  being  left  un¬ 
treated.  The  effect  usually  was  to  entirely  stop  the 
growth  of  one  horn,  while  the  other  grew  naturally. 
Fig.  180,  is  a  picture  of  a  grade  Jersey  heifer  two- 
years-old,  showing  that  the  left  horn,  to  which  the 
compound  was  applied,  never  developed.  Fig.  181, 
shows  the  right  horn  (with  the  shell  removed)  natur¬ 
ally  developed,  while  the  left  side  of  the  head  to  which 
the  chemical  was  applied  has  not  only  failed  to  develop 
the  horn,  but  even  the  heavy  base  which  grows  out 
from  the  skull  to  support  it.  This  failure  to  develop 
not  only  the  horn  but  its  natural  support,  raises  the 
query  whether  a  hornless  race  of  cattle  could  not  be 
developed  by  using  the  dishorning  compound  for  a 
number  of  generations. 
In  advertisements  of  chemical  fluids  it  is  often 
claimed  that  the  application  is  painless,  but  our  ob¬ 
servations  do  not  coincide  with  any  such  statement. 
The  application  of  a  fluid  powerful  enough  to  destroy 
so  large  a  surface  as  the  button  on  the  calf’s  head 
must  produce  a  great  deal  of  pain,  and  the  calves 
show  this  by  nervous  movements  of  the  head  and  at¬ 
tempting  to  rub  the  irritated  spot.  From  our  experi¬ 
ence  in  applying  the  liquid  and  also  in  cutting  out  the 
horns  with  instruments,  we  believe  that  when  used 
the  fluid  should  be  applied  to  calves  as  young  as  pos¬ 
sible,  since  the  older  the  calf  the  more  it  seems  to  suf¬ 
fer  when  the  horns  are  removed.” 
The  First  “Run”  of  that  Beef 
Factory. 
How  the  Steers  Paid. — The  R.  N.-Y.  of  January 
2,  page  2,  under  the  caption  “A  Kansas  Beef  Factory,” 
gave  some  account  of  my  cattle-feeding,  then  under 
way  here  in  Wyandotte  County,  Kans.  The  “factory” 
was  closed  down  for  the  summer  on  April  4.  Perhaps 
some  of  The  Rural’s  readers  may  be  interested  in 
the  outcome  of  its  first  year’s  business. 
It  will  be  recollected  that  136  steers,  averaging  1,027 
pounds,  were  chained  to  their  mangers  on  October  21. 
They  were  sold  January  11  after  they  had  been  fed 
for  80  days.  The  average  gain  was  224  pounds.  The 
average  cost,  delivered  at  the  factory,  was  $2.95  per 
cwt.;  the  average  selling  price,  freight  and  other  ex¬ 
penses  paid,  was  $3.80  per  cwt.;  cost  of  feed  apd 
feeding,  including  labor,  coal,  oil,  salt  and  wear  of 
machinery,  $1,995.63 ;  cost  of  the  added  weight  per 
cwt.,  $6.54.  Loss  on  each  100  pounds  of  added 
weight,  $2.74.  Gain  in  price  on  original  weight,  85 
cents  per  cwt.  Profit,  $277.87.  Nothing  is  here 
counted  out  for  interest  or  insurance,  and  nothing  is 
credited  for  manure,  over  400  loads  of  actual  droppings. 
A  Trial  of  Heifers. — On  January  30  I  finished 
getting  in  90  heifers — the  estimated  number  required 
to  finish  up  the  ensilage  on  hand.  They  were  fed  en¬ 
silage,  corn-and-cob  meal,  oil  meal  and  bran.  They 
were  sold  March  28  and  April  4  after  an  average  feed¬ 
ing  of  68  days.  Average  weight,  when  bought^flj^ 
pounds  ;  when  sold,  883  pounds.  Average  gain,  141 
pounds.  Price  paid  delivered  at  “  factory  ”  $2. 30  per 
cwt.;  selling  price  at  “  factory  ”  $3.08  per  cwt.;  cost 
of  each  100  pounds  of  gain,  $5.48.  Profit  on  the  deal, 
$177.08.  I  should  say  that  the  heifers  were  subject  to 
some  losses  that  are  fully  figured  against  them  ;  but 
which  materially  cut  down  the  profits  on  them.  One 
was  choked  to  death  by  the  chain  ;  several  had  calves 
and  were  sold  at  a  discount.  Notwithstanding  these 
drawbacks  they  made  a  better  percentage  of  gain  and 
of  profit  than  the  steers. 
With  feed  at  a  much  higher  figure  than  common 
with  us,  viz.,  40  cents  per  bushel  for  corn,  and  with 
fat  cattle  (heavy  steers)  actually  bringing  lower  prices 
in  our  market  (Kansas  City)  when  I  sold  in  January 
than  when  I  bought  in  October,  and  still  lower  when 
I  sold  on  April  4,  I  feel  that  my  beef  factory  with 
$454.91  and  over  600  loads  of  manure  standing  to  its 
credit,  has  been  fully  justified.  Nearly  aDy  other 
year,  my  commission  men  tell  me,  other  things  being 
as  they  have  been,  it  would  have  made  me  “good 
money.  ” 
Young  Cattle  Best. — In  his  kindly  notice  of  my 
operations  in  The  R.  N.-Y.,  page  99,  Mr.  J.  S.  Wood¬ 
ward  encouraged  me  to  buy  younger  cattle.  My 
little  experience  inclines  me  to  think  he  is  right, 
although  the  advice  is  entirely  opposed,  in  the  main, 
to  the  practice  of  our  Western  feeders.  With  them,  if 
I  have  caught  their  idea  correctly,  the  main  consider¬ 
ation  is  that  when  they  buy  “  top  ”  feeders  they  sell 
“top ’’beeves,  and  get  one  or  two  cents  more  per 
pound  for  what  they  put  on  than  lower  grades  would 
make.  As  it  seems  to  me,  however,  the  money  is 
made,  if  made  at  all,  on  the  added  price  for  the  orig¬ 
inal  weight,  instead  of  on  the  added  weight.  On  the 
added  weight,  considered  by  itself,  there  is  bound  to 
be  a  loss  ;  whether  it  is  a  cent  or  two  per  pound  more 
or  less  is  not  the  turning  point.  But  if  the  feeder, 
whatever  his  quality,  can  be  worked  over  into 
“  butcher  stuff  ”  inside  of  90  days,  and  sold  at  an  ad¬ 
vance  of  “  around  a  cent”  a  pound  there  is  something 
to  be  made. 
Difference  in  Manure. — Mr.  Woodward’s  assur¬ 
ance  that  the  superior  quality  of  manure  from  a  ration 
containing  a  large  percentage  of  oil  cake  and  bran 
will  make  itself  manifest  in  the  crop,  is  already,  in  a 
measure,  fulfilled.  I  have  applied  it  at  the  rate  of 
A  Typical  Hackney  Mark.  Fig.  182. 
about  20  loads  to  the  acre  to  potato  ground  and  plowed 
it  in.  The  tubers  may  tell  a  different  story  from  that 
told  by  the  tops  ;  but  the  latter,  on  the  manured  por¬ 
tion,  are  so  much  larger  and  brighter  colored  that  it 
does  not  seem  possible  that  all  are  the  same  variety, 
planted  the  same  day.  I  am  a  little  surprised  at  the 
promptness  with  which  this  difference  appeared — be¬ 
fore  the  plants  were  fairly  out  of  the  ground — as  I 
have  used  barnyard  manure  on  potatoes  with  no  per¬ 
ceptible  effect  whatever. 
Better  Than  Chemicals. — If  I  am  correct,  a  chemist 
would  find  somewhat  over  five  times  as  much  nitrogen, 
phosphoric  acid  and  potash  in  the  20  loads  (tons)  of 
these  droppings  put  on  each  acre  as  in  a  ton  of  any 
manufactured  potato  manure.  If  the  potatoes  can 
also  find  and  appropriate  these  elements  of  fertility, 
even  as  well  as  they  do  in  case  of  a  much  smaller 
total  supplied  by  chemicals,  I  shall  be  ahead  of  the 
“chemical  farmer”  by  the  difference  between  the 
labor,  cost  of  hauling  and  spreading  my  manure  and 
the  purchase  price  and  expense  of  applying  his.  The 
cost,  with  me,  was  $2.50  per  acre,  counting  only  the 
wages  of  the  man  ;  the  horses  would  otherwise  have 
been  idle  (in  winter  time)  and  are  not  charged  for  in 
the  account.  One  ton  of  potato  manure  will  cost  $40  ; 
freight  and  expense  of  applying,  say  $5 — total,  $45. 
Half  a  ton  to  the  acre  is  recommended  for  potatoes, 
costing,  $22.50 — a  saving  for  me  of  $20  per  acre.  T  have 
used  both  the  Mapes  and  Stockbridge  potato  manures 
at  the  rate  of  1,500  pounds  per  acre,  with  no  apparent 
effect  on  the  vines  and  no  effect,  by  careful  measure¬ 
ment,  on  the  yield.  But  now  with  my  factory  refuse 
I  have  a  great  show  on  the  plants,  at  least,  at  a  trifling 
cost ;  if,  at  digging  time,  the  tubers  confirm  the 
testimony  of  the  tops,  the  “beef  factory”  has  come 
to  Stay.  EDWIN  TAYLOR. 
R.  N.-Y. — Supposing  that  manure  to  be  a  little  above 
the  average  cattle  manure  in  quality  and  that  it  is  ap¬ 
plied  in  a  fresh  state,  20  tons  will  contain  the  follow¬ 
ing,  as  compared  with  one  ton  of  a  complete  potato 
manure,  figured  in  pounds 
Nitrogen,  Phos.  acid,  Potash, 
•  Stable  Manure .  140  04  100 
Chemicals........  ......  ««  160  m 
We  have  given  the  highest  valuation  for  cattle  man¬ 
ure — where  plenty  of  straw  is  used  to  absorb  the 
urine.  We  find,  on  referring  to  Mr.  Taylor’s  former 
article,  that  he  uses  no  bedding,  in  which  case  the 
figures  given  above  for  the  stable  manure  must  be  re¬ 
duced  at  least  30  per  cent.  In  any  event  it  is  mighty 
cheap  manure.  The  addition  of  ground  bone  or 
“  floats”  to  it  would  be  of  great  value. 
Horses  that  will  Sell. 
At  Fig.  182  is  shown  a  picture  of  the  class  of  horses 
that  the  present  market  calls  for.  This  Hackney  mare 
has  won  many  prizes  at  English  shows.  She  is  in  the 
fashion — city  people  want  these  chunky,  high-stepping 
horses,  and  are  ready  to  pay  well  for  them.  Some 
excellent  Hackneys  have  been  brought  from  England, 
and  more  are  coming.  These  horses  cannot  compare 
in  speed  with  our  American  trotters — they  are  not 
“built  that  way.”  They  lift  their  feet  too  high  to 
make  the  best  speed,  but  this  very  high  stepping  is 
what  gives  them  a  peculiar  value,  and  the  trait  is  well 
worth  cultivating  as  is  done  in  England  by  driving  the 
colts  in  deep  straw  so  as  to  make  them  “  pick  up  their 
feet,”  or  even  by  making  them  wear  great  glasses  that 
deceive  them  as  to  the  distance  from  the  ground. 
Farmers  and  others  who  have  smart,  “  chunky  ”  mares 
of  good  color  and  spirit,  will  do  well  to  breed  them  to 
first-class  Hackney  stallions. 
Is  It  Easy  to  Hatch  Chickens  ? 
EXPERIENCE  DOESN’T  SAY  SO. 
is  it  ignorance  or  incubators?  Real  averages  ;  is  Persian 
powder  death  ?  What  is  there  in  thunder?  The  hens 
ahead;  we  want  your  averages  ? 
Hatching  no  Scft  Job. — A  contributor  to  The  R. 
N.-Y.  says,  “  Now  that  it  is  easy  to  hatch  chickens  in 
an  incubator  or  with  hens,  if  we  could  grow  them  suc¬ 
cessfully  with  a  brooder,  it  would  be  ‘smooth  sailing.’  ” 
To  get  the  chickens  hatched  is  easy,  is  it  ?  There  are 
seven  incubators  at  work  near  me,  varying  from  the 
newest  make,  with  all  the  latest  devices,  to  the  cheap 
home-made  liot-water  box.  Their  capacity  is  from  200 
to  600  eggs.  The  first  time  the  big  machine  was  tried 
12  chickens  were  hatched.  The  eggs  cost  $15.  The 
only  reason  for  the  failure  I  heard  was  that  the 
incubator  was  too  near  the  cellar  door,  and  a 
current  of  cold  air  struck  it  when  the  door  was  opened. 
One  machine  cost  $30  brand  new  and  a  new  man  took 
charge  of  it.  The  eggs  cost  $10.  It  was  put  in  the 
kitchen.  “  Little  boys  jarred  it,”  said  the  owner  after¬ 
wards,  “  the  floor  sprung  when  anyone  walked  across 
the  room;  ”  “  the  lamp-wick  was  kept  turned  too  high 
so  the  regulator  had  to  play  lively  to  keep  the  heat 
dawn.”  Result  (astonishing)  20  chickens.  The  in¬ 
surance  company  threatened  to  cancel  its  policy,  and 
ordered  it  out  of  the  house.  The  owner  built  a  small 
shanty  just  large  enough  to  hold  it  and  put  on  a  tin 
roof.  The  roof  will  be  hotter  than  a  baker’s  oven  on 
warm  days,  and  colder  than  an  ice-house  when  it 
rains.  His  supply  of  September  laying  pullets  will  be 
slim.  He  is  a  beginner  and  “calculated  this  year’s 
profits  would  take  him  to  the  World’s  Fair.” 
What  is  the  Average  ?— One  hot- water  box  has  a 
capacity  of  200  eggs.  From  three  hatches  there  are 
200  chicks.  The  owner  has  had  two  years’  experience, 
lie  said:  “  I  do  not  think  the  hens  had  green  food 
enough  the  first  time.  The  second  time  I  gave  them 
plenty,  but  the  weather  was  wet  and  cold  and  they  did 
not  get  exercise  enough.  The  third  time  everything 
was  all  right  and  I  confess  I  do  not  know  to  what  to 
lay  my  ill-success.”  Next  door  there  are  two  new  250- 
egg  machines — the  owner  is  a  veteran  in  the  business. 
There  have  been  three  hatches.  The  first  time  only 
about  30  per  cent  came,  because  the  “cellar  was  too 
damp  from  a  cistern,”  or  “  the  hens  did  not  get  exer¬ 
cise  enough.”  The  second  time  “  the  eggs  did  not  get 
moisture  enough,  they  acted  queer,  but  50  per  cent 
hatched  out.”  The  third  time  I  asked: 
“How  did  the  eggs  hatch?”  “  Splendidly!  I  have  175 
fine  chicks.” 
“Let’s  see,  that  is  69  per  cent;  is  that  a  good 
average  ?  ” 
“  They  can  talk  about  90-per-cent  hatches;  do  you 
know  how  folks  get  them  ?  ” 
“  No  ;  I  do  not  know.” 
“  Well,  they  put  in  200  and  in  a  week  test  out  the 
infertile  ones.  In  a  week  they  test  out  again,  and  on 
the  18th  day  test  again  ;  then  they  figure  the  percent¬ 
age  from  what  eggs  are  left  after  that.  I  do  not  be¬ 
lieve  the  average  of  incubator  chicks  this  year  in  this 
section  is  30  per  cent  of  all  the  eggs  put  in  the  ma¬ 
chines.”  Another  gentleman  has  two  home-made  ma¬ 
chines.  From  four  hatches  he  obtained  600  chicks. 
His  average  (40  per  cent)  would  have  been  better,  but 
for  an  accident.  I  had  furnished  a  part  of  the  eggs,  and 
was  to  come  Thursday  for  my  share.  I  received  the 
following  letter,  which  expresses  the  feeling  not  only 
