8 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
JAN. 3 ' 
THE 
Rural New-Yorker, 
TIMES BUILDING, NEW YORK. 
National Weekly Journal for Country and Suburban Homes. 
ELBERT 8. CARMAN, 
HERBERT W. COLLINQWOOD, 
EDITOR8. 
Rural Publishing Company: 
LAWSON VALENTINE, Preiid.nt. 
EDGAR H. LIBBY, M«n«g#r. 
RURAL NEW-YORKER, 
THE AMERICAN GARDEN, 
OUT-DOOR BOOKS. 
Copyright, 1890, by the Rurel Publishing Company. 
SATURDAY, JANUARY 3, 1891. 
“A Connecticut farmer” talks (page 4) about 
the money in circulation and in the people’s pockets. 
Is there any money in your pocket that belongs to 
somebody else ? We know of a number of people 
who have delayed the payment of bills in order 
that they might invest their money at advantageous 
rates of interest. While they are “sure pay,” in 
time, this practice of deferring the payment of just 
debts in the hope of obtaining “interest on the 
money ” just as long as possible, is wrong in every 
sense. The deferring of payment injures not only the 
creditors of such people, but every one with whom 
these do business. All of them who are “short of 
money ” must dispose of goods at a sacrifice in order 
to obtain cash, or, in turn, defer payment to their 
creditors, thus spreading the trouble. Some people 
regard this as an excellent way to “make money.” 
Possibly, but it does not make morality, friendship 
or comfort. Are not these better than money ? 
Pay cash as you go! 
Practice before you preach. 
The most important of all dairy operations is that 
of milking the cow. Inventors have spent years in 
trying to take this work out of the “ hand of man ” 
without success. Dairy writers have devoted whole 
columns to thdstory of how to milk—generally with 
the result of muddling their readers more than 
they helped them. We have no help for the inven¬ 
tors ; but we may shame the dairy writers a little by 
quoting the following, which is sent us “right 
from the original ” by a Michigan friend : “ Our 
pastor has a bright, curly, three-year old laddie who 
on witnessing for the first time the milking of a 
cow, thus describes the operation: ‘The woman 
sat down by the cow and she took hold of his 
handles and pulled up and down and the milk it 
ran right out of the cow’s pocket, and then he 
kicked her hat right off with his tail.’ ” 
See here, you “successful farmers,” you are all 
right because you have money ahead to invest; 
your farms are in good heart and you know how to 
farm. You have made few mistakes and were 
quick to correct those you did, make. By working 
on strict business principles you have met with 
success. That’s good—we are glad of it. There 
are also unsuccessful farmers in the country—good, 
honest, upright men, who have failed, in many 
cases doubtless because they could not bring them¬ 
selves to do as you have done. Could not? No! 
Because in many cases Nature never intended them 
for farmers; in other walks of life they might have 
met with success. Mind you now, we speak of the 
“misfits,” not the lazy, the intemperate and the 
ignorant. Now, “successful farmer,” here is a 
New Year’s question for you: Is it “any of your 
business ” that these men are in trouble? 
The members of the Kansas Farmers’ Alliance 
have decided to try a modified form of the Sub- 
Treasury scheme themselves, and not wait for the 
National Government to take it up. They have 
formed a stock company, with a capital of $250,- 
000, and propose to warehouse their grain and 
hold it for higher prices, advances being made to 
the owners on their warehouse certificates. The 
prices of grain are now so high that there is a 
good deal of risk in this Kansas project. It is 
an attempt to ‘ ‘ corner ” the grain in one section, 
and may affect prices in that region, but will 
hardly do so beyond it. It is a matter of mere 
speculation, in which untrained farmers pit them¬ 
selves against trained gamblers in produce— 
which side is likely to come out ahead ? A quarter 
of a million dollars is not, however, an excessive 
price for a lesson in trade for a whole community. 
The R. N.-Y. examined a bull calf last week, 
which, if theory and “calculation” are worth any¬ 
thing, ought to make an ideal animal to head a 
dairy herd. The dam is an animal which we be¬ 
lieve can be made to give as much milk as any cow 
in the country. If she were not in an “ unfashion¬ 
able ” herd book, she would have been made famous 
long ago. The sire is a Jersey, a grandson of Mary 
Anne of St. Lambert, with a butter pedigree almost 
too fat for comfort. What better could be asked 
for practical purposes? From its dam the calf 
takes wonderful milk-producing powers, strong 
constitution and good eating capacity, while the 
sire is but the concentration of long lines of butter- 
producmg ancestry. Could we not be positively 
sure that he would give to his heifer calves the 
ability to produce large quantities of rich milk? 
That is the question. Some of our leading dairy¬ 
men answer it by saying that they would as soon 
have a scrub or grade for the dam, depending upon 
the bull to fix any desired quality. Why? Because 
they say both parents in the case mentioned are 
equally potent in exactly opposite directions. If 
one were less strongly bred than the other, or if 
they were both bred in the same direction—for 
butter or milk—we could tell to a certainty what 
the calf would be. As it is, there is no certainty 
about it. The calf may excel in one direction or 
the other or it may have no individuality and be 
unable to transmit any striking qualities. This 
problem is presented to breeders who have had ex¬ 
perience with cross-breeding animals. We have 
practiced cross breeding somewhat with fowls and 
have usually found the first cross useful, but the 
cross bred fowls as breeders were generally failures 
so far as the perpetuation of type was concerned. 
Wilhelm Rehnstrom the inventor of the lac- 
toserine products which are known to R. N.-Y. 
readers as “skim-milk on the square,” told the 
writer last week of a remarkable breed of cattle 
common to Northern Sweden. This breed has 
been bred for more than 1,000 years. The animals 
are polled and snow-white except the ears which 
are black, in this respect resembling the wild cattle 
of Chillingham, England. While not large in size 
the cows are good milkers and yield large quan¬ 
tities of excellent butter. If any of our American 
breeders want to introduce a novelty with a good 
deal of practical value about it, let them try this 
Swedish race. Their beautiful color and mark¬ 
ings and the fact of their being hornless would 
attract attention at once. Prof. Rehnstrom goes so 
far as to say that this breed crossed on the best 
specimens of our American-bred Short horn dairy 
cows would make the finest possible American 
dairy cows. Cattle breeders, however, seem to have 
had about all the ‘ 1 novelties ” they want for a time. 
We would like to call the attention of our learned 
friends who persist in saying that the Jersey cow is 
predisposed to consumption, to the following simple 
proposition. 1. If the Jersey cow is a consump¬ 
tive, of course her milk is unfit for use and her 
butter must contain the “germs” of consumption 
in a mild form. 2. Dr. Koch’s researches go to show 
that consumption can be cured by inoculation; that 
is, by inducing a mild attack of the disease and 
thus clearing the system of the “germs.” 3. In 
view of these facts, why not use Jersey butter in¬ 
stead of Dr. K.’s “lymph?” Consumptives, accord¬ 
ing to this line of argument, should use nothing 
but pure Jersey butter! But, seriously, these 
attacks made upon the Jersey as a breed are unjust 
and uncalled for. Queen Victoria’s prize Short¬ 
horn died of a lung trouble last week. Are all 
Short-horns to be condemned in consequence? There 
are Jerseys that have been inbred to the point of 
worthlessness, but to say that all Jerseys, or a ma¬ 
jority of them, are consumptives is absurd and 
mean in view ot the evidence before any man who 
will investigate the matter. 
CONCENTRATION, OR CO-OPERATION. 
The remark made by Nelson Morris, one of the 
great packers of Chicago, that he feared no com¬ 
petition from small operators because he could uti¬ 
lize every part of the animal, a thing they could 
not do, is worthy of the consideration of the farmers 
of this country from the importance of the truth it 
contains. However questionable many of the 
methods employed by these corporations may be 
considered, the fact remains that the greater econ¬ 
omy that is possible in their wholesale manner of 
doing business gives them an immense advantage 
over small operators. Another advantage lies in 
the special tools and appliances possible to the 
large operators, which are entirely out of theques 
tion for any one doing business on a small scale. 
The time is past when farmers, in a large part of 
the country at least, can achieve the highest degree 
of success by growing all the crops possible to their 
soil and location. To be sure, it would be folly to 
attempt the cultivation of crops for which the con¬ 
ditions were unfavorable, but the more the farmer 
can concentrate his attention upon those for which 
his conditions of soil and climate and location are 
most peculiarly adapted, the greater are his 
chances of success. The most successful farmers in 
the country to-day are those who have been spe¬ 
cialists to a greater or less extent; and the pros¬ 
pects are that they will continue to be specialists. 
There are men who succeed in conducting a varied 
business, but the proportion of such is small. Many 
a man who has undertaken small fruit growing or 
market gardening in connection with mixed farming 
has made a dismal failure of both, when he might 
have made a success of either alone. His straw¬ 
berries were sure to be ready to pick just when the 
corn needed cultivation; or the raspberries and peas 
must have attention when the Timothy was in the 
best condition to make choice hay. If one has suf¬ 
ficient resources to give each crop proper attention 
at just the right time, and sufficient executive abil¬ 
ity successfully to apply those resources, then a mul¬ 
tiplicity of crops may be permissible, otherwise hot. 
But there are thousands of farmers who are con¬ 
fining themselves to a limited number of crops but 
who are still hampered for want of proper imple¬ 
ments and who find it difficult to compete with 
those who are equipped with more expensive ma¬ 
chinery. Profitable potato culture nowadays re¬ 
quires the use of planters and diggers, but few 
small growers consider the ownership of these im¬ 
plements a possibility. In California and other 
parts of the West steam plows are in use which turn 
over 30 to 40 acres and upwards per day, at an ex¬ 
pense of 50 to 60 cents per acre; harrows that cover 
50 feet at a single trip across the field, and other 
machinery on a corresponding scale. What can 
the small grain grower in the East do in competi¬ 
tion with such overwhelming odds ? These im¬ 
mense implements, too, are equipped with head¬ 
lights, so that they are kept constantly at work 
night and day, and no time is lost. There are 
many small farmers to whom the ownership of a 
self-binder or a grain drill or a roller is a burden to 
be assumed witb caution. Are they to be deprived 
of the use of these apparent necessities because of 
their cost ? Is not here an opportunity for practi¬ 
cal cooperation among farmers ? If one cannot 
afford the expense of a potato-planter or digger, 
why do not two or more combine and secure the 
advantages which one alone could not afford ? And 
the same with other needed implements. We know 
this is done to a limited extent in some neighbor¬ 
hoods, but it seems to us that it might be carried 
still further with advantage and profit. This part¬ 
nership business in implements may not always be 
so convenient as individual ownership, but with 
anything like the right spirit between the partners, 
there certainly must be a great advantage over 
doing the work without the more necessary tools. 
By lessening the number of crops grown, their 
needs and better methods of culture may be more 
closely studied and better supplied; by cooperation 
in the purchase of implements, facilities may be ob¬ 
tained for better cultivation; by a judicious com¬ 
bination of both, something may be done towards 
securing some of the benefits which now accrue to 
those who are succeeding because of these very ad¬ 
vantages which they enjoy. 
Prof. Brewer gave a notable address before the 
Connecticut Board of Agriculture last week. After 
sketching the history of New England agriculture 
now over 200 years old—he went on to give some 
of the causes of the present “ depression ” and the 
outlook. He sees hope in the future. He says : 
“ My argument is, that all the various causes which 
have stimulated over-production have now spent 
their force, or at least done their worst, and that 
hereafter New England farmers will compete with 
the West on more and more nearly equal terms.” 
His reason for the decline in cattle growing in Con¬ 
necticut is certainly striking. The beef that has 
driven Eastern cattle into the air was grown on free 
pasture with no rent, no taxes and no fertility to 
pay for. There would certainly have been money 
in Connecticut cattle during the past 20 years if the 
government had provided feed for the cattle free ! 
That is what has been done for the Western man. 
Now that the “free land” has been whittled down 
to a peg the ranchman must buy his land and pay 
for it as the Connecticut man did 150 years ago ! 
Can he then compete with the Eastern farmer? 
Prof. Brewer says no—at least not with the present 
conditions. As with cattle, so with bread stuffs. 
It is the free fertility of “given-away” land that 
has made the over-production and glutted our 
markets. Sooner or later, obeying the inevitable 
law of Nature, this free fertility must give way to 
“ boughten ” fertility—in other words, the govern¬ 
ment can give away land so long as the public do¬ 
main lasts, but it cannot giveaway manure. Whpn 
the manure is needed the “ over-production ” falls. 
As The R. N.-Y. has frequently said, the duty of 
the farmer in any of the older States is to get his 
farm into readiness for the change that is slowly 
but surely coming. Stock your farm with fertility. 
It will pay back interest later. 
BREVITIES. 
A pile of rich manure 
Underneath ihe weeping eaves. 
Where the rain comes dripping down all winter long, 
Will certainly endure— 
While the empty pocket grieves— 
As a monument to ignorance and wrong. 
COURT your cows I 
Steam out the dairy drains. 
Which is the best grass-eating breed of pigs ? 
A DOSE of linseed meal makes bossy happy feel. 
How are you going to know your cows are good f 
A Milk Producers’ Union—good cows, good care, good 
feed. 
Does it pay to “ hog ” clover rather than to plow it 
under ? 
Have you prepared a course of reading in seed cata¬ 
logues ? 
What shall we cast before swine ? Pearls are too ex¬ 
pensive. 
Plan to soil your cows this winter—not by saving bed¬ 
ding, however. 
Let the government offer a bounty for sorghum or 
maple syrup if it wants to develop the making of home 
sweets. 
Growers of Japanese Buckwheat are beginning to be 
heard from regarding the quality of the flour. What do 
you say ? 
We will soon show a picture of a New England field that 
has done good agricultural service for over 200 years I It 
is still hale and hearty. 
A SCIENTIFIC way of saying “ As the twig is bent the 
tree’s inclined,” is “ The youthful indigenous brain struc¬ 
ture is easily modified; but let it become calcareous and 
furrowed with much repetition and the case is hopeless.” 
Place a tight board, sloping floor in your hen roosts 
under the roosting poles at an angle of 30 to 50 degrees. 
The droppings will roll down into a trough placed at the 
lower end of the sloping floor. Shovel the droppings out 
of this trough every week into a barrel and notice how 
easily you can keep your hen roosts clean, and how rapidly 
your barrels will fill up with a good manure, 
