i89i 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
cereal crops adapted to human consumption is forcing 
the French farmer into stock raising on a larger scale. 
Whether the farmer should count the value of the 
manure is worthy of serious consideration. There is a 
fallacy underlying the method of book keeping cau ed by 
confounding the meanings of two words— fertility and 
productiveness. If any given crop were allowed to rot on 
the ground, the fertility of the soil would not be increased, 
for the elements returned are only identical with those 
abstracted from the soil by the crop (the quantity of nitro¬ 
gen, however, may sometimes be affected), although in 
the above manner the productiveness of the soil may be 
largely augmented, owing to the greater availability of the 
elements in the decomposed vegetable matter than in the 
same elements in their original state. If, now, the crop, 
instead of being allowed to rot on the land, is fed to stock, 
the elements In the manure restored may be still more 
available, and the productiveness for the succeeding crop 
may also be greater, but the fertility is so much the less 
by the auantity of animals or their products sold off the 
farm. Of course, the farmer may increase both the fer 
tility and the productiveness by adding the fertility of 
other people’s farms, and this is exactly the principle 
upon which society is based—the attempt to enrich one’s- 
self at the expense of one’s neighbor, and especially at the 
expense of future generations ; and then a part of the 
booty is restored to those who are robbed by building 
poorhouses and lunatic asylums for them. The same 
principle applies to the application of commercial ferti¬ 
lizers, which are as limited in supply as the fertility of the 
soil. When the farmer begins to take a business glance 
at his affairs, he will see that, instead of counting the 
value of the manure, he must have a profit after debiting 
the manurial value of the products sold off the farm. It 
is true that such a method of reckoning is impossible 
until society is completely rec instructed in such a manner 
that agricultural competition is removed. 
From the scientific point of view, perhaps the greatest 
new departure amongst French authorities is the remod¬ 
elling of the albuminoid ratio, which the French scientist 
calls Re'ation nutritive, (nutritive ratio). This expression 
is extremely unscientific, for it gives us no idea of the 
compounds whicn form the ratio, while the expression 
albuminoid ratio indicates that the albuminoids of the 
food form the basis of the ratio; the other term can only 
be the carbon compounds, and there being only two terms 
in every ratio, the fats and carbohydrates must be reduced 
to the same unity. Thus we see the logic of the German 
and English expression, while that of the French is a pure 
abstraction. The German method is to multiply the fat 
by 3.44 to reduce it to its equivalent in carbohydrates, 
while the French ignore this multiplier altogether, simply 
adding the fats to the carbohydrates and then forming 
their relation. They take as typical food hay of medium 
quality from natural pastures, which, according to their 
reckoning, makes a “ nutritive” ratio of 1:4.8, the hay hav¬ 
ing the following composition, viz : albuminoids 8.5, fat 
3 and carbohydrates 38, digestive percentages, while this 
analysis after the German method, which is adopted in 
America, would give an albuminoid ratio of 1:5 3. Ayraud, 
of the National Society of Agriculture, in a recent work on 
cattle feeding, gives the following reasons for his method : 
“ The Germans have complicated the formula of the rela¬ 
tion nutritive by considering the fat too exclusively from 
the point of view of its function as a heat producer. It 
having been proved that it requires 2 44 times more oxygen 
for the combustion of fat than for reducing to water and 
carbonic acid a similar qu intity of starch, the former 
must therefore possess 2.44 times more heat than the latter, 
and thus this multiplier has been applied to the fats in all 
foods. We shall not adopt this method of calculation for 
the reason that, in our opinion, the chief function of the 
fat, least of all with reference to animals subjected to 
severe labor, is not for respiratory purposes, but to be 
utilized in the formation of fat. It is the carbohydrates, 
which are almost always in excess in the ration, that serve 
to maintain the animal heat.” 
Another new departure in connection with the same 
question is the establishment of what French writers call 
the relation adipo-proteique, which may be translated as 
the adipo-albuminoid ratio, or, more simply, the fat-pro¬ 
tein ratio. It is intended to express the ratio between 
the fat (adipose) and the albuminoids (protein ) Ayraud 
lays great stress on this ratio, and shows that In good hay 
of natural pastures this ratio is 1:3 7, calculated upon the 
basis that this food contains 11 per cent of raw protein and 
three per cent of raw fat, so that 3-rll“=l:3 7 ; or, taking 
the digestible percentages, which he regards as being the 
only correct basis, the formula would be 1.5-^7=1:4.7 for 
superior hay, and 1 ^-5=1:5 for hay of average quality. 
Instead of simplifying the albuminoid ratio, it seems 
that the French authorities complicate it; for their for¬ 
mulas lead to the establishment of other ratios, such as 
that between the fat and the carbohydrates and between 
the protein and the carbohy drates. In human dietetics, 
doctors reduce the compounds to their elements, thus 
establishing a relation merely between the nitrogen and 
the carbon, and it would be well to inquire how lar this 
formula would be operative in rations for the domestic 
animals. 
There is another difficulty in the way, namely, that in 
the theory that hay from natural pastures is the standard 
ration, even admitting that it does not give the beat re¬ 
sults economically speaking. In the first place, neither 
this food nor the animals that consume it are in their nat¬ 
ural state, but are made highly artificial, especially by 
chemical treatment. Plants and animals are biological, 
not chemical, beings; and it Is important to know how far 
these artificial 'methods of treatment can be carried. 
Here again we are confronted with the question of the 
reconstruction of society on a biological basis, and it is 
evident that under existing conditions artificial processes 
would be conducted so far as to lead to the extinction of 
all domestic plants and animals. So far, there has been 
probably more harmony amongst agricultural scientists 
than amongst those of any other class, and a splitting up 
into various schools or creeds could only be reharmonized 
by adopting the biological basis of dietetics, thus making 
chemistry the handmaid of biology, instead of the re¬ 
verse, as is the case in the existing constitution of society. 
Paris. W A. MACDONALD. 
CHEAP SCALE?. 
A neighbor who has largely combined stock-raising with 
farming, frequently buying stock and feeding for market, 
employs a cheap and convenient method of weighing 
small animals. At one corner of a small yard or pen into 
which the animals may be driven an inclined plane is con¬ 
structed for the purpose of loading them into wagons. 
This inclined plane is not immediately connectei with the 
yard, a passage four feet wide and seven or eight feet long 
leading up to it, as shown in the engraving. 
In this level part of the passage is placed the framed 
box or “cage,” shown at Fig. 149. Five feet long 3^ feet 
wide, and four feet high is found to be a very satisfactory 
size for this cage, as it will admit the largest hog or sev¬ 
eral smaller animals. The construction of this cage is 
well shown in the engraving. The frame is made of oak 
or other good timber not less than three inches square. 
Three cross-pieces below support a solid fl >or. Only two 
are necessary above. These cross-pieces, above and below, 
are mortised into the side frame inch from the end, so 
that a board nailed across the end leaves an opening a 
little more than an inch wide, in which the sliding gate 
may freely move up and down. Such a gate is made at 
each end of the cage. The upright bars of the gate are 
laid in position and the cross-bars fastened to them after¬ 
ward, making it impossible to remove the gate. The ends 
of the upright bars extend an inch or more below the 
lower cross-bar, and enter the narrow opening at the bot¬ 
tom of the frame, thus holding the gate firmly in place. 
A stout latch on the upper part of the frame and a heavy 
staple in each cross bar of the gate furnish means of 
locking the gate down or holding it up. An iron rod, 
terminating in a hook at the top, is placed near each 
corner of the cage. These extend down through the lower 
frame, that they may carry the entire weight when the 
cage is suspended. 
At the side of the narrow passage in which this cage 
rests is a large post, 10 feet high, notched at the top to 
receive the lever. Tee short end of this lever extending 
over the passage is necessarily three or four feet long, 
while the longer end should be ab out four times this length, 
making the entire lever 18 or 20 feet long. A piece of good 
timber, eight inches by four, placed edge upward, will be 
strong enough for this purpose. To make it lighter with¬ 
out weakening, the lower side of the longer arm of the 
lever is tapered off to the end, where it need not be more 
than four inches square. Here it bears against another 
post, to which it is confined by a guard of iron, allowing 
vertical motion only. In the short arm of the lever, di¬ 
rectly above the center of the cage, a large ring-bolt is in¬ 
serted. Attached to this is a large steelyard, weighing up 
to 1,000 or 1,200 pounds. The caee is hung to the steelyard 
by four chains of equal length, joined together above by a 
large ring and connecting below with the iron rods of the 
cage. It is intended that the two sides of the lever, when 
the cage is attached, should be nearly balanced, the short 
arm being a little the heavier, If it is pot so, a box of 
4l5 
stone placed on top of that part of the lever will make it 
right. 
Now for the method of operation. The gate of the cage 
next to the pen is raised, and it being several feet within a 
narrow passage and in a corner of the pen, there is no 
great difficulty in driving an animal into it. The gate is 
now closed and the cage with the animal in it is lifted 
from the ground by pulling down on the outer end of the 
lever. For this purpose a chain is attached, and when 
drawn down is hung on a stout iron pin driven into the 
post. The lever is thus held in position while the weighing 
is done. A plank laid across the fence above the cage 
serves as a platform for the weigher 
If it is desired to put the animals into wagons after 
weighing, the gate next the inclined plane is raised and 
they are easily driven up. 
The inclined plane is not anecessrry attachment to the 
scales, as each may be used independently of the other, but 
it will be found most convenient to have them connected 
as described. 
The advantage claimed for this device is not that of gen¬ 
eral service as scales, for it can never take the place of 
good platform scales. But because of their great cost few 
farmers can afford these, yet there is scarcely one who has 
not occasion to use something of the kind just described. 
Its low cost places it within the resch of all, and once in 
possession, it will be used much more frequently than 
might be supposed. s. I*. SHULL 
Montgomery Co , Ohio. 
TREATMENT OF TRANSPLANTED TREES. 
As indicated in a prior article, I believe that every 
orchardist should grow his own trees. This is as import¬ 
ant as that every dairyman should breed his own cows,— 
and even more so. I have just been walking through a 
portion of my orchard which was set out last fall from my 
own nursery. Every tree is starting strongly into growth, 
and as every one was carefully selected, carefully dug up, 
and carefully planted at the right time, and within two 
days after digging, there Is no reason why they should not 
do so. 
The points which I look upon as essential are these: l. 
A well grown, thrifty tree, reasonably straight and evenly 
brinched. 2. That every root possible shall be dug u;< un¬ 
mangled, and that there shall be no pulling on the tree, 
except to see where the roots still have hold of the soil, 
until they are entirely free. By this plan we can get at 
least twice as many roots as nurserymen usually deliver. 
Impatient pulling, before the roots are free, will tear out 
the roots at their union with the trunk, which spoils the 
tree. If the trees are thus dug up, but little cutting of the 
roots will be needed—merely smoothing the ends cut by 
the spade with an undercut of a sharp knife. For fall 
planting I want to move the trees as soon as the leaves 
will strip, which will be after one or two sharp frosts. The 
holes had best be made before taking up the trees. In any 
soil fit for an orchard they need to be only deep and large 
enough to receive the trees easily, just as they stood in 
the nursery. 
In planting, I find it important to lean all the trees 
towards the preva'ling summer winds, in most places 
towards the southwest. If this is done, they will stand, 
when they get so well rooted as to resist the wind pres¬ 
sure, as nearly perpendicular as one could expect. The 
angle at which they are thus inclined will depend upon the 
force of the wind in each locality. I find about six degrees 
sufficient. This gives an erect trunk, but does not prevent 
the limbs from taking more or less of a “set” in the direc¬ 
tion of these summer winds. 
A good deal has been written about the pains needed to 
set out fruit trees properly. This depends upon the na¬ 
ture of the land. If it Is hard and stony, it will take more 
time to dig the holes, and perhaps a little more to do the 
planting. The time needed in every case is just as much 
as It takes to press the soil firmly to every root, and no 
more, pains being taken to assign each circle of roots to 
its own zone in the soil, and to allow time to compress 
every layer so that the soil shall be thoroughly and 
strongly firmed throughout. To do this only a thin layer 
must be put in at once. In treading, which can be safely 
done after the roots are covered, the toes of the treader 
should point directly to the stem of the tree. The danger 
of breaking the roots is in this way avoided. N > water 
ought to be used in setting out a tree. Water takes room 
and when it has soaked away the space it occupied becomes 
empty. Consequently where water has been freely used 
the trees will stand very loosely in the soil, which is the 
reverse of what should be. 
If trees are firmly planted they require no staking, unless 
of unusual size and height, in which case two stakes are 
needed, and the trees must be well bandaged before tying. 
But all my experience favors liberal mulching, and of all 
mulching material bean straw has always suited me best. 
Beans are a good crop to grow in a young orchard, and 
though there is considerable feeding value in the straw, 
there is more value in it for mulching. Bean straw can¬ 
not be scratched away by fowls, nor does it furnish a 
harbor for mice. Wind has no effect upon it, and it holds 
the snow firmly all winter. Waen it decays it forms a 
very rich fertilizer. Renewal every second year is enough. 
Sometimes it lasts longer. 
I find it quite as important to keep weeds out of a young 
orchard as out of any other crop. Clean culture Is essential. 
In the rows, between the trees, currants and gooseberries 
can be grown with great success—better than in full ex¬ 
posure, and they may remain until the trees are four 
inches in diameter. Between the rows, any low hoed crop, 
well manured, is a benefit to the trees, because it insures 
and pays for good cultivation, and leaves much in the soil 
to promote the growth of the orchard. With a view to 
give such crops a (letter chance it is a good plan to have 
the rows run nearly north and south. 
