784 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
NOV. 7 
worthless In the East, but with J. M. Smith out In 
Wisconsin It succeeds well. We grow four or five times 
too many plants to the acre. Raspberries should not be 
planted nearer than six or even eight feet; there is more 
profit In this way and the berries are better and larger. 
Cultivation is easier and you get just as many quarts per 
acre, with less grass and weeds between the rows. Black¬ 
berries and raspberries should be grown In hills and not 
In hedgerows. The hill system is best from a dollars-and- 
cents point of view. Strawberries may be grown either 
way, the choice depending upon the variety and soil. You 
can’t well grow strawberries with profit for a series of 
years unless you have a plan of irrigation. They are 
usually planted too closely. 
"The man who packs fruit honestly from top to bottom in 
the long run makes the most money. A little judicious 
laziness is sometimes advisable. Study the methods of 
your successful rival. Put your name on each package. 
A Massachusetts grower who uses baskets of fine white 
clean basswood, and labels each very tastefully, claims 
that he always gets five cents more a quart than anybody 
else. I know another gentleman in New England who 
grows fine strawberries, and also beautiful roses for which 
he has a great love. He puts nice little rosebuds on the 
tops of the baskets of strawberries sent out, eight rose¬ 
buds to every bushel crate. Now you may say a man who 
comes to buy strawberries doesn’t want roses, but this 
fruit sells for three or four cents more than any other. 
You must please the eye first before yon can open the 
pocket book. This grower is making money on this plan 
right along.” 
Two asparagus shipments from Illinois were also 
cited by Mr. Hale, the one in an ordinary box, the 
other in nice thin boxes tied with pink 
tape; the former brought six and the latter 
ten cents a pound. People buy the best 
looking fruit an'l think it tastes better, 
and it does. Nice food always tastes better 
when served in nice, clean dishes on a nice 
clean table. Two lots of strawberries, both 
of the same quality, were sold for 12}£ and 
15 cents respectively. One lot was in a 
nicer package and contained the grower’s 
name. Asked why the buyer chose the 
highest-priced fruit, he told me "simply 
because I know this man’s berries are the 
same at the bottom as at the top of the 
basket, and I have no time to examine a 
new lot.” 
The average home in this country is not 
one quarter supplied with the small fruits 
it should have. Farmers have no time 
to grow a full supply of fruit; they think 
they will buy all they want for the family; 
but they never do. They may get a few 
berries for Sunday or for a short-cake now 
and then, but that is all. The best and 
most profitable market for a lot of fruit is 
the family. Plant in long rows, use the 
horse and cultivator, let the horse do the 
work; plant such standard varieties as 
are best for your section and you will 
be all right. A Yankee friend of mine 
charges up all fruit used in his family as it 
comes from his half acre garden, at mar¬ 
ket rates. This amounted in a year to 
$365, and his family show the good effect— 
they look healthy and smiling. Pies-and cakes work 
for the women is saved, and dyspepsia is avoided. 
Then follows an Interesting essay on small fruits, 
by J. T. Lovett, abstracts of the most important parts of 
which have already appeared in these columns. H. H. 
(To be continued.) 
of their horns may increase their capacity for mischief. 
But their vicious character is not the result of the posses¬ 
sion of those monstrous horns, as is shown by the quiet 
disposition of the long-horned breed of cattle of Great 
Britain, as well as of the Devons whose horns are long 
and sharp, and yet the breed is distinguished for its 
docility and kindly disposition, while we frequently find 
polled cattle that are intractable and vicious. 
As regards this argument so zealously advanced by the 
advocates of the dishorning craze, it is well-known to all 
practical cattle growers that when the stock is of im¬ 
proved blood and properly treated, there is absolutely 
nothing in it. For 40 years I have been interested in 
breeding cattle of the Short-horn race; during most of this 
time my herd has numbered from 50 to 75 head of 
different ages, there being always one or more aged bulls. 
I have, besides, handled, grazed, fed or shipped a large 
number of graded Short-horn blood. In all this experience 
no accident has occurred, no injury to man or beast has 
been inflicted by the horns of my cattle. But my stock 
is always treated kindly—not allowed to be beaten or even 
harshly treated in any way. 
2. Admitting that, as regards cattle allowed to run wild 
on the ranges, subject to exposures and privations that 
ought to subject their owners to prosecution for cruelty 
to animals, they might be less difficult to handle if horn¬ 
less, have the dealers and speculators who breed stock 
to sell to the ranchmen considered the time and the enor¬ 
mous cost required to make the change they propose ? 
The millions of farmers in this country whose holdings do 
not exceed, say, 100 or 150 acres, and who with their fami¬ 
lies cultivate the land they own, are the breeders of the 
great majority of the cattle that furnish most of our 
characteristic in cattle will be obliged to confine them¬ 
selves to the cruel and excruciatingly painful process of 
dishorning. 
3. The argument in favor of the abolishing of horns in 
cattle breeding disregards entirely the fact that purity of 
blood and refinement of character are essential to the 
maintenance of the highest excellence, even in useful and 
profitable qualities in our domestic animals. Uniformity 
is an essential feature, but It is not the only essential 
factor in the highly improved breed. The hippopotamus 
and the American buffalo are exceedingly uniform in char¬ 
acteristics; but they are certainly not of superior refine¬ 
ment and symmetry, attributes everywhere regarded as 
essential in highly cultivated races, as the British Thorough¬ 
bred horse, the Devon and Short-horn cattle, the South 
Down sheep, the Berkshire swine, etc. 
Now, the intelligent breeder of farm stock in the discus¬ 
sion of such questions as we are now considering, should 
not overlook the fact that the maintenance of symmetry 
and beauty of form, with general refinement of the char¬ 
acteristics of the several breeds recognized as of pure and 
ancient lineage is es c ential to the highest success in the 
live stock breeding industry. T. C. JONES. 
Delaware Co., Ohio. 
Live Stock Matters. 
"HORNED CATTLE.” 
The species of domestic animals the most useful to man 
of all the varieties of stock subject to his control, was in 
the olden time designated as “ horned cattle.” defined in 
Chambers Universal Knowledge as : “Distinguished by a 
flat forenead, longer than broad, and by smooth, round 
tapering horns, rising from the extremities of the frontal 
ridge.” 
But in our day Impractical theorists are insisting that 
these ornamental appendages of nature, which to an 
admirer of proper proportions and symmetry in fine stock 
seem essential to perfection In the head, which is the most 
important and characteristic feature in the highbred 
animals, must be eliminated—abolished 1 The accidental 
variety of hornless cattle found In some parts of North 
Britain, though defective in some qualities essential to 
profitable and advanced husbandry, must be crossed upon 
our best and most highly cultivated breeds, so as to 
engraft upon them this unnatural " mulley ” head. 
To this extraordinary and drastic departure from the 
practice of the most enlightened and successful cattle 
growers in all the ages, the following objections appear 
obvious and conclusive: 
First of all, it cannot be pretended that the removal of 
the horns will in any respect increase the profitable excel¬ 
lence of the animal; it will not increase the quantity or 
improve the quality of the milk or beneficially affect the 
feeding or fattening qualifications of the beast. The argu¬ 
ment in favor of the proposed change in the character of 
cattle is based upon the false assumption that horns are 
dangerous, and tend to make animals vicious and restless. 
Now, as regards the cattle of Texas and others of Spanish 
blood that have been for ages subjected to the most cruel 
and harsh treat^Tei^t, it is certainly true that they are 
vicious, and perhaps the extraordinary length and strength 
/ 
dairy products and the best quality of our beef. What is 
the character of their cattle t Where they have resorted 
to superior blood for the improvement of their herds, they 
have not patronized bulls of the mulley sort, nor do we 
find, except in very rare instances, polled animals upon 
their farms. A large portion of this stock Is of excellent 
quality, being improved by infusion of the blood of the 
most approved races. Granting that a change to the polled 
breeds is desirable, how long would it take to effect it t 
How much would it cost t What would be the extent of 
the loss occasioned by the resulting depreciation in the 
value of the excellent stock now upon our farms ? 
All intelligent breeders understand the value of pure 
blood, the potency of well-established breeds in transmit¬ 
ting qualities. How long does it take to establish uni¬ 
formity and constancy In a variety of domestic animals t 
For more than 100 years we have reliable history of the 
existence, as we now see them, of the Devon, Short horn 
and Hereford cattle. How much longer they had been cul¬ 
tivated as distinct breeds we do not know. The same may 
be said of the Channel Island cattle, the West Highlanders 
and the Galloways, and we know what all these breeds 
are capable of doing. But now it is proposed to build up 
new breeds 1—we hear of “Polled Durhams.” A man in 
Ohio began with a common mulley cow, crossed her and 
hf r progeny with Short-horn bulls. Three or four such 
crosses will give the appearance of the Short-horn. So it 
Is in this case; the crossbreds have a good deal of the 
Short-horn character, excepting in that important feature, 
the characteristic Short-horn head, with its sprightliness, 
intelligence and beauty—instead of which they have the 
clumsy, unintelligent and stupid head of the mulley. The 
owner admits that many of the crossbred animals have 
horns, and these he discards, rearing only the hornless for 
breeding. 
It is said that this herd has recently been disposed of to 
parties in Indiana also claiming to be breeders of Polled 
Durhams. I have also understood that there is a herd of 
this variety in Iowa, but it is admitted on all hands that 
this work of building up a new breed is tedious and un¬ 
satisfactory, and though the modern mischievous practice 
of registering in a Herd Book stock with no claim to 
purity of blood has been resorted to, as I understand, in 
this instance, to give character to the enterprise, it will 
doubtless be short-lived, and the advocates of the mulley 
FORKFULS OF FACTS. 
Electricity and the Horse Trade.— Electric street 
raihoads have increased rapidly of late. B'cvcles, too, 
have been greatly cheapened in consequence of the ending 
of several patents. It has been claimed that this would 
result in a falling off in the market for light horaeg and 
ponies. The London Live Stock Journal savs: “The use 
of electric overhead tramway cars in 
Bngland as in America mav cause many 
In this country to think that the interests 
of light horse breeding may suffer. So far 
the bicvcle has not affected the nrice. and 
round London everv Sunday and Saturday 
there are more cvcles on the roads than 
light ponies. The fact is that as we in¬ 
crease wealth and facilities for enjoyment 
more people come out to en jov themselves. 
This is reallv the history of the large fields 
to be seen out hunting ” Tn this country 
we belie\e the regnlar “street car horse” 
finds a poorer market than before, but the 
market for ponies and good riding horses 
seems better than ever. 
Stalks for Horses.— Regarding the 
feeding of corn stalks, my experience is 
somewhat limited. I believe there is no 
question of tbelr being a «afe feed for stock 
of all kinds. They should of course be free 
from smut, which should always be left out 
In cutting. Chopping has always been 
efficacious and steaming a great benefit, 
rendering the harder portions palatable, 
but without steaming I wonld not think 
it advisable to mix grain with the stalks, 
as much of it would be wasted with the 
portions that cannot be eaten. Such fodder 
is undoubtedly good for either colts or 
horses. H. C FARNTTM. 
There seems to be an extra large crop 
of roots in the country this season. In 
our own case as soon as it was evident 
that the hay crop would be short we planned for a good 
root crop. Turnips were sown wherever a place could 
be made for them—after peas and early sweet corn, be¬ 
tween the rows of late corn and potatoes—wherever a 
vacant space occurred. We have now a fine cron—more 
stock food than could possibly be produced with any other 
crop under like circumstances. We feed them while milk¬ 
ing and never find any bad odors in the milk. Should the 
roots b8 cut f Many farmers find a root-cutter or slicer 
necessary while others merely throw the roots in front, of 
the cows, and let them gnaw them as sheep would. We 
believe it pays well to slice the big ones, and that it would 
pay better yet to pulp them as the English farmers do. A 
cow’s teeth are worth saving. 
Whole or Cut Ensilage? Value of Winter Work. 
I notice that Prof. Massey is on the war path again 
against uncut ensilage. Does not be forget that there 
may be differences in conditions, which will account for 
the continued use of uncut ensilage by many farmers in 
New England ? He seems to think that it is impossible 
to make good ensilage from uncut corn. L*»t me bring 
forward the testimony of two witnesses, directors of ex¬ 
periment stations, whose testimony must be admitted as 
reliable. In New Hampshire Agriculture. Volume XVII., 
page 377, I find the following statement made by Prof. 
G. H. Whttcher: "The experience of the past two years, 
both on the college farm and among others who have 
tried the system, has clearly shown that corn may be 
stored whole in the silo, giving, in many reacts, a better 
preserved ensilage than when cut in half inch lengths.” 
Again, Prof. W. W. Cooke says: “ Onr silos were filled 
this year in alternate layers of cut and whole ensilage 
(corn.) Whole fodder comes out in the best shape. No 
sour smell about it. Any ensilage has some sour taste or 
acid in it. The corn we used was mostly King Phillip ; 
all had ears and some were quite ripe. Where whole corn 
Is put in the silo it is the universal verdict that it comes 
out in a better condition than the cut. The riper the 
corn is the more starch and less sugar. There is not much 
difference In the cost of putting it in, whether whole or 
cut. It takes twice as long to get whole corn out of the 
silo as cut.” Eleventh Vermont Agricultural Report, 
page 29. 
Now here are the statements of two directors of experi- 
