TWO DOLLARS A YEAR.] 
“PROGRESS AND IMPROVEMENT.” 
[SINGLE NO. FIVE CENTS. 
YOL. IX. NO. 9.1 
ROCHESTER, N. Y.-SATURDAY, FERRUARY 27, 1858. 
{WHOLE NO. m. 
MOORE’S RURAL NEW-YORKER, 
AN ORIGINAL WEEKLY 
Agricultural, Literary and Family Newspaper. 
CONDUCTED BY D. D. T. MOORE, 
WITH AH ABLE CORPS OF ASSISTANT EDITORS. 
Thb Rural New-Yorker is designed to be nusnrpassed n 
Yalne, Pnrity, Usefulness and Variety of Contents, and unique and 
beautifn] in Appearance,' Its Conductor devotes his persona] atten- 
tion to the supervision of its various departments, and earnestly labors 
to render the Rural an eminently Reliable Guide on the important 
Practical, Scientific and other Subjects Ultimately connected with tiro 
business of those whose interests it zealously advocates It embraces 
more Agricultural, Horticultural, Scientific, Educational, Literary and 
News Matter, Interspersed with appropriate and beautiful Engravings, 
than any other journal,—rendering it the most complete Agricultu¬ 
ral Literary and Family Journal in America 
SPECIAL CONTRIBUTORS I 
PROr. C. DEWEY, Lt. M. F. MAURY, 
T. C. PETERS, IL T. BROOKS, 
T. S. ARTHUR, .Mrs. M. J. HOLMES, 
Mbs E. C. HUNTINGTON, Miss C. A HOWARD. 
JENNY MARSH PARKER 
CIP" All communications, and business letters, should be addressed 
to D, D. T. MOORE, Rochester, N. Y. 
For Terms nnd other particulars, see last page. 
1. 
Jb 
COMPARATIVE NUTRITION OF FOOD. 
From what we said last week of the difference 
between the apparent and actual nutrition of food, 
caused by ease of digestion, &c., it will be apparent 
that to establish a scale exhibiting the comparative 
nutrition of feeding substances is a work of diffi¬ 
culty and liable to mistakes. The nutritive effects 
of food are dependent upon so many circumstances 
—the condition of the animal, the purpose for 
which it is fed, the mode in which it is housed and 
protected from the cold—that our readers must not 
be surprised should their experience differ, 111 some 
instances, from the estimates given. Notwithstand¬ 
ing this acknowledgment, which truth demands, the 
knowledge already gained on this subject is of 
great value, as it furnishes a very good, though not 
iafallable guide in practice. 
In making a comparat’ve estimate of the value 
of food, it is necessary that some well known article 
should be taken as a standard, with which to com¬ 
pare others. English meadow, or Timothy hay, has 
been selected for this purpose, and is represented 
by the number 100. Any article like potatoes, con¬ 
taining one-half as much nutriment in a given 
quantity, as the hay, is put down at 200, showing 
that it would require 200 pounds of the latter to 
produce the same result as 100 pounds of the for¬ 
mer. Corn contains about twice as much nutriment 
as hay, and is, therefore, put down at 50, showing 
that 50 pounds of corn will produce the same ef¬ 
fect as 100 pounds of hay. With this explanation 
aM will he able to understand the table below, which 
we give from the best authorities: 
[ Thkohetiuai. h Experiments. 
The theoretical value as given above, is from 
Boussingault, and the value, as shown by feeding 
experiments, bears the name of the experimenter at 
the head of each column. From these it will be 
seen how far the results of actual experiments dif¬ 
fer from those obtained by analysis, and from each 
other. From these facts and figures farmers must 
make their own deductions. 
All calculations made in Europe on the capa¬ 
bilities of the soil for producing food, assume that 
one and a half tons of hay is the general or aver¬ 
age yield per acre—this ratio is higher than with 
us. According to the highest value given to corn 
in the table, it will be seen that one pound is eqnal 
in value to two of hay, so that to produce the same 
nutrition from an acre in corn as from an acre 
yielding one and a half tons of hay, the former 
must yield 25 bushels at CO pounds to the bushel. 
Turnips are not cultivated very generally in this 
country, and our climate affords some excuse for 
he neglect. r llie table shows a wide range between 
Food. 
Water in 100 parts. 
Nutritive equivalent. 
Petri. 
Thaer. 
Pabet. 
Meadow Hay 
11.0 
100 
100 
100 
100 
Rye straw 
18.7 
479 
600 
666 
350 
Oat straw 
21.0 
383 
200 
190 
200 
Barley straw 
11.0 
460 
180 
150 
200 
Wheat straw... 
26 0 
426 
360 
450 
300 
Pea straw. 
8.5 
64 
200 
130 
150 
Buckwheat straw 
11.6 
240 
200 
Mangold leaves 
88.9 
230 
... 
600 
Carrot leaves. 
70.9 
135 
Swedes_ 
91.0 
676 
300 
300 
250 
Mangold Wurtzel 
400 
460 
250 
White Silician beet 
85.6 
609 
Carrots. 
87.6 
382 
250 
300 
250 
Potatoes . 
75.9 
319 
200 
200 
200 
Turnips . 
92.5 
885 
600 
526 
450 
Indian corn_ 
18.0 
70 
52 
Buckwheat. 
12.5 
55 
64 
Barley_ . 
13.2 
65 
61 
! 76 
50 
Oats. 
12.4 
60 
71 
1 86 
60 
Rye 
11.5 
58 
55 
| 71 
1 50 
Wheat. 
10.5 
55 
62 
| 64 
40 
the theoretical and practical value of this root, hut 
estimating its value at one-sixth that of hay, it 
would require nearly 400 bushels to the acre to 
furnish an equivalent for 1$ tons of hay or 25 
bushels of corn. 
The carrot is now receiving, and very deservedly, 
a good deal of attention from farmers. Three 
pounds of carrots is supposed to be a fair equiva¬ 
lent for one pound of hay, and six for one pound 
of corn. This may bo estimating the carrot a little 
too high, and as we wish to be careful on this 
point, we will, in our calculation reduce its value 
to one-fourth that of hay and one-eiglith of corn. 
According to this it will require 12,000 pounds of 
carrots, which is 200 bushels at 60 pounds to the 
bushel to be grown on an acre to furnish an equiv¬ 
alent for the hay. It must strike every one in a 
moment, that this is not much more than a quarter 
of a crop of carrots. No one should think of be¬ 
ing satisfied with less than COO bushels, and our 
State Agricultural Society very wisely refuses to 
consider applications for premiums where the crop 
does not come up to this standard. At this rate 
one acre of carrots will produce as much nutritive 
matter as three acres in hay, or corn, the former at 
1$ tuns to the acre, and the latter 25 bushels. That 
this is by no means a maximum crop is shown very 
plainly by the reports in the Agricultural Journals, 
as well as by the premiums awarded by the differ¬ 
ent State Agricultural Societies. In the last Trans¬ 
actions of the Massachusetts Hoard of Agriculture, 
Daniel Buxton, Jr., of South Danvers, is reported 
as having raised 5C0 bushels, and Ephraim Brown, 
of Marble Head, 553 bushels, each on half an acre. 
In the Transactions of our own State for 1855, the 
premium for the largest crop of carrots grown on 
an acre was awarded to E. C. Bliss, of Westfield, 
for 1,280 bushels, and the premium for the largest 
crop of corn to J. V. Drove, of Ovid, for 98 bushels 
of ears. Take these two premium crops as an ex¬ 
ample, and it will be found that the enrrota con¬ 
tained a« muon nutriment as three such crops of 
corn. Whether the production of the 1,280 bushels 
of carrots cost three times as much as the 98 
bushels of ears, is a question we shall not attempt 
to decide, as it is our object to present facts and 
not to draw inferences. 
A crop of carrots, we believe to he as certain as 
any other crop raised by the farmer, and far more 
sure than the potato crop has been for many years 
past Even corn has partially failed here, more 
than once in the last ten years, but in that time we 
have not seen a failure with carrots where they 
were properly treated. 
CLEARING AND IMPROVING MARSHES. 
Many farms throughout the country are dis¬ 
figured by portions of marsh or swamp land, of 
various extent and characteristics, but alike in 
being nearly valueless for all the purposes of Agri¬ 
culture, in their present unimproved condition. 
They may afford a covert for birds, and a haunt for 
reptiles, and, perhaps, some wild berries and coarse 
grasses, but their growth, unlike that of the forest, 
does not increase in value with succeeding years. 
Yet, when drained and cleared, these eye-sores of 
the provident husbandman become the most easily 
cultivated and productive part of the farm. Their 
reclamation may he expensive, but a few years will 
repay the outlay, and an additional handsome 
profit to the farmer. This subject has received 
considerable attention in New England; and the 
premiums offered by the different Agricultural So¬ 
cieties, have brought out a mass of information in 
the statements of competitors and reports of com¬ 
mittees. Without further reference to the who, 
when, and where, we shall mention some instances— 
as the facts alone are of importance to our readers. 
One farmer, who has reclaimed fifteen acres of 
swamp land, did it by open draining, clearing off 
hogs and brush, and then carting on 300 loads of 
gravel to the acre. The whole cost, per acre, was 
about $20. The land is flooded every year, which 
increases the quantity, and improves the quality of 
the grass, and the profit on the present crops is 
equal to the interest of $300 per annum. 
In another instance, ten acres of bog meadow were 
reclaimed at an expense of $10 to $20 per acre. It 
was first thoroughly drained by covered sluices, 
laid three feet deep, then plowed flat and harrowed. 
Then twenty-five loads of compost, composed of 
two parts upland soil, and one of stable manure, 
were applied per acre. The second year a dressing 
of oyster-sliell lime was given. In August the land 
was harrowed fine, and seeded with half a bushel of 
herd’s grass, one bushel of red top and twelve 
quarts of clover seed, per acre, and smoothed down 
with a roller. The yield is stated at from two to 
three tuns per acre. 
Another farmer reclaimed three a*res of muck, 
generally covered with water, and situated in a 
hollow on the mountains, as follows:—He first 
opened an outlet for the water; three years after 
lowered this, cut ditches around and across, every 
ten rods apart, and put some small potatoes in cul¬ 
tivation. The natural condition of the marsh was 
a vegetable deposit of muck and peat, from three 
to twelve feet deep. The fifth year after com¬ 
mencing upon it, the crops of corn, potatoes and 
garden vegetables on one-half the lot, paid the 
whole expense of reclaiming and cultivation. 
The last instance we shall now mention, is that 
of a farmer who drained his marsh and carted on 
300 loads of gravel per acre, which changed it from 
a worthless, mirey spot, producing not more than 
three-fourths of a tun of poor fodder per acre,— 
carried out on poles,— to land now producing 
three tuns of excellent hay per acre, which he can 
rake with his horse-rake, and draw off with his cart 
and oxen at pleasure. The crops pay six per cent 
on the expense of bringing into and keeping in 
cultivation. 
These statements show that it is profitable to 
clear and drain marshes. Let us, then, remove 
these pestilent quagmires from our farms, by mak¬ 
ing them into good land —yielding good crops of 
almost every farm product—and bringing cash into 
our pockets, instead of, as now, sickness to our 
families, and our hearts. 
CAN BEEF-MAKING PAY! 
WATSON’S “NO PATENT” PORTABLE FARM FENCE. 
A sound maxim in farming is to get manure. 
More manure, more crops, and more crops more 
stock, and more stock more manure. So that on a 
good farm well managed, the tendency should he 
to increased fertility of the soil, by the sinking 
therein increased capital in the manure annually 
applied. We must keep stock. The questions 
then arise, how can we best dispose of it? Shall 
it be lean or fat, young or old? 
Theso questions require answers differing much 
under the conditions of the persons making them, 
as well as the place wherein made. In the peculiar 
corn growing regions of the Western States, a dif¬ 
ferent answer may ho gl m from what we should 
expect in our own State or in the New England 
States. I purpose, however, to confine the inquiry 
mainly to our own State: in the outset presuming, 
however, that where the farm is adapted to the 
purpose, no business is so uniformly profitable as a 
well conducted dairy. 
The first consideration is, what does it cost to 
make a pound of beef? In a former number I 
showed that it had been satisfactorily settled, that 
it would require, at least 4$ lbs. of corn meal to 
make a pound of beef, and it must be fed to the 
best advantage to do this. It was also shown that 
18 lbs. of good hay would do the same thing, and 
for the present I shall confine myself to stall-feeding. 
The average price of corn in this State is not 
less than 50 cents for 50 His., or a bushel, and $0 per 
tun for hay. We will allow two tuns of hay, or 50 
bushels of corn as the product of an acre. An 
acre of corn will produce, then, 500 lbs. of beef, 
and an acre of grass, in hay, 222 lbs. The value of 
the hay would be $12—of the corn $25, so that 
with hay, it would cost 5 cents and 4 mills per B>., 
and with corn 4 cents and 4$ mills. But as it would 
not be as profitable to feed all hay or all corn, we 
will feed half hay, and half meal, which would 
make the cost of a pound of beef at 4 cents 9.J 
mills, or say 5 cents. Allowing a daily consump¬ 
tion equal to the making of 4 lbs. of beef, or rather 
to the adding of 4 lbs. to the live weight of the 
animal, the two tuns of hay would feed it for 56$ days ) 
and the corn for 140 days. Putting the corn and 
hay together, and it will furnish feed for two ani¬ 
mals for nearly 100 days—about the usual time for 
stall-feeding. 
No allowance has been made in the foregoing for 
attendance, interest on cost of animal, nor upon 
the fixtures necessary for its protection—for with¬ 
out warm shelter the quantity of food must be 
largely increased to produce the required improve¬ 
ment in the animal. Will the manure pay for 
these items? Let us see. Von Tiiaer says that it 
is safe to estimate the dry food and litter as 
doubled in weight by its transformation into dung, 
by which is meant the solid as well as the liquid 
excrements. Assuming that data, we get six tuns 
and a half of manure, which, if applied to half an 
acre, would give nearly ten ounces to the square 
foot—a very liberal manuring—and would add to 
the productive capacity of the land, in the two fol¬ 
lowing crops, at least liftecn bushels of corn, or its 
equivalent We get the, for our trouble in feeding, 
and the use of capital, $7 50, or nearly one cent per 
pound for the increased live weight I would be 
very willing to furnish bain room and all the 
necessary litter and attendance for the manure 
made by stall-fed animals, and would even pay the 
interest on the cost of the animals while feeding. 
The actual cost, then, under the most favorable 
circumstances, of increased weight of stall-fed cat¬ 
tle is 5 cents per lb., and good animals for feeding, 
in high condition, can usually be bought about the 
1st of December for from 3 to 3$ cents per lb., live 
weight. The sales from the stables are usually 
made in about 3$ to 4 months or from the 15th of 
February to the 1st of March—the average being 
not far from 100 days. During that time 400 lbs. 
has been added to its live weight at an expense of 
$20. Supposing the animal when first put up, to 
weigh 1,200 lbs., costing on an average at 3| cents 
Mr. Moore: —As Patent fences seem to lie in 
order in your Rural New-Yorker, I venture to 
offer my No Patent Portable Farm Fence for its 
chances amongst its Patent cousins. It is simply 
a modification of the rail fence, I have been using 
many years, the result of studying economy in the 
use of fencing timber, (which is leaving our forests 
hereabouts at railroad speed,) and other matters of 
utility which should enlist the attention of every 
farmer who desires to make his occupation plea¬ 
sant and profitable. Without claiming unqualified¬ 
ly “more strength and durability than any OTHER 
portable fence introduced," or ill any way avoidable 
alluding to those most renowned q/'-fences-Patent, 
I will as concisely as possible offer a few explana¬ 
tions of its humble pretensions for the benefit of 
some of your readers who can get along with a com¬ 
mon, simple article until they are more able (and 
willing) to reward the worthy efforts of our liberal 
Yankee inventors. 
This fence is made of most kinds of our lorest 
timber, sawed into “stuff” 1 by 3 inches, or thicker 
if preferred, 12 to 13 feet long,—in panels of 0 rails 
and 4 battens, all of same size. One rail, if 13 feet 
long, makes 4 battens, each 4 feet 3 inches long, 
and no waste. The end battens are put on about 6 
inches from ends of rails, depending upon thick¬ 
ness of stuff and crook or “ worm” desired, and pro- 
jecting below the rails 3 inches at one end and 3 
inches above at the other end and on opposite sides, 
to receive the ends of the top or bottom rail (as the 
case may be) of the adjoining lengths or panels, 
and the two middlo battens of about same length 
with ends, sawed angling, are placed angling across 
the fence nearest together at tops, with lower ends 
spreading far as the length of the battens require 
to bring them even with top and bottom rails,— 
which position serves as braces t,o prevent racking, 
and making only one good clinch nail necessary at 
each crossing of batten and rail. Every panel is 
made with the battens reversed from those of the 
adjoining panels, that, they may be placed in a po¬ 
sition to support each other, with no ends of rails 
cut off to weaken the. fence, and in shoemaker’s par¬ 
lance, “rights and lefts." 
The 5 spaces between rails are 4, 5, G, 7 and 8 
inches, with 6 rails 3 inches each, making each 
length 4 feet high, exclusive of corner foundation 
blocks and the top or bottom rails of the adjoining 
lengths at each end, and only 18 inches pcrpendic- 
lar resistance to the winds with spaces so wide for 
its free passage that it cannot blow away the fence 
when properly put up and fastened together with 
No. 9 annealed wire passed around the middle of 
the two adjoining end battens, and simply hooked 
together, costing much less than wooden hook or 
wedge, nnd more durable if iron bears exposure to 
the elements better than wood. 
In each 12 feet length there are 22 feet of inch 
lumber, which at $1 00 per 100 is 22 cents, and 24 
nails, say 5 cents, is 27 cents for material to mako 
10$ to 11 feet in the air line of a “worm” fence.— 
Now add to 27 cents 5-11 of itself, and you have 
about 40 cents for materials for a rod, leaving a 
margin of 10 cents for the trilling fraction for wire, 
and putting up (by any man who knows right from 
left, and can drive a nail,) to bring the cost within 
50 cents per rod, and no Patent fees to pay ,— cheap 
enough and good enough for me. Jos. Watson. 
Clyde, N. Y., 1857. 
Remarks. — A drawing and description of above fence 
were furnished ns last summer, and we intended to give 
the same a few weeks after receipt. The no-patent “pa¬ 
pers” were, however, mislaid, and when wanted would not 
« turn up.” But as we had resolved to give Rural read¬ 
ers the benefit of friend Watson’s invention, we subse¬ 
quently applied for another copy of his “ plan and speci¬ 
fications,” which (after postponing till near the fence¬ 
making season,) we now present as above.— Ed. 
per lb., $40, and at the end of the 100 days the total 
eost would be $00 for 1,(100 lbs. live weight, or 3.J 
cents per pound. 
That these estimates are more or less liable to 
variation there is no doubt; hut it is quite certain 
that actual experiment would show a cost more 
likely larger than smaller. To bring it within even 
these figures will require skillful managing of the 
material used so that none may be wasted, and all 
made to produce its full measure of increase.— 
Neither too much nor too little must he given. 
From what is known now in regard to stall-feeding, 
is it not safe to say, that at least three-quarters of 
all the farmers who feed, actually lose money, un¬ 
less the manure be worth much more than the esti¬ 
mate here placed upon it? 
But we are told by our Western cousins that they 
can heat us out of sight in making beef, and that 
we cannot possibly compete with them, and this 
idea has induced many to sell their farms in this 
State, and in New England, and go to this land of 
magnificent promises. Perhaps, after all, the dif¬ 
ference in their favor is more apparent than real. 
Corn will average 20 cents per bushel over the 
greater portion of the Western States. Now, in 
their slovenly method of feeding, want of shelter, 
and proper care, it will require at the least 11 
lbs. of corn for 1 lb. of increased live weight—or 
a bushel of corn will only give about 5 lbs.—mak¬ 
ing the cost 4 cents per lb. Taking the increased 
expense of reaching market, and the greater loss 
by shrinkage, at 1 cent per lb. against them, and 
the competition is not very alarming after all.— 
Will somebody correct my figures and theory?—r. 
THE CRAMPON. 
During the winter season, when ice and snow 
render the streets slippery, and horses are continu¬ 
ally endangering the lives of those whom they are 
carrying and drawing, on account of the difficul¬ 
ties attendant upon keeping an upright position, 
various practices are resorted to for the purpose of 
obviating the evil, and also to assist the ani¬ 
mal in its endeavors to maintain its footing. In 
England roughing is resorted to—a number of ser¬ 
rations on the bottom of the shoe are made with a 
file—but this mode very soon renders the shoe 
worthless. In our own country the shoes are 
calked —steel spikes worked on them—but many are 
inclined to think that this course results in injury 
to the hoof the horse. The Crampon — the form 
and adjustment of which, our engraving gives an 
accurate idea—is a combination of the calk with an 
elastic shoe, and is the invention of M. Anelli, of 
j/mdon, England. Several trials of its merits have 
been made upon the ice with heavy loads, and it 
was found that the horses had a good, steady hold, 
and the wear was very slight. The Illustrated In¬ 
ventor says it “ is intended as a sort of outer shoe to 
prevent horses from slipping in frosty weather. It 
is readily buckled on and taken off the hoof, with¬ 
out, of course, removing the shoe, and will last for 
years. It supersedes the very inconvenient, expen¬ 
sive and ruinous method of what is termed rough¬ 
ing now in use; and, having been tried in the 
presence of Mr. Longworthy, principal veterinary 
surgeon to the Queen, and Mr. Wilkinson, princi¬ 
pal veterinary surgeon to the Horse Guards, it has 
met with their most entire approval. The Vete¬ 
rinary College of Britain also hold this invention 
in high esteem.” 
CULTIVATION OF THE SUN - FLOWER. 
Four years ago, in an article in the Michigan 
Farmers’ Companion, I advocated the more exten¬ 
sive cultivation of the Sun-Flower, on account of 
the numerous good qualties which it possesses, but 
I was not aware, at that time, that it was a valuable 
preserver of health, and as Lieut. Maury has 
clearly demonstrated that such is the tact, I can 
now give my testimony in support of his opinion. 
A few years ago, I lived on a farm in this State, 
which was not very well cleared, and being inter- 
\txuxsi2j, 
a r a wn • myn as s 
