agriculture 
ROCHESTER, N.Y.-FOR THE WEEK ENDING SATURDAY, MARCH 1, 1862. 
{WHOLE NO. 63. 
MOORE’S RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
the evil. To tax unproductive property was wrong 
in principle. You must tax productive property in 
order that the owner may be able to pay. 
Mr. E. Sherrill,, of Ontario, was surprised to 
hear Judge 0. oppose the tax law. lie was in favor 
of taxing dogs, and related instances in which the 
poor class of whelps and sheep-killers had destroyed 
flocks of sheep in his locality. Air. S. would tax 
every dog $5. and more if necessary to exterminate 
the race of whelps. What we want is to make the 
four thousand or more dogs in this State pay. 
People who have favorite dogs would be willing to 
pay a tax. to abate the nuisance of worthless curs. 
Mr. S.'s remarks were earnest and eloquent, eliciting 
applause from the audience. 
Mr. Peters was in favor of dogs and opposed to 
them. There were full five ttfousand in this State, 
and he thought the number ought to be cur-tailed, 
lie had a favorite Shepherd dog, now past being 
useful, which he thought much of. Others had their 
favorites: gentlemen in cities and villages keep 
their 44 pointers” and 14 setters 1 " to aid in killing the 
little birds when they go into the country. Mr. P. 
was in favor of a lax in order to reduce the number 
of dogs, but would not go as high as $5. Home 
years ago, when Supervisor, he succeeded in getting 
a tax on dogs, which reduced the number of curs. 
But it was opposed, and men barked Into office who 
were in favor of repealing, and the result was that 
the law was repealed. Mr. Peters concluded by 
offering the following: 
Whereas, Tliis Society has learned that a proposition is now 
before the Legislature of this State to protect the raisers of 
sheep by a tic on dogs; therefore, 
Reiolwd That it is the judgment of this Society that the 
Interests of the public demand that such a law should be 
passed as will protect, as far as is practicable, the raising of 
sheep from the depredation a of dogs. 
Mr. Ex-President Conger, of Rockland, alluded 
to statements made by the Ohio Ag. Society relative 
to injury to sheep in that State by dogs. Ho thought 
the statistics alarming. Mr. C., however, while 
favoring a tax on dogs, would make a discrimina¬ 
tion— he would not put the same tax (if indeed 
any) on a Shepherd dog as on a common one. So 
also of ratters and poodles — the latter could not 
injure sheep. 
Mr. Geodes remarked that the tan terriers were 
among the worst enemies of sheep; he had just 
destroyed one because he killed shfepj. 
Mr. Peters said that terriers and untrained Shep¬ 
herd dogs were the worst class of dogs — death on 
sheep. 
Mr. C. L. Kiersted, of Ulster, was in favor of 
taxing dogs enough to exterminate them. He 
would not discriminate, but tax all alike. It would 
not do to favor any party. He liked dogs —had 
two — and was willing to pay $5 a year on each. 
No man would keep a worthless dog one year if 
taxed $5. 
Hon. H. S. Randall, ofiCortland, said he had no 
dogs on his farm, uor did he want any. Even the 
Shepherd dogs were more bother than benefit — the 
men and boys were always trying experiments with 
them to see what they could and would do, Ac, He 
spoke of the Spanish Shepherd dogs, and of their 
value in their own country, but showed they were 
not what we wanted. Mr. R. was opposed to the 
whole race of dogs. Put the tax as high as you 
can. and let it be rigidly enforced. People all over 
the country were prevented from keeping sheep on 
account of dogs. 
Mr. E. Cornell, (Presidentelect,) of Tompkins, 
related that in traveling through the mountainous 
region of North Carolina, he thought it admirably 
adapted to wool growing; mentioned it to the peo¬ 
ple, but they said no, they could not grow wool 
there. On inquiring why, he was told that some 
gentlemen had, years before, organized a company, 
bought 1,000 Vermont sheep, and a large tract of 
mountain land. They bought negroes and dogs to 
take care of the sheep. The negroes, sheep and 
dogs were turned out on the land together—but the 
next year, when looking for the sheep for shearing, 
they could find few negroes, sheep or dogs. The 
dogs had destroyed most of the flock. Mr. C. spoke 
of the greai damage from dogs in Ohio and New 
Y'ork, giving statistics of some counties in this State. 
The present dog law is not properly understood — 
is construed differently. In some couuties the 
Supervisors tax sufficient to indemnify loss, but in 
others no tax is levied. He thought the Legislature 
(of which Mr. C. is a member,) now having the sub¬ 
ject under advisement, would tax $1 for the first 
dog and $2 for the second, owned by same person— 
S3 for one bitch and $5 for second. Mr. C. would 
like to heat the views of those present on this scale. 
Mr. Sherrill offered the following resolution: 
Resolved. That a committee of three bo appointed by the 
President of the Society to confer with die present Legisla¬ 
ture and urge the passage of such a law as will protect the 
farming interests from the destruction of sh«p tv dogs. 
Mr. Bogart “stood up for the dog. 
Mr. Randall replied that the English required 
dogs for watching, Ac., as they had no fences, but 
that their sporting and hunting dogs were kept con¬ 
fined—not allowed to roam at large. Mr. R. (in 
reply to a remark by Mr. Conger.) stated that not 
one American wool-grower in fifty kept a Shepherd 
dog. He had just returned from a visit among the 
sheep-breeders and wool-growers of Vermont Air. 
IlAMMOxn, and other leading sheep men, had no 
Shepherd dogs; indeed he did not see one iu Ver¬ 
mont. 
The President (Mr. Geodes, ) thought the greatest 
damage caused by dogs was in their deterring people 
from keeping sheep—that thousands were prevented 
from keeping them for this reason. The sheep of 
this State have largely decreased in a few years on 
this account —the ravages of dogs among flocks, 
especially near villages and cities, rendering the 
keeping of sheep extremely hazardous and unsafe, 
and certainly unprofitable. 
Afr. Cornell stated that the sheep of this State 
had fallen off about one-half within the past twenty 
years. In 1840 we had 5,118.779 sheep, but five 
years later, (in 1845.) the number was reduced to 
4,605,369. During the next ten years the decrease 
was over a million, for in J855 the census showed 
only 3.217,024. The decrease has probably been 
much greater, in proportion, since 1855. 
After some further remarks the resolutions w’ere 
unanimously adopted. Thu discussion was inter¬ 
esting and animated throughout, and we regret our 
inability to give a more extended report. Could it 
have been heard by the members of the Legislature, 
we think the propriety of taxing dogs would not 
long bo questioned by that honorable body. 
THK LEADING AMERICAN WEEKLY 
RURAL, LITERARY AND FAMILY NEWSPAPER. 
CONDUCTED BY D. D. T. MOORE, 
With an Able Corps of Assistants and Contributors, 
CHAS. D. ERAGDON, Western Corresponding Editor. 
Thb Rcral New-Yorker is designed to be unsurpassed in 
Value. Purity, Csefulneai and Variety of Contents, and unique 
and beautiful in Appearance, Its Conductor devotes bis per¬ 
sonal attention to the supervi-ion of its various departments, 
and earnestly labors to render the Rural an eminently Reliable 
Guide on all the important Practical. Scientific and other 
Subject* intimately connected with thijj business of those whose 
interests it zealously advocates. As a Family Journal it is 
eminently Instructive and Entertaining —being so conducted 
that it can be safely taken to the Hearts and Homes of people Of 
intelligence, taste and discrimination. It embraces more Agi i- 
cultural, Horticultural. Scientific. Educational, Literary and 
News Matter, interspersed with appropriate and beautiful 
Engravings, than any other journal,—rendering it the most 
complete Agricultural, Literary and Family Newspaper 
in America. 
C&~ For Terms and other particulars, see last page. 
In closing a brief synopsis of the proceedings of 
the recent Annual Aleeting of the State Ag. Society, 
in our last number, we alluded to the discussions 
and promised to recur to the subject. We now draw 
upon our note-book and memory to redeem the 
promise, though it will be impossible for us to give 
more than a mere sketch—the main points—ol the 
various arguments adduced by the gentlemen who 
participated in the discussions. 
The general attention now given to bee-culture, 
affords us great pleasure. This interest has been 
too much neglected, and if we have a little excite¬ 
ment and fever on the subject, of which speculators 
may take advantage to gain a few dollars from the 
enterprising, great good will iu the end be the 
result. It is now generally admitted, and certainly 
should be, that movable frames are a necessity in 
bee-keeping, and no hive without these conveniences 
will be received with any favor by Intelligent bee¬ 
keepers. Martin Metcalf, of Grand Rapids, 
Michigan, has invented a new movable frame-hive, 
on which he has received a patent, and which he 
claims is superior to others with which the people 
are familiar. We give an illn&t ration of lhisimprovc- 
ment—called Metcalf’s Improved Bee-Hive — 
together with the inventor’s description: 
11 This hive is intended, when full, for wintering, 
to contain four separate independent colonies of 
bees. In spring, as soon as bees begin their labors 
of the season, we transfer bees’ comb, by means of 
the movable comb frames, to other hives having but 
two stocks in the premises. These occupy opposite 
apartments, the movable fronts of the now tenant¬ 
less apartments being removed, and the temporary 
passage ways through the central walls of the hive, 
at. hbbb , so adjusted that a part of the bees, occu¬ 
pying A, may pass through B to and from the fields, 
while a part of those of C, in like manner, use D as 
a passage way, at the same time that the greater 
portion of both stocks use the more direct and larger 
outlet at a a. When drones appear in spring, and 
we desire to increase the number of our stocks, we 
open the Live, A, and transfer a card of comb, brood 
and bees (being careful not to get the queen) to the 
empty part, B, at the same time shuttiugoff the com¬ 
munication with the parent stock, and putting into 
place the adjustable front and top. Many of the 
bees will return to the parent hive, but enough of 
those that have been in the habit of using B as a pas- { 
sage way—knowing no other—will thus be detached 
from the mother stock, and having the necessary 
brood, will set themselves about rearing a queen, 
while the old hive, retaining their fertile queen, suf¬ 
fers no detriment, but. on the other hand, multiplies 
all the taster, rapidly filling the space made vacant 
by the removal of the comb frames, with new worker 
cells in which the queen finds ample room to depo- 
site her eggs, thus early in the season securing the 
greatest rapidity of breeding. 
‘•But to reiurn to our little colony. The tenth 
day after transfer we open the litter swarm, cutting 
out all but one of the queen cells, (of which we 
shall find from three to seven annually.) with which 
we start other swarms. We now, also, open the 
stock swarm, C, transferring a comb frame precisely 
in the same manner before described, in this case to 
D, starting another small colony, and to this latter 
we attach one of the queen cells taken from B. We 
have now to let our hive rest from eight to twelve 
days for the purpose of giving time for the maturity 
of the young queen, and their fertilization by flight 
with the drones, when, if the latter are abundant, 
wo shall find, on inspection of our little swarms, 
that they are In possession of new-laid worker eggs 
of the young queens. If, now, we turn the hive one- 
quarter tho way round, wo shall throw out a swarm 
of bees into each of tbe infant apartments, for it is 
well kuown that tho largest portion of a swarm of 
bees will return to the accustomed spot, after the 
removal of their hive to a new location—in the 
present instance to remain, for the reason that a 
queen and brood is found, together with abundant 
room ami consequent labor before them. Gauze- 
wire curtains are provided through the partition 
walls, as a safeguard against quarreling. 
“Where greater rapidity of multiplication is 
desired, our stock is left in each quadruple hive, in 
spring, preparatory to commencing the process of 
artificial swarming, when substantially the same 
process is resorted to, but to describe which, and the 
multiform mysteries and laws of the hive and honey 
bee, the limits of this paper denies. 
*• Amoug the objects secured by this new hive and 
system of management, are the following:—Colonies 
are multiplied to any desirable extent more readily 
than can be done by any other hive in use. All loss 
of swarms by flight to the woods is entirely pre¬ 
vented. All watching for the issueof swarms during 
the time is done away with. By the use of a new 
style of frame, combined with this hive, the removal 
of combs and bees, by any one, without the least 
precaution, is safely accomplished. The revolving 
principle for artificial swarming, now first presented 
to the public, renders the perfect equalization of 
colonies an easy operation. A winter passage 
through the combs is provided, for the purpose of 
moru safely wintering them. In the quadruple 
hive, four times the ordinary amount of animal heat 
is secured in one body, for the same object. The 
form of the movable frames is such that combs may 
be readily transferred from the common box hive to 
them, at the suine time they are kept firmly in place, 
perfectly parallel with each other, and are not too 
shallow for safely wintering. Tbe presence of a 
fertile queen is at all times insured, thus effecting a 
saving of at least twenty days’ time in breeding over 
the natural method of swarming—no eggs being laid 
in a hive after having thrown eut a first swarm of 
ihe current year, under from twenty to thirty days.” 
WESTERN EDITORIAL NOTES 
I have a number of deferred items in my note 
book. Many of these are nr‘re suggestions; some 
are only whims of men with whom 1 have talked, 
on which they base practice; other some are prac¬ 
tical facts. I give them here for what they are 
worth. 
BUCKWHEAT JAND BARK LICE. 
“ I have no bark lice in my orchard,” said a far¬ 
mer to me, w because I have got rid of them." 
How did you get rid of them? 
-My trees were very lousy. An old Hoosier 
came along three years ago, discovered the lice, and 
told me to sow buckwheat on the ground, let it 
grow, lie on the ground and decay there —let it 
cover the ground as a mulch. Have done so, and 
the lice have disappeared.” 
The orchard was in grass before, and the plowing 
and thorough culture, which the buckwheat seeding 
gave it, together with the enriching nature of the 
mulch, may have been the direct cause. Culture, I 
believe, will cure orchards of this pest, in most 
cases. And ashes applied about the base of lousy 
trees are found to render the tree uncomfortable for 
the lice. 
WHITE CLOVEH A POISON FOR SHEEP. 
Daniel Kelley, Jr., of Du Page county, told 
me that white clover, when in blossom in early 
spring, is a poison to sheep. He urges the import¬ 
ance of keeping salt and ashes before them all the 
time—equal parts ot each. They should be fed 
this before the clover starts, after a rain in warm 
weather. Fresh clover will make their teeth sore. 
Old sheep are rarely injured; but young sheep are 
quite liable to injury. If a sheep is discovered 
affected, drench the animal with a glass of alcohol 
or spirits of some sort at once. Let it be no stronger 
than a man would be able to drink it He regards 
it the best remedy. Lard or ashes are next best. If 
a sheep is attacked, death ensues at once, unless 
some remedy is applied. 
ANALYSES OP SOILS. 
At a well-attended meeting for discussions, held 
in the Lecture Room of the Society, on Thursday, 
Mr. President Geddes in the chair, the following 
preamble and resolution (introduced the previous 
evening by Prosper M. Wetmoke, of New York, 
and laid upon the (able,) were taken up: 
Whereas, It is of the first, importance to the Agricultural 
Interests of the United States to he possessed of the best 
information which the science and skill of the country tan 
command, of the deterioration of tho soils of the several 
States, from cultivation, and also of any remedies which may 
be known, to lesseiior counteract such deterioration; therefore, 
Resolved, That Uie Commissioner of Patents he requested 
to procure and report to Congiess analyses of the arable lands 
of the United States, showing the per ventage of proximate 
organic and inorganic fertilizing elements contained in their 
cultivated depth; also, the annual yield of the same crop on 
Uie same soil from the first to the latest cultivation; also, the 
estimated amount of fertilizing material in crops annually 
exported from the United States. 
On reading the preamble and resolution, Mr. 
Geddes remarked that he did not believe the soils 
ot the country were deteriorating— hence the basis 
of tbe resolution was erroneous. In Mr. G.’s opinion 
our soils were increasing in fertility, rather than 
deteriorating, as assumed by Mr. Wetmuke. and 
gave cogent reasons tor the opinion expressed. He 
trusted the Society would nut endorse an assump¬ 
tion so fallacious as that embodied in the preamble. 
Mr. Wm. Newcomb, of Rensselaer, said that from 
forty years’ experience as a practical farmer, he was 
of opinion that our soils were not deteriorating, as 
assumed, and therefore opposed the resolution. He 
had little or no faith in the analysis of soils as a 
remedy, even if the assumption of deterioration 
were true, as his experience led him to believe that 
little dependence could be placed upon analyses. 
Judge Osborn, of Albany, did not believe our 
soils were deteriorating, uor, if they were, that 
analyses would prove reliable. The Judge related 
some of his experience in analyzing soils — that he 
found a similar result in testing both poor and rich 
soils —and concluded that proper cultivation, the 
liberal use of the plow and hoe, must be the main 
dependence. 
Other gentlemen, practical farmers, opposed the 
resolution—contending that by proper culture, rota¬ 
tion, plowing in clover, &e., our soils would continue 
to increase in fertility, or at least not deteriorate. 
Hon. T. C. Peters, of Genesee, after some 
remarks pertinent to the subject, offered the follow¬ 
ing substitute, which was adopted: 
Whereas, It is important to the Agricultural Interests of the 
United States that the most reliable information should be 
obtained with regard to the effect of the continued cultivation 
of our soils upon their fertility; therefore, 
Resolved , That the Commissioner of the Patent Office be 
requested to institute such inquiries and Lake such 
CROSSING SPANISH MERINOS WITH SOUTH-DOWNS 
The same shepherd, talking of crosses of sheep, 
said that crossing the Spanish buck on South-Down 
ewes, increases the quantity and improves the 
quality of the fleece without affecting the quality of 
the South-Down mutton. He obtains larger car¬ 
casses from such a cross; and believes, when sheep 
are bred for mutton, near a market, this cross much 
more profitable than the pure bred South-Downs. 
He does not think the Leicester and Bakewell 
breeds as profitable here as the South-Downs, lie 
calls tho South-Downs and Devon, the best mutton 
and beef animals or breeds. He has found the Lei¬ 
cester tender in large flocks. Has had 1,200 together 
and knows. He has bred the Bakewell, but the 
Downs were better—like a Suffolk pig, they are al¬ 
ways ready for market. 
haired. The two large Yorkshire sows are pur¬ 
chased for the purpose of using the large middle 
breed boar upon them; thus insuring the progeny 
more hair, than is now found on the pure middle 
breeds. I was shown one small middle breed sow, 
which I must call the most beautiful animal I ever 
saw, of the hog kind. 
Mr. W. could give me but little information rela¬ 
tive to the history of these breeds. They are the 
result of long continued careful breeding—crossing 
with whatever breed best insures the ideal point the 
breeder aims at. They seem to possess (especially 
the small middle breed) some of the characteristics 
of the Suffolk, yet when fattened—-filled out”— 
they put on flesh where the Suffolk does not. The 
object of this style of breeding is to <jci the flesh on 
ihe back , ichere it can be carried C The large mid¬ 
dle breed is smaller than the true Yorkshire. 
• I'oirniL.' to (Vie of hi* sows, Mr. IV, -aid —" 1 can put nine 
inelies -olid fat on the back of that animal by the usual inode 
of feeding to fatten.” 
At Milwaukee, at the Fair there last fall, I met 
and was introduced to Mr. Edward Waterhouse, 
as the owner of a large middle breed boar, labelled 
“Don Pedro.” He invited me home with him to 
look at his pigs, saying his finest animals were yet 
at home; were not in condition to exhibit. Arrived 
at his place, I found seven imported sows in his 
pens. Two of these were of the large Yorkshire 
breed, with pig by prize (Yorkshire) boars, and out 
of prize sows. Three of the seven were of the large 
middle breed—all of them in pig before they left 
England. The remaining two sows are of the small 
middle breed, and in pig by English boars of the 
same breed. Mr. W. has one large boar 19 months 
old and a large middle breed sow from the same 
litter. 
These hogs are quiet —very long, broad, deep, 
with small head, good hams and shoulders. The 
small middle breed are larger than tbe Suffolks, and 
carry quite as little hair; Mr. W. says, however, 
that there are families of these breeds that are more 
YORKSHIRE. LARGE AND SMALL MIDDLE YtTUFTcn 
SWINE. 
Loudon says of the old Yorkshire breed:—•• This, 
in the old breed, was probably the worst large 
variety we had; extremely long legged and weak 
loined. their constitution not the soundest, and bad 
sty-pigs in the winter season: they were quicker 
feeders than some of the superior breeds. They 
have been improving some years from the Berkshire 
cross, but are still inferior to the north-western 
stock, rendering a less price in market" 
Whatever may have been the character of the old 
breed, there are modern specimens of this (im¬ 
proved) breed that seem to possess none of the ob¬ 
jectionable features above detailed. 
action as 
may be necessary to determine whether their fertility is 
increasing or diminishing 
TAX UPON DOGS. 
The President then announced the question 
selected for discussion to be the propriety of the 
law now before the Legislature, authorizing a Tax 
on Dogs. 
Mr. Newcomb, of Rensselaer, was in favor of 
taxing dogs. Some people who kept dogs—and the 
worst class of curs—thought more of them than they 
did ol their wives and children, and made better 
provision for them. 
Judge Osborn thought the tax would not obviate 
” Heaven 
created the dog as well as the sheep for a wise pur¬ 
pose. He asked, (and would like to have Mr. Ran¬ 
dall respond.) why the English kept so many 
dogs among their sheep and other stock, if they 
were so injurious, Ac. Mr. B. made other remarks 
—more eloquent and facetious than plausible, aud 
evidently because no one else bad defended the 
canine race, or offered any resistance to the •• swift 
destruction” to which several speakers would hurry 
the entire tribe. 
■i 1- 
A 
* 
r? 
6 
T> 
oj. 
I_ 
