AD'3. 29 
MOORE’S RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
gain); gitfibandra. 
CAN THE BUTTER IN MILK BE IN¬ 
CREASED BY SPECIAL FEEDING 1 ? 
The Boston Cultivator of .July 18thprinted 
an abstract of our recent address at the In¬ 
dianapolis Butter Convention as reported by 
the Indianapolis papers and to the point re¬ 
ferring to the popular notion that extra feed¬ 
ing will increase the proportion, of butter or 
change greatly the constituents of milk, 
which we stated was a fallacy, the Editor of 
the Cultivator, Mr. Wethicrbll, says“Are 
you sure of this, friend Willard ( We think 
you err as reported. Do you mean to be 
understood as saying that cows fed on still 
slops give as good milk as when fed on good 
grass ? Let us hear.” 
Again in the Cultivator of July 25th, Mr. 
Wetherell quotes from a. letter of B. B. 
Moore in Herkimer, N. Y., in which he 
(Moore) says :—“The idea I wished to con¬ 
vey was that the quality of the milk is very 
much affected by the quality of food. I have 
conversed with several workers in this vicin¬ 
ity and all remarked the increased amount 
of milk required to make a pound of cheese 
during the scarcity of hay, &c.” To this Mr. 
Wetherell says:—“With Mr. Moore we 
fully agree; yet according to Prof. X. A. 
Willard of Little Falls, N. Y., at the Na¬ 
tional Butter Convention, published in our 
last issue from the Rural New-Yorker, Mr. 
Willard said “ Experiments prove that 
the general impression cf farmers that the 
composition or quality of milk may be chang¬ 
ed by changing the food, is a fallacy. Extra 
food may and does increase the quantity of 
milk, but not the constituents or proportions. 
The quality (that Is, the richness) of the milk 
must be sought, for in the the particular ani¬ 
mals or breeds and not in special feeding. 
Different kinds of food have great influence 
on the flavor of milk, and some foods are 
moie efficient than others in keeping up the 
strength of the cow. The dairyman should 
seek, therefore, such food as will keep his 
cow in a good, thrifty condition ; food that 
will make the largest quantity of milk of the 
best flavor. But. if he seeks very rich milk 
he must look to individual breeds noted for 
this peculiarity.” The italicising is Mr. 
Wetherell’s. See Rural New-Yorker 
July 11th. 
The quotations above, so far as they go, 
represent very nearly what we said in the 
address referred to. But there were other 
points or conditions urged in the connection. 
In the first place, we premised that the cow 
should bo iu good, healthy and thrifty con¬ 
dition; that she be receiving abundant ra¬ 
tions of healthy, nutritious food sufficient to 
keep up that condition ; and that under 
these circumstances and condition an extra 
feed of meal would not alter materially the 
relative constituents of her milk. Thus, for 
instance, if a cow is healthy, in good flesh 
and vigor, and has at her command an abun¬ 
dant supply of sweet and nutritious grass 
you cannot increase the relative proportion 
of butter in her milk by an extra feed of 
meal. You may possibly increase the quan¬ 
tity of milk—and in this way the quantity of 
butter yielded from day to day would be 
increased—but the butter in a given quan¬ 
tity of milk before the extra feeding would 
be about the same us that from the same 
quantity of milk after the extra feeding bad 
been resorted to. 
In the case referred to by Mr. Moore 
where, on account of scarcity of hay, the 
cows are getting an insufficient supply of 
food and os a consequence are thin in flesh, 
as was the fact In many of the herds of Her¬ 
kimer County during the last spring, the 
milk would undoubtedly be poor, since the 
cows, under these conditions, would be con¬ 
stantly drawing on their own llesh to make 
milk which, if the animals had been abun¬ 
dantly supplied with nutritious food, would 
hafe come from that souree. So, as we infer, 
when they began to get an abandonee of 
food and to recuperate their strength and 
condition the milk is improved in quality 
The experiments to which we referred as 
proving our assumption, are those of Kuhn 
and Boussingault, and no one, we are sure, 
is better able to discriminate between the 
value of proof drawn from well-conducted 
experiments and that of guess work or mere 
opinion than friend Wetherell. 
A friend of ours who has spent some time 
at the Agricultural Schools in Germany, has 
given a description as to the manner these 
experiments are conducted. He says:—“If 
1 have a dairy and make butter, it is worth 
while to know whether, hy increasing the 
amount of fatty matter in the food I can get 
a milk rich in butter, or whether in case I 
wish to make cheese during the hot summer 
months I can increase the amount of albu¬ 
men and caseiue in the milk by adding albu¬ 
minous material to the food. Here in Ger¬ 
many, when a question of this kind arises, 
they have a simple way of settling it. They 
tryandsBe. How Dr. KuUN and his assist¬ 
ants carried on this experiment and what the 
plan and results were, is thus detailed by 
t lern : 
In the stables of the Moeekern Station are 
some stalls especially set apart for cows 
under experiment. During the course of the 
experiment these cows are fed and milked 
under the direct supervision of one of the 
chemists, Dr. Haaso, whose duty it happens 
to be to attend to the feeding and milking. 
The cows are quietly eating their hay and 
oilcake, a cow-maid is milking one and the 
Doctor is looking on to see that no milk is 
spilled and is ready to taka the milk and 
weigh it as soon as it is ready. The general 
plan of the experiment is to feed the cows 
during one period of two or three weeks, 
with a rat ion rich in albuminoids, the ration 
being made up of hay, which we consider 
normal fodder, to which is added bean meal 
or rape cake, or some other substance rich 
in nitrogen, and then change the proportions, 
and for the next period furnish a preponder¬ 
ance of carbo-hydrates, or hay, with oil, 
starch, &o.. and note the difference, if any, 
in the quantity and quality of the milk. That 
would seem to be quite a simple matter, but 
in fact it is a very complicated work. To 
feed a cow three weeks on the highly nitro¬ 
genous food, and t hen suddenly change to a 
highly non-nitrogenous ration would be too 
great a shock upon the Internal system to 
allow the experiment to he reliable. And fur¬ 
ther, natural change that takes place iu the. 
composition and amount of tho milk, inde¬ 
pendent of the fodder, makes the work still 
more complicated. To get over these diffi¬ 
culties we must start with a period of normal 
foddering on goad meadow hay, then grad¬ 
ually change, through a transition period, to 
the more or lass nitrogenous feed, as the case 
may he, and continue this latter course of 
feeding for a long while, so as to be sure that 
it, has a fair opportunity to work out its full 
effect; then on to Urn second special ration, 
which on the supposition that the former 
was over-rich in nitrogen, will have an excess 
of carbo-hydrates. When this period has 
run on long enough, there conics another 
transition period, during which the carbo¬ 
hydrates will be removed, until at length we 
come back to meadow hay again, and this 
normal foddering is kept up through the last 
period. 
it is not necessary, in this place, to give 
the result of these experiments in detail; it 
will suffice to say that Dr. Kuhn has carried 
out a number of investigations similar to the 
one described, and several other well known 
investigators have been for -oine time past 
at work upon the same subject. Of these 
latter Professor Wolff, Director of the Ex¬ 
perimental Station at Hohonheim, in Wur- 
temberg, gives the result of a long series of 
investigations in the following language ; 
“One interesting result of these experi¬ 
ments is, that tl^e quality of the milk—the 
amount of butter it contains—leaving the 
taste out of account, has always remained 
the same, iu spite of manifold and important 
changes In the quality of the fodder. In fact, 
the changes in the amount of butter in the 
milk, as determined by chemical analysis, 
are so unimportant as to be entirely un¬ 
worthy of consideration. 
“As tile practical result of this we are 
left to infer that the quidily of food exercises 
no influence upon the quality —the amount 
of butter in the milk— while on the other 
hand the effect of fodder becomes readily 
aud distinctly manifest in the quantity of 
the milk yielded and in the increase or de¬ 
crease of the live weight of the animals. The 
quality of the milk secuia, therefore, to be 
determined by the peculiarities of the breed 
or the individual animal, at least as long as 
the fodderis healthy, jmlatable and sujflcient 
in quantity'' 
Dr. Kuhn gives the result of his own ex¬ 
periments in so far as they are directly ap¬ 
plicable to practice in similar language. He 
says:—“The Influence of variations in the 
fodder hi these experiments was manifested 
in the amount of milk yielded alone and noi 
In the quality. The influence upon the quan¬ 
tity is. however, quite apparent. As regards 
the desire of the farmer to increase the pro¬ 
duction of a certain element of the milk—as 
butter, for Instance—by a change in the qual¬ 
ity of the fodder, the above law is fully valid. 
The farmer must, on the other hand, look to 
the peculiarities of different breeds of cattle 
for that quality of milk which is best adapted 
to his own special purpose.” 
The subject is an interesting and important 
one, and we are glad friend Wetherell has 
called attention to it. And in this connec¬ 
tion we may remark that for the last 25 
years we have owned and lived upon a dairy 
farm, having a herd of from 25 to 30 cows 
employed for both cheese and butter mak¬ 
ing, and that our experiments have been 
numerous and carefully-conducted in these 
branches, and although in feeding we cannot 
claim that exactness as those of Dr. Kuhn 
and Prof. Wolff, still wo may say that in 
several instances we have had cows notorious 
for their poor quality (daficiency in butter) 
of milk which they yielded, and that by no 
variety or amount of special feeding were 
we able to improve the quality of their milk 
and make, them good butter cows. Our ex¬ 
periments with these cows have led us to favor 
the theory set up. And we may remark here 
that in all our addresses and writings we 
have endeavored to be extremely careful in 
advancing mere speculative theories. Having 
had a dairy at command with all the neces¬ 
sary machluery and appliances for conduct¬ 
ing experiments and satisfying ourselves as 
lo the reason and value of opinions aud state¬ 
ments, we have felt that there would be 
little excuse for advancing that which is not 
true in practice. Of course, all men are lia¬ 
ble to err and fall iuto wrong conclusions, 
and while we do not claim immunity from 
them we could not well forgive ourselves for 
making them public. Hence, it has been our 
rule to make up our opinions from actual 
practice on the farm, in the dairy and at the 
manger. In conclusion, we make this sug¬ 
gestion :—That if any one has a cow remark¬ 
able for yielding a poor quality of milk (and 
such can be found in almost every neighbor¬ 
hood where there is a considerable number 
of cows) she be set apart for experiment. 
Lot the owner test the value of different 
lcind3 of feed, aud if by any special feeding 
he may be able to change her milk so that it 
will rival that from the far-famed Jersey 
breed in richness, we shall be glad to print 
the result of his labors. If it can bo done, a 
knowledge of the process will be immensely 
valuable to our butter dairymen. 
-- 
YIELD OF MILK AND BUTTER FROM 
A JERSEY COW. 
Mr. H. 8. Ranke of Long Island commu¬ 
nicates to the Country Gentleman au inter¬ 
esting statement concerning the yield of 
milk and butter from a Jersey Cow owned 
by him. For the week from June 10th to 
June 10th, inclusive, the morning's yield of 
milk was 6(5 quarts and the evening’s yield 
7<»# quarts—or nearly 19# quarts per day. 
This gave 15 pounds of butter from one 
week’s churning. From the 17th to the UJtli 
of Juno inclusive, she gave 58 quarts, the 
cow being fed wholly on grass. From June 
20tli to 2tith, inclusive, she gave 135 quarts, 
which yielded 15# pounds of butter for the 
seven days. 
The next t rial was made upon an increase 
of feed, she being fed daily 3 quarts of wheat 
bran, 2 quarts of corn meal and I quart of 
linseed oilcake meal. She had this feed 
three days before the trial commenced, the 
record being from June 27th to June 29th, 
inclusive, her yield being 27# quarts. From 
June 30th t,o July fith, inclusive, the yield of 
milk was 133# quarts, or very uniformly, 10 
quarts per day. From this was made 15# 
pounds of butter, showing only a quarter of 
a pound more butter than she yielded during 
the week when she had grass only. 
This is a large yield of butter, being more 
than 2 pounds per day. The statement is 
interesting also, as showing that the addi¬ 
tional feed of grain had but slight effect on 
the quantity of butter yielded above that 
when fed upon grass alone. Mr. Ranke, 
however, Is of the opinion that a consider¬ 
able Increase of feed would have given better 
results ; aud lie remarks that, as it was, the 
6 quarts but just made good the deficiency in 
the pasturage owing to the dry weather and 
that duo to the worrying of the cow by flies. 
He proposes to continue the experiment, 
feeding a little higher, or varying the feed 
somewhat. 
According to the German experimenters, 
a cow that is in good condition and gets all 
the good grass she needs will not increase 
her butter yield materially by supplement¬ 
ing the good pasture with meal. Perhaps 
Mr. Ranke can show a different result, hut 
the experiment given above would seam to 
be confirmatory of those made in Germany. 
Cows which do not give on good pasturage 
fully one pound of butter a day, ought not 
to be bred from for dairy purposes. 
SHALL I DIP MY LAMBS. 
Such inquiry is a very frequent one at this 
seasou of the your, but flock masters still ap¬ 
pear to be somewhat divided as to the neces¬ 
sity for dipping Iambs, Not a few good 
managers aswfc that ticks, lice, and other 
vermin, for the removal of which lambs are 
tubbed, are only the result of indifferent 
thriving and bad management. With a cer¬ 
tain amount of truth the opponents of dip¬ 
ping assort that fresh pastures, plenty of 
room, and a few ounces daily of cake or 
corn, keep both skin, blood, and bowels in 
good order. Against the use of some dipping 
mixtures is urged the still more serious com¬ 
plaint that many of the lambs dipped thrive 
indifferently, aim some even die within a 
few days. Such mishaps occur sometimes 
where nostrums compounded at home have 
been used, sometimes where mixtures are 
obtained from the chemist, and sometimes 
where the operation has been performed by 
one of the professional dippers who travel 
some counties at this season of the year. 
But neither damage to health nor risk to 
life ought to result from the proper use of 
fitting dipping mixtures. Where the wool 
after dipping separates in handfuls, as is 
sometimes seen, it is evident that some pow¬ 
erful poison, probably corrosive-sublimate, 
has been injudiciously used. The liberal use 
of carbolic acid or other tar oils will .fre¬ 
quently bring on congestion of the lungs and 
symptoms of nervous disturbance depending 
upon the absorption of tiie volatile active 
oil. Arsenic, too freely used, sometimes 
does considerable injury, not, as is commonly 
supposed, by getting absorbed iuto the sys¬ 
tem of t.' e lambs dipped, but owing to the 
rapid performance of tho operation and in¬ 
sufficient dripping of the flock before they 
are turned out ; portions of tho arsenical 
solution fall upon tho herbage, are eaten by 
the lambs themselves or by other stock de¬ 
pastured , and thus arises inflammation of 
the bowels, aud othor familiar symptoms of 
arsenical poisoning, in this way a few years 
ago occurred the wholesale poisoning of up¬ 
wards of 800 lambs belonging to a Northum¬ 
berland farmer, 
Buch risks are, however, avoided by the 
use of the various non-poisonous dips now 
sold by most chemists. No very potent 
stuff is required to destroy either ticks or 
lice. It requires no skilled chemist to dis¬ 
solve in tepid water about 7 pounds of soft 
soup and -i pounds each of sulphur and pearl 
ashes, and make up, with hot or cold water, 
a bath of about 50 gallons. This, with rea¬ 
sonable care in dipping, should suffice for 50 
good-sized lambs, will effectually cleanse the 
skin, destroy vermin, and for several weeks 
ward off the attacks of flies. One pound of 
arsenic in many districts is still added to the 
mixture, and with reasonable precaution 
may be used with perfect safety. Were it 
not for the. expenditure of time and trouble 
wa should dip twice a year, in spring and 
autumn, not only the lambs, but also the 
whole Hock, for we are convinced that the 
operation rids them of tormenting parasites, 
lessens the chances of attacks of flies, favors 
the growth of wool, and conduces to lieulthy 
thriving.— N. B. Agriculturist. 
-- 
SHEPHERD NOTES. 
Bell-wether Billy of Buffalo.—The. hero of 
the Buffalo stock-yard is named Billy. Be¬ 
neath this homely appellation he carries his 
load of honors end wool at the same time, 
for he is a wether ; but whether 'Jotswold, 
Southdown or Merino, or all three in part, 
no one can tell. Billy wears a bell, and, as 
the nightly stock train arrives, he puts him¬ 
self at the. liCfhd of flocks of sheep as they 
are unloaded and leads them safely through 
the circuitous by-ways of Buffalo to the 
yard 1 --. As soon as the last sheep is safely 
penned Billy slips out of a door specially 
provided for him, and retires to his own 
quarters and his bale of hay.— If. Y. Tribune. 
Good for the Bur-Clover Pastures.—A 
band of ewes of the Spanish Merino blood, 
belonging to Mr. Put Smith, near Walla Wal¬ 
la, was recently sheared, and their fleeces 
averaged U lbs. and 4 ozs; 23 bucks of the 
same band sheared at the same time, aver¬ 
aged 17 lbs. and 4 ozs. apiece. Nearly all the 
bucks were yearlings. The bucks and the 
ewes were recently brought, first from Ver¬ 
mont to Michigan ; next from Michigan to 
Kelton, by railroad ; and next driven from 
Helton to Dry Creek, a distance of 600 miles. 
—Pacific Rural Press. 
