238 
APRIL 9 
(1,706), and if it was, then what becomes of the 
theory of in-and-in breeding ? By the use of 
Belvedere, Mr. Bates has stown to the world 
that other Short-horn breeders of hia day 
had as good cattle as he had. By the use 
of this bull he also proved ibat be did improve 
his herd, thus showing that he was too strong 
in his prejudice against the cattle of other 
breeders. The improvement made ty this out- 
croes and the fact that the Matchem Cow*, the 
ancestress of the so-called Oxford family of 
Mr. Bates, which has been ranked second 
to the Duchess, had a strong infusion of 
Mason blood in her veins, which blood Mr. 
Bates had previously condemned, prove most 
conclusively to my mind that Mr. Bates’s 
cattle were not better than those other breeders 
had in hie day. In fact, he selected his ani¬ 
mals to start with from what he no doubt con¬ 
sidered the best herds, and the best specimens 
in such herds, and after breeding for some time 
and without that success that he wished, he 
was forced to go outside ot his herd (although 
it must have galled him to do so. after his 
sweeping denunciations of the cattle of other 
breeders), or his herd must have utterly failed. 
Mr. Stephenson mnst have felt proud to have 
sold Belvedere to Mr. BateB, as it was a tacit as¬ 
sent on the part of the latter that Mr, Stephen¬ 
son had a 1 etter bull than be had, which was no 
doubt the fact, as his “ get" so plainly proved 
Should not Mr. C. Colliugs have the honor of 
originating the Duchess lamily, and Mr. Ste¬ 
phenson the honor of furnishing Mr. Bates 
a bull that did more to bring that family of 
Short-horns into repute than any bull Mr. 
Bates ever bred ? Also, should not Mr. Mason 
have the honor of furnishing from stock of 
his breeding the Matchem Cow which pro¬ 
duced the so-called Oxford family in the hands 
of Mr. Bates ? It seems to me that to these 
men equal houoris due with Mr. Bales, if they 
get their proper meed of praise in regard to 
these families of Short-horns. 
In regard to Mr. Bake well’s sheep breeding, 
he could for years breed without going out¬ 
side his own flock and not breed very close, 
owing to the large number of ewes In the flock. 
And then what of the black tup found on his 
premises? Did not Mr. Bake well get some new 
outcross from that soarce ? It has often been 
shown that such a thing was possible, and 
even probable. Does the single instance of 
Goldsmith Maid prove that in-and-ia breed¬ 
ing is a success? llow many of the trotting- 
bred horses are a success, even as farm horses 
or roadsters ? In other words, how many are 
failures to all intents and purposes, as has been 
plainly shown by the pri res they have Bold for 
during the past few years, when from over¬ 
stocking breeders have sold the surplus? I 
could point to sales where the animals sold 
did not bring the money paid for the service 
of their tires—could that be called a success ? 
“ Stockman” knows full well that In a case 
like Goldsmith Maid’s, it will do to publish the 
success, but what breeder of cattle or horses 
would be willing to have the failures made 
public, and no one 6bould do that with his 
neighbor’s property without his consent. 
“ Stockman” says 1 have no right to pick out 
the Duchesses as examples of what I consider 
it j urious breeding. That is a strange assei - 
ticn it seems to me. If in-and-in breeding is 
the true couree, then the more in-bred the bet¬ 
ter, I should think. I did think I had the 
right to ask the question and also that I had 
the tight to pick out the Duchesses if I chose. 
If I had no such right, then it is au error of 
judgment on my part, as I did not intend to do 
what I had no right to do. I leave the readers 
of the Rural to judge in this matter, and will 
abide by their decision. Stockman says. ’'The 
histoiy of the best aud most successful stock- 
breeding is full of Buck examples, and yet Mr. 
Talcott fluds fault with me for complaining 
that the great bugbear of farmers Is close 
breeding—it is only because they are unin¬ 
formed of the facts. But Mr. Talcott is in¬ 
formed and therefore if he sins at all it is 
against light.” The above sentence I suppose 
Btockman thinks is unanswerable ; but I would 
most respectfully ask him or any other person : 
Did not the introduction of Belvedere (1706) 
Into Mr. Bates’s herd make in it the greatest im¬ 
provement made by any bull he ever used ? Did 
not the Matchem Cow in her first crossings 
with Mr. Bates’s D ike bulls produce healthier 
aud more prolific animals than the Oxfords of 
the present day ? If so, what becomes of the 
theory or practice of in-and-in breeding i In 
regard to examples, I will state that nearly 
40 years since I saw in the yard of ihe late 
Francis Rotch one of the most miserable 
specimens of Short-horn cows that I ever be¬ 
held, which Mr. Rotch said was the progeny 
of a bull on his own mother, and he called my 
attention specially to that fact, as one of the 
results of in-and-in breeding. I also have 
frequently seen such results in other herds, 
and in my own I have in a good many in¬ 
stances had results as disastrous, but I never 
knew any harm to come from an infusion of 
fresh blood In ary herd. That there have oeeu 
fine animals bred by in-and-in breeding I 
have no doubt; but such are not the invariable 
rale, but rather exceptions to a general rule, 
THE RURAL MEW-VORKER. 
while with fresh blood of equal merit a poor 
animal is the exception and not the rule re¬ 
sulting from such breeding. J. Talcott 
Calves Sucking Themselves.— A corre- 
apondent writes us from Albion, Michigan, 
that he found a complete remedy for this 
habit in the liberal application of Cayenne 
pepper two or three times to the parts sucked. 
No evil effects resulted either to the sucker or 
sucked. 
Another correspondent writes from Peek- 
fkill, N. Y., that the use of common pine tar 
(applied we suppose, to the part usually 
sucked) will prevent the habit. 
Saini liusbanfirD. 
THE DAISY COW-NO. 29. 
HENRT STBWABT. 
Cheean Factories, 
The cheese factory is nothing more than an 
association of dairymen by which one set of 
apparatus and one skilled person are employed 
to do the work of several. It is thus a system 
of economizing labor and capital by associa¬ 
tion. It has lightened the labors of thousands 
of larmers and their families and has vastly 
enlarged the development of the dairy interest. 
There are two methods of managing the busi¬ 
ness of a cheeBe factory; one is by purchasing 
the milk outriekt from the farmers at a Btated 
price and another by making the cheese on a 
co operative principle and distributing the pro¬ 
ceeds, pro rata, accord'ng to the quantily of 
milk delivered by each member, after a certain 
fixed charge has been made for manufactur¬ 
ing. This charge Is usually two cents per 
pound of manufactured cheese. The method, 
however, of organizing the business is imma- 
tei ial; it is the management that is more per¬ 
tinent to us at the present. 
0 B 0 B 
1_ 
!—§?-1 
[ (f _ A 
-7—1 ILL f 1 
jl-*- 1 
1' 
GROUND PLAN OF CHEESE FACTORY—FIG 190. 
A cheese facto) y consists of a building adaj.- ' 
ted to the requirements of the machinery used 
in the manufacture, for the proper reception 
of the milk, and for the curing of the cheese. 
It is provided with a steam boiler for heating 
purposes, a curing room for storing the cheese 
and apartments for the manager. It should be 
constructed in 6uch a manner as to maintain 
an equal and steady temperature with econom¬ 
ical consumption of fuel and be connected with 
effective drainage 1 y which the refuse whey 
may be carried off to a safe distance. A frame 
building with an eight or ten-inch ait-space 
between the inner and outer walls and protec¬ 
ted by air-proof lining, answers eveiy desirable 
purpose. The ground floor should be amply 
spacious, and a two-story building with curing 
room above is the cheapest. As an even tem¬ 
perature and a stable condition of moisture 
and good ventilation are required, it would 
seem that a basement curing room would be 
preferable to any other. It would certainly 
provide eve) y rt quieite in a more certain man¬ 
ner than an upper floor would, and yet I have 
not yet heard of a curing room so arranged in 
this count) y. Curing cellars are common in 
England and in France, and it is difficult to see 
why an airy, well lighted, well drained bas<- 
ment of brick or stone should not be Infinitely 
pieferable to an upper floor heated by the 
should be substantial; the lower floor of 
matched hard pine plank, slopes three inches 
from front to rear, where a trapped drain is 
made to convey away all the slop and whey 
and the washing of the floor. The whole in¬ 
terior should be double plastered. The upper 
floor should be matched and tight, and to 
avoid pillars in the lower room the beams 
should be supported by iron rods attached to 
collar beams in the roof. An ice chamber, or, 
which is far better, one of the Ice and cold-air 
machines now made and to be procured for a 
moderate turn, is needed to control the Sum¬ 
mer temperature. The most ample arrange¬ 
ments for thorough ventilation are indispen¬ 
sable. A modern factory for 500 to 600 cows, 
is supplied with the following apparatus: two 
600-gallon vats, or more smaller ones; a fivt- 
horse power boiler; two gaug cheese presses; 
20 self-bandaging hoops; one 600-pound plat¬ 
form scale; a 70-gallon receiving can ; a hoist¬ 
ing crane; a tin milk conductor ; a set of curd 
knives to cut perpendicularly and horizontally; 
a curd mill; cheese scale aud other amall 
utensils. The whole cost of these amounts to 
a little over $700. 
LARD-CHEESE. 
CHEESE FACTORT UNDER ONE ROOF—FIG. 192. 
The space on the lower floor required for 
manufacturing will be about 40 feet in length. 
This is separated from the rest of the building 
by a close double partition having a large 
sliding door in the center or otherwise placed, 
as may be found convenient for the removal of 
cheese from the press to the curing room, for 
which this space is set apat t. A convenient 
arrangement is as shown at Fig. 190. 
At a, is a covered drive-way for unloading, 
with a platform for receiving and weighing 
the milk. The milk is then conducted by 
means of the milk conductor to the vats, b, b, 
b, b, here represented as 300-gallon ones, and 
four la number. The curd sink is at c; the 
boiler house at u; the presses at f, and the 
cheese tables at g g , g, in tlie curing room. The 
drain is shown by the double lines. 
The curing room is furnished with benches, 
24 inches high and three feet wide, made of 
strips having spaces between them to facilitate 
circulation of air. These benches should be 
carefully made to avoid cracks or spaces In 
the joints which would harbor cheese maggots, 
the great pest of the cheese factory. They 
should be ranged at a distance of two feet 
apart and the cheeses are placed on them in 
double rows. A roomy closet should be pro¬ 
vided in which to keep the numerous small 
utensils and for a wash-stand and towels for 
the men. The factory is best warmed by steam 
coils supplied from the boiler, and a small en¬ 
gine of two-horse power at least will do all the 
hoisting, pumping, or forcing water for wash¬ 
ing, and grinding the curd. The upper curing 
room, or the basement if that is used, is fur¬ 
nished in the manner described and an eleva¬ 
tor for moving the cheese will be found very 
convenient. A sliding trough will also serve 
to pass the cheese from the upper to the lower 
floor. 
The style of building for a factory may be 
varied to- suit the taste or ambition of the 
owners. Fanc y-work pays nothing, and plain¬ 
ness and substantial work and material only 
are required for economy aud for use. The 
engraving, Fig. 191 represents a well ai- 
CHEESE FACTORY WITH DETACHED PARTS — FIG. 191. 
Summer sun to an injurious degree and diffi¬ 
cult to cool at certain seasons. 
The factory site should be on high, airy, 
well-drained ground. A permanent supply of 
water sufficientto fill a twe-iuch pipe is needed 
for a factory of 500 cows. A building of this 
capacity should be 75 feet long by 32 feet wide 
and the floor should be nine feet in the clear. If 
thecHring room is In the basement, a story-and- 
a-kalf building only will be needed. The frame 
We no sooner become resigned to “ oleomar¬ 
garine ” than this invention of more recent date 
meets our gaze. It has even become stale to 
say, What next ? Lard-cheese is a mixture of 
lard and cheese in the proportion of three 
pounds of sweet milk to one pound of lard. 
The two ingredients are mixed together by 
running them through a machine which re¬ 
volves at the rate of about 4,000 revolutions per 
minute. The machine consists of a revolvingcyl- 
Inder within a stationary one, and is two feet 
high and eight inches in diameter. The inside 
is set all over with about 4,000 sharp teeth, 
which just clear the outside cylinder when 
they revolve. The lard and milk after being 
mixed are called cream. Three pounds of this 
cream are mixed by hand with 100 pounds of 
sweet skimmed milk; the cheese is then made 
just as other cheese. 
The butter is taken out of the milk—four 
pounds of butter to 100 pounds of milk—and 
about a pound and a half of lard substituted 
for it. The butter in cheese hastens decay, 
while lard may be shipped around the world. 
This cheese stands the beat better than any 
other kind, and will therefore be apt to find a 
ready market in the South. No taste or smell 
of lard is perceptible ; it is a great improve¬ 
ment on skira-mi:k cheese, and contains noth¬ 
ing deleterions to the health. The cheese is, in 
fact, first-class, althongh it does not sell quite 
as high as milk-cheese. 
The cylinder which I have described costs 
about $300. The parties who own the patent 
put in all the machinery—that is, boiler, en¬ 
gine, etc.—which costs about $5 000, and charge 
.00} cent, per pound on all cheese made. The 
cheese is branded “ Lard-cheese,” and if so 
branded I see no reason why it should not 
find a ready market, and the making of it be¬ 
come a profitable and honorable industry. 
Professor I. P. Roberts. 
Jfitnr Crop. 
POTATOES CUT TO SINGLE EYES. 
A Uueitllon of Space*. 
CONRAD WILSON. 
This inquiry is clearly presented and very 
fairly tested in an experiment recently re¬ 
ported from the Rural Faim. Some of the fea¬ 
tures and results of that trial, though not ap¬ 
parently very striking, are too important to be 
lightly dismissed. Though the yield was not 
large, in const quenee of an unusually poor 
season, I think it will be found, when all the 
factors are examined and compared, that the 
trial was by no means unfruitful, and that 
some of the results developed are well worth 
the time aud labor invested. 
On comparing the various products (but 
omitting such as were injured by moles), It at - 
pears that in the two poorest rows the average 
number of pieces was 35, and the average 
product 20} pounds, making the yield per acre 
equivalent to 150 bushels It will also be seen 
that in the best row the number of pieces was 
66, with a yield of 31} pounds, making the 
rate per acre 225 bnahels. Taking the average 
rate per acre for all the rows together, we find 
it equal to 184 bushels, with 50 pieces in each 
row, and for the five best rows 209 bushels per 
acre, with an average ot 64 pieces per row. 
Now to show in what way, and to what ex¬ 
tent the spaces in planting affect the yield, we 
have the following instructive figures. 
bush, per acre. 
35 pieces per row represent a yield of about.150 
60 “ to each row “ * ’ . 
H 4 “ per row ' , 
.209 
.226 
In other words, 
The distance apart for 160 bu. per acre was nearly 13 in. 
.. .. r •• 184 •• “ 8 “ 
m 
209 
225 
1 “ 
Just 8 “ 
ranged factory in Northern Vermont In 
which the whole is under one roof. In 
eome factories the curing and store-ho uses 
are made separately, with every appliance 
for coolness, such as shutters and ventila¬ 
tors; double walls; aud an open space 
under the building. A separate curing 
house belonging to a well-known New York 
factory Is shown at Fig. 194. These buildings 
are plain but sufficient for every purpose. 
In another view also, this result Is further 
confirmed ; for if we take the closest planting 
above given (which is six inches in the row's), 
it shows au area of 2.6 square inches for each 
single eye, which is space enough for a much 
larger yield than either of the above. 
But again, there is another comparison to be 
made in this connection. Au adjoining plot of 
the same area as the above was planted with 
the White Elephant variety, and the yield wus 
at the rate of 280 bushels per acre. In this 
second plot the distance in the rows was 22 
inches, while the other conditions were similar 
to those of the first plot. 
Now if this variety had been planted at the 
same distance in the rows as the average of the 
previous plot (which was about eight inches,) 
the yield would have been, according to the law 
above indicated, over 400 bushels per acre, and 
in a good season, probably five or six hundred 
bushels; for it is evident, from the above com¬ 
parative test, that the White Elephant is much 
m >re prolific than the Beauty of Hebron. 
If now we take the average product of the 
two plots together, it shows a yield for the en¬ 
tire experiment equal to more than two hnn- 
a HnaiwUa which must be admitted 
