416 
THE RURAL HEW-YORKEW 
J1JWE SO 
Dainj Qitsbant)n}. 
OUR ANIMAL PORTRAITS. 
FAMOUS HOLLANDS. 
The little province of North Holland is, in 
many respects, a peculiar country. It con¬ 
tains less than 1,000 square miles, or 000,000 
acres, much of which is far below the level of 
the seas—by which it is on three sides bor 
dered and from which it is protected by very 
extended aud expensive dykes. Its drainage 
is by a series of canals, and wind-mills which 
collect the waters and pump them up into the 
sea. 
Although its rich soil is worth from $300 to 
$300 per acre, a large part is devoted to pas. 
turage and meadow, and, besides supporting 
a population of half a million people, it feeds 
over 150,000 head of cattle, producing annually 
for sale 21,000.000 pounds of cheese, aud 
1,000,000 pounds of butter. For centuries, no 
one knows how many, the aim of its breeders 
has been to produce a race of cattle excelling 
in milk and cheese production. Is it any 
wonder, then, that the Hollands—the result¬ 
ing breed—have by far exceeded all others in 
their enormous yields of milk? 
While there are many cows of this breed 
that have made astonishing records, we have, 
as a matter of history, got together and pre¬ 
sent this week, on our first page, at Fig. 213. 
the likenesses of the live largest milkers ever 
on record, and, as might be expected, every 
one owes her origin to this peculiar country. 
These cows have given in milk an aggregate, 
in one year, of over 50 tons, or five full car¬ 
loads, being au average of over 10 tons each. 
At the head of the list stands Echo No. 121, 
H. H. 13. She was bred by the Hon. Gerrit 
S. Miller, was sired by Rip Van Winkle No. 
35, H. H. B.; her dam was Crown Princess 
No. 0, H. H. B., both of which wero imported. 
Echo was calved in September, 1373. In one 
year, ending March 20, 1383, she gave for her 
present owner, Mr. F, C, Stevens, AHica, 
New York, 18,ISO)* pounds of milk, thereby 
placiog herself at the head of milk producers. 
In a second trial, extending from May 28th, 
1834, to the same date in 1335, under such cir¬ 
cumstances as Mr. Stevens thought best cal¬ 
culated to show a large return, with what 
food she would eat, consisting of graiu, roots, 
hay and silage; milked three times daily, 
she gave in one day, 82% pounds; in one 
mouth, 2,290% pounds, and in one year 23,- 
777% pounds of milk, making for the two 
years the enormous yield of 41,390 pounds, an 
average daily production of 57 pounds five 
ounces. .As she weighed less than 2,000 
pounds, she produced in the best year more 
than 12 times her own weight of milk, plac¬ 
ing her by far ahead of all others.* 
Second in production is Princess of Wayne, 
No. 054, H. H. B. She was imported from 
North Hoi laud in September, 1870, by her 
present owners, T. G. Yeomans & Sous, of 
Walworth, N. Y. She was calved in March, 
1878. Her dam was Queen of Wayne, No. 
955, H. H. B. From January 1st, 1384, to 
January 1st, 1885, she produced 20,400 pounds 
nine ounces of milk; her best day’s record was 
80 pounds, and she yielded 2,102 pounds one 
ounce in one month. 
Empress, No, 539, II. H. R , stands third. 
She also was fiom North Holland, being 1 .im¬ 
ported in February, 1879, by her present own¬ 
er, the Hon. Gerrit 8. Miller, of Peterboro, 
N. Y. She was calved in May, 1871, aud is 
consequently now 14 years old. She is said to 
have given iu one day, while in Holland, 108 
pounds of milk, and m a single month 2,074 
pounds. She gave Mr. Miller in a year, end¬ 
ing April 17th, 1884, 19,714% pounds, being 
then 18 years old. 
Mr. Edward lluidekoper’s cow Violet, No. 
748, H. H. B., stands fourth. Violet also is a 
North Hollander. She was imported by Mr. 
Huidekoper, of Meadville, Pa., in March, 
1878. Her highest record is, for a single day, 
80% pounds; for a single month,. 2 840% 
pounds, and for the year closing March 24th 
1881, 18,607% pounds, or a little over 51 pounds 
per day. 
Fifth, and completing this remarkable 
group, is Aaggie, No. 901 H. H. B., the 
property of Messrs. Smiths, Powell & Lamb, 
of Syracuse, New York. Her sire was Hook¬ 
er; her dam Aaggie Oude. She was calved 
in April, 1374, and was imported from North 
Holland in September, 1379 by Messrs. Smiths 
& Powell, and has ever since been owned by 
them until the firm was recently enlarged by 
the taking in of Mr. Lamb. Jn 1880, she gave, 
in one day, 84% pounds; in one month, 2,302%; 
pounds, and in oue year, 18,004 pounds 15 
ounces, being then the largest recorded yield, 
aud at once making her and the herd to 
which sh& belonged famous. She has proved a 
♦ We are sorry to announce that since our Illustra¬ 
tion was made, this famous cow has died. 
most prolific breeder, and has become the 
mother of the celebrated Aaggie family. 
This picture is full of instruction, and will 
well repay careful study by every milk or 
cheese dairyman in our country. A feature 
very prominent is the striking similarity of 
these cows in form and general appearance, 
also in development of udder and copious 
system of milk veins. That these remarkable 
cows should all belong to a single breed and 
all come virtually from the same country, is 
certainly something more than an accident, 
and this fact should have great weight with 
our dairy friends. 
A LITTLE PLAIN TALK ABOUT 
JERSEYS. 
COL. F. D. CURTIS. 
I hope the Rural readers will not get the 
notion into their heads that Jersey cattle are 
a humbug, because the Jersey Cattle Club is 
too much run by aristocratic impracticables, 
or because certaiu breeders, by special care, 
may secure wonderful results. There are 
most gratifying results about Jersey cattle, 
aud they are plain facts, which plaiu people 
can see for themselves aud plainly understand. 
They are unquestionably the best breed for 
butter making, and possess the largest per- 
cen age of good cows for this purpose of any 
breed. There is no doubt in my mind that 
there are hundreds of Jersey cows that will 
make on good, not extra, feed from 10 to 16 
pounds of butter in seven days. This is good 
enough, and when the development of udder 
and other characteristics for milk are peculiar 
to a family, aud the poor cows are exceptional, 
such a family is valuable. When cows of a 
particular strain give very rich milk, there is 
another value added to them. Jerseys have 
not only an intrinsic value in themselves for 
the dairy, but they will impart it to native 
cows. The experience of fanners in my neigh¬ 
borhood establishes this fact. The cows in 
the dairies which make the most and the best 
butter iu this section are the offspring of 
crosses of Jersey bulls, and it is a common 
thing for these grade cows to make from nine 
to 12 pounds of butter in a week on pasture 
alone; aud a number of cows, one-half and 
three-fourths Jersey, have made upwards of 
12 pounds. They will not dry up as soon as 
the natives, and this valuable quality is de¬ 
rived from the Jerseys, and it gives them ad¬ 
ditional value. Jerseys possess the character¬ 
istic of being long milkers to a remarkable 
degree. 1 bavo oue family which never be¬ 
come entirely dry. This peculiarity increases 
the milking period over native cows at least 
three months, which is no small item in the 
profit of a cow. Jersey bulls are very cheap, 
and it will pay to introduce them in dairy sec¬ 
tions for the improvement of the native cows 
tor making butter. People interested in other 
breeds naturally talk down Jerseys, hut those 
who appreciate rich milk and nice butter, self- 
colored, will tell a different story. Where 
there is a mixture of Jersey blood ia a dairy, 
carrots and annatto will not be required. 
Saratoga Co., N. Y. 
A CONVENIENT MILKING STOOL. 
A good milking stool is not so insignificant 
an appliance in the diary barn or yard as 
might, at first thought, be supposed. It adds 
much to the comfort of the milker and to tho 
certainty that the milk will not be wasted by 
the kicking over of tne pail, or the putting of 
a foot in the milk. We show at Fig. 214 a 
Fig. 214. 
simple stool, that can be easily made by any 
one handy with tools. The main or lower 
part is to be 10x10 inches; on the back end of 
this is a piece one inch thick, two inches wide 
and 10 inches long nailed securely to the top 
side. The seat is 8x10 inches, and is nailed 
upon the raiser, with its front edge project¬ 
ing, ns shown in the cut, and hollowed 
OUt to fit the puil. A holt four inches Jong a,nd 
a quarter of an inch thick, should be put 
down through the center of t he raiser, holding 
all firmly together. This stool should have 
three legs, as shown, two under the front part 
four iuches long below the stool, and one 
under the seat part, six aud one half inches 
long. This makes a very strong aud comfort¬ 
able stool, and no oue taking the trouble to 
make one will ever regret the time or labor. 
- ■ • ♦ • 
MORE ABOUT AMLBTO, 
In the Rural of June 8, we presented to 
our readers a full-page engraving of the 
famous Holland cow, Auileto, belonging to 
F. C. Stevens of Attica, N. Y., proprietor of 
the well known Maplewood herd. Several 
inaccuraeiesaccideutally occurred iugiviugthe 
pedigree of the animal; and as the tho owners 
of such choice stock are as careful about 
accurucy iu the pedigree of their favorites, as 
are the proud possessors of time-honored 
names in noble families, we hasten to say that 
Amleto was calved on March 10, 1879, and 
was sired by the district bull of VVoguutn, 
North Holland; dam, Beetje, having a record 
of 70 pounds eight ounces of milk per day. 
Amleto was the prize cow at the great 
Amsterdam Exposition of 1384, after which 
she was bought by her present owner, arriv¬ 
ing in this country on October 15, 1834, and 
giving birth to a calf, Amleto 2d, No. 8,352, 
H. H. B., on November 19. Since, she has 
yielded 10,310 pounds of milk in 135 days, or 
an average of 55 pouuds 11 ounces per day for 
the entire time, the largest day’s record being 
79 pounds four ounces. As the animal had 
been a month in quarantine, and had not yet 
been acclimated at the date of testing, this 
record is certainly remarkable. 
farm Camoimj. 
$urnl it. *J. <f avm gjtote*. 
THE SELECTION OF FEEDING STUFFS. 
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION. 
Aside from the number of animals fed, the 
kind of forage given und the amount of the 
bedding furnished will determine the size of 
the manure pile; but the selection of feeding 
stuffs, iu connection with the forage, estab¬ 
lishes its mannrial value, and this is secondary 
only to the profit to be derived from the 
operation, aud should always be considered in 
making choice of foods. Of course, our first 
thought should be the selection and combina¬ 
tion of such stuffs as beHt meet the wants 
of the stock so as to result iu the largest profit. 
If machinery for making cloth be supplied 
with cotton, however good and abundant the 
supply, it can not bn expected to turn out all- 
wool flannel; so with the animal economy, to 
produce lean meat or muscle, milk rich in 
caseine—the cheese element—requires food 
rich in albuminoids, of which nitrogen is the 
base; to build up the bone structure of a 
young animal, whether before or after birth, 
it is necessary that its food, or that of the 
mother, should contain phosphate of lime and 
other mineral salts; to take a full grown but 
lean animal, and fit it for the shambles, adding 
largely to its proportion of fat, or for the pro¬ 
duction of butter, requires food rich in the 
carbohydrates—sugar, starch aud oils—from 
which animal fat ia derived. So, ashasalreudy 
been stated, the animal’s system is but the 
machinery for converting the various ele¬ 
ments contained in tho food into meat, wool, 
milk or bone, and after selecting and appro 
priating what it needs, the residue is excreted 
as manure. To a certain extent, all animals, for 
whatever purpose kept, require the same 
elements iu their food; compensation for 
wear and tear of muscles, as well us the re¬ 
placement of bone, aud the maintenance of 
animal heat, requires a supply of nitrogeu, 
phosphoric acid, lime, carbon, etc., and 
Nature has provided that ulruost every plant 
and grain contain these iu sufficient quantity 
for au uuimal’s ordinary wants. But, as has 
been repeatedly demonstrated by experiments, 
but most recently by Prof. Sanborn, of Mo., 
the animal can, to a certain extent, be forced 
into the development of lean or fat meat, or 
the yieldiug of milk rich iu butter or caseiue, 
or tho building up of a large frame, by u 
variation of the above elements in its feeding 
ration; so, when we feed for a special purpose, 
as the growing of wool, the making of butter 
or cheese, the rearing of a young animal, we 
must select such foods, aud so combine them 
as to present a surplus of those elements re¬ 
quired for the particular purpose. 
If a person having corn to shell, should em¬ 
ploy a boy with only sufficient power to turn 
the empty Rbeller, uo mutter how perfect the 
shelter muy be, no corn would be shelled and 
all the money paid for running the sheller 
would be simply bo much lost. The same is 
true of stock-feeding; the feeding of an ani¬ 
mal so us just to maintain its flesh (merely 
running the machine), requires, at the mini¬ 
mum, the daily consumption of two per cent, 
of its live weight of the very best Kuglish 
bay, or its equivalent of other food. This 
mode of feeding is the employment of the boy- 
power, aud the entire wasting of so much 
food, except the small return in manure, and 
yet bow many, very many, farms do we 
find whose stock iu bpring are not one whit 
heavier than when they entered the Winter, 
and often, by many pouudM, actually lighter, 
to the loss not only of food, but of valuable 
time. 
Profit in stock-feeding, then, only comes 
when the animals consume food iu excess of a 
mere maintenance ration, aud because this is 
nearly a fixed quantity, the ratio of profit in¬ 
creases much faster than the increase of food. 
The amount of food which an animal can be 
induced to eat, and which it will digest and 
assimilate, depends largely upon tho selection 
of feeding stuffs and in so combining them as 
to present to the digestive organism au abun¬ 
dance of such elements, in their most assimila¬ 
ble form, as are essential to the secretion of 
the desired products. It must not, however, 
be forgotten that the proportion of nutri¬ 
ment extracted from the food more nearly 
approximates the whole contained, as we near 
the starvation ration, and decreases as our 
ration becomes more generous, until a point 
is reached when tho digestive 01 gars cease to 
be able to take any more, and beyond this the 
consumption becomes unprofitable from its 
excess. The correctness of both these propo¬ 
sitions is attested by the cases of those cows 
recent y tested for the production of butter 
or the yield of milk. In each case, where we 
are enligbtunod as to their manner of being 
fed, they have been supplied with a combina¬ 
tion of rich, easily digested foods, aud the 
quantity increased till nearly 100 pouuds were 
eaten, aud the products would fail to pay for 
the food consumed. 
The safe rule, then, in the selection of feed¬ 
ing stuffs, if looking only upon their action 
upon the stock, is to choose those rich iu the 
components of whatever product we most 
desire; but there is another very important 
consideration which we cannot ignore, and 
which will often decide the point of profit or 
loss, and this we will next consider. 
ON THE IMMEDIATE ACTION OF POL¬ 
LEN ON FRUIT. 
Thomas Meehan, Editor of the Gardener’s Mouthly 
and State Botanist of Pennsylvania. 
( Continued .) 
The Utica Herald for 1869 records au apple 
tree, in Saratoga County, N. Y., of a sour 
variety, grafted on all the lower brauebes 
with a “sweet” kind; but the fruit was al 
sour. Eventually the top was cut away, wheu 
tho sweets were satisfied to resume their nor¬ 
mal character. If pollen hud acted in this 
case, the “sours” would surely have been once 
in a while affectud. When all the vigor was 
thrown into the lower branches, it made, iu 
that variety, a difference, and we see at once 
that changes from “sour to sweet" in any case 
may not have auy relation to pollenization. 
In the same paper is noted a curious ease in¬ 
tended to prove that pollen has some direct 
influence. Mr. David Walker, of Washing¬ 
ton County, New York, “noticed” that au 
orchard all of late apples, always kept well. 
In another orchard with late and early ones 
mixed, the lute ones did not keep as they 
should do, and, “he supposed,” this occurred 
because the late ones were immediately influ¬ 
enced by pollen of the early ones. Why 
should this one supposition be the only oue 
to be entertained? Another curious case is 
that mentioned by Philip Woodley, Raleigh, 
North Carolina. An apple tree forked; it 
fruited in alternate years, as many kiuds of 
apples do; but it came, in time, to bearing on 
each branch on alternate years, so that he had 
apples every year on one branch or the other. 
But with this ehauge the fruit also changed 
somewhat, “so as to be easily distinguishable” 
(Gardener’s Monthly, 1867, pugo 887). 
Not only have believers in changes through 
pollen felt bound to believe it merely because 
they saw changes; but they have even insisted 
that apples changed to [wars! The New York 
Journal of Commerce, 1872.says that Ellwood 
Walter, President of the Mutual Mercantile 
Mariue Insurance Company, exhibited au 
apple brunch, having one upple and two pears 
on it, the apple being between tho two pears. 
Another pear was on the branch, but had 
been taken off for testing, and found to be a 
true pear! The editor saw the apple leaves 
on tho branch. In 1875 John Lambert, father 
of the proprietor of the %’atcbes Democrat 
aud Courier, had a pear branch that had 
borne pears for two years, bear apples. The 
apples, were, however, “pear-shaped.” (Gar¬ 
dener’s Monthly, 1875). In 1876 Mr. T, T. 
Lyou, of Plymouth, Michigan, gathered from 
u Carolina Red June u fruit so like a pear 
that he half suspected at first it had been ac¬ 
cidently grafted with a pear. In 1871 a fruit 
said to be an apple was sent, to the author of 
this paper from Dr. Lawrence, of Paris, On¬ 
tario, but it was rotten when it arrived. It 
was said to be like the Rhode Island Greening, 
though believed to have been gathered from 
a pear supposed to be the Tyson, It hndpear 
seeds, ami this proved that the sender had 
probably made no mistake iu supposing it to 
