it. At the beginning of "each mouth all three 
pointers are placed at ft. Each day, as the 
eggs are gathered, the number is recorded on 
the lower circle. When 10 are found the rec¬ 
ord is carried to the circle above, and so on 
through the month. If there are poultry men 
who have other items regarding their flocks 
that they wish to keep n record of, they can 
make other spaces for them. This poultry 
board is the only oue in existence—no pateut 
has been secured; infringements are solicited. 
The upright housewife who credits her hens 
in the almanac by means of a split pencil 
which she sharpens with a bread knife, will 
be greatly pleased with this board. 
Allegheny Co., Pa. vine k. pratt. 
A Profitable Flock.— I keep 100 hens. I 
find that thoroughbred hens will lay more eggs 
than cross breds, though they will not grow 
any faster. Most poultry ailments are due 
to lilt.h in their food and drink. Boft food 
will always get more or less dirt in it, as the 
fowls are sure to track through it. The same 
food, fed dry, will uever get iu such a con¬ 
dition. I always feed my gram dry, In Jan¬ 
uary I fed 1<X> pounds of wheat, #1,75; eight 
bushels of corn, #5. 12; two bushel > potatoes, 
60 cents, anti 50 pounds of waste bones, 25 
cents. Those I got at a market and pounded 
them up with 25 cents' worth of shells. Total 
cost of feed #7.97. I got JO!-j dozen eggs 
which sold at JO cents per dozen, or #10.98 in 
all. I call the manure good pay for my time, 
so that there was a dear profit of #3 01 for 
that month. In February I fed 2(MJ pounds of 
wheat, #3.50; four bushels of corn, #2.50; 
bones JO cents; shells, 40 cents: two bushels 
of potatoes, 00 cents, and one bushel Luck- 
wheat. SO cents. Yield, 72 dozen eggs at 28 
cents per dozen—#20.16, leaving a clear profit 
of #12 for that short month. The March feed 
was one bushel of oats, 15 cents; 100 of 
cracked corn, #1.15; 200 pouuds of wheat, 
#3.50; one bushel of buckwheat, 80 cents; two 
bushels of coni, #1.38; 00 pounds of bones, 30 
cents; shells, 40 cents. Yield, 86)^ dozen of 
eggs at 22 cents per dozen—#10.03, leaving a 
net profit of #11.15. Thus in the first three 
months of the year during which many flocks 
‘ are eating their heads off”, my 100 hens 
made a net profit of #20.10. n. c. 
Bristol, Conn. 
form Copies. 
CORRESPONDENTS’ VIEWS. 
That “Seed Store.”— The farmers who 
write in favor of a continuance of the Wash¬ 
ington Seed Distribution, appear to base their 
arguments on three points:—1. They get the 
seeds for nothing. Out of the many kinds 
sent them they are pretty sure to find some¬ 
thing that will suit. Such experimenting is 
profitable. Somebody else pays for it. 2. The 
seedsmen, they claim, charge exorbitant prices 
for seeds, and frequently send seeds not true 
to name. 8. The fact of a free distribution of 
seeds, induces mauy to plant vegetables aud 
make gardens who would never think of it 
otherwise. That is their case, from what they 
have said in the RURAL. It is always pleas¬ 
ant to get things without paying for them, 
but if one man is to have seeds free, all men 
have a right to them. There should be no dis- 
criiuinatiou. To supply seeds to every 
farmer in this country would require an ap¬ 
propriation that would frighteu the very peo¬ 
ple who want these seeds because they are 
given away. Then why limit the gift to 
seeds? There are plenty of other things that 
the farmer and the laboring man need. Ou 
this "gift” theory where are we going to stop? 
1 Ins idea of saying that seedsmen send out 
such poor seeds that farmers are obliged to go 
to Washington is pretty thin. Where do these 
seeds come from originally? Why ,froiu these 
very seedsmen who are cursed so roundly. 
W hat is to prevent a seedsman from selling a 
a lot of old worthless st uff to the Government? 
V hero are these seeds tested? Who knows 
whether they aro “true to name?” It is doubt¬ 
less true that some men have been induced to 
make gardens because they got 50 cents’ worth 
of seeds for nothing. The man who was will¬ 
ing to wait until his Government coaxed him 
into providing vegetables for his family ought 
to be ashamed to tell about it. 1 look upon 
such arguments as very small business. The 
Government ought to test every variety of 
of seed it sends out, test it carefully, aud then 
send it to good farmers for further test before 
it is generally distributed. If the Department 
would send out tested varieties and then fol¬ 
low them up with reports, much good would 
be done. This buying a great lot of trash aud 
scattering it broadcast over the land, is a 
fraud in my opinion. henry wilder. 
Morris Co., N. J. 
Insurance Losses in Rural Districts.— 
In lookiug over the cartoon ou the first page 
of the R. N.-Y. of April !)th, I found an in¬ 
teresting study, and while I was wondering 
when education would open the eyes of the 
farmer, 1 noticed a surprise skulking behind 
the tree iu the embodiment of insurance 
frauds. 
As a farmer who has never taken any stock 
in life insurances, but who has been a strong 
advocate of fire insurance for the protection 
of home interests, I thought seriously that 
there might bo a great deal of sad truth in 
that representation. So I brought a largo 
county aud township map and laid it upon 
the table,and drew a circle five miles in diam¬ 
eter, and set myself to work to figure tho 
amouut of property within that area iu a 
farming community with which I have been 
thoroughly acquainted for the last 50 years. 
I found it no small matter, but I must give 
the result of an evening’s work. I considered 
what an immense capital is held by insurance 
companies, and the large dividends paid to 
stockholders, aud the large percentages to 
agents, and other expenses, which must all be 
paid by the holders of the iron-clad insurance 
policies. I do not think that our community 
has been less favored than many others, but I 
found from my investigations that upon all 
iusurable property, stock, etc., an annual per¬ 
centage of less than 50 cents upon #1,000 
would pay the entire losses that had OCeuiTed 
by fire and lightning for the period of 50 
years, within the ubove area, including the 
business risks. Now r we pay from 30 cents to 
#1 per #100 anuually and receive five cents for 
every dollar paid out. Perhaps other locali¬ 
ties may receive a larger percentage; but the 
subject is oue that should receive a more than 
passing notice. an old farmer. 
[R. N.-Y.—This matter is indeed well worthy 
of discussion. It will be interesting to com¬ 
pare the losses by fire in other localities with 
the statement made by our correspondent. 
What percentage of property is destroyed by 
fire? Is the percentage of loss in any commu¬ 
nity greater than the percentage paid to main¬ 
tain nu insurance policy ? Valuable facts can 
be gained from such figures, J 
Curing Seed Corn “in the Milk.”—I n 
the R Urals of March 26tli and April 2d, 
mention is made of seed coru cured while “in 
the milk” condition, and Director Sturtevant, 
of the N. Y. Experiment Station, is taken to 
task for his alleged opinion that if properly 
dried while in that condition it will make the 
best of seed corn. I know that such corn, if 
dried aud not allowed to get sour, will pro¬ 
duce as vigorous plauts as any other, even if 
so soft that when the kernel is pinched between 
the thumb and finger the “milk” will squirt 
out for several feet, leaving nothing but the 
hull between the fingers. I have tried it 
several times, aud even when the kernels were 
not one-third of the natural size every one 
grew a strong, healthy plaut, and every time 
there was a good crop. s. 
Palermo, N. Y. 
FARMING A FAIRLY PROFITABLE 
BUSINESS. 
No one reason sufficiently explains the lack 
of large numbers of students of agriculture in 
any of the colleges of the country: but I am 
more and more convinced that the exceedingly 
gloomy and discouragiug view of the condi¬ 
tion and prospects of our agriculture, com¬ 
monly presented by writers and reporters on 
the subject, has much to do with this state of 
affairs. 1 have just returned from oue of the 
series of interesting and valuable Institutes 
being held under the auspices of the Illinois 
State Board of Agriculture, at which au able 
and honored member of that Board read uu 
elaborate paper, the logical effect of which on 
the mind of any bright young farmer boy 
would bo to cause him to decide to abandon 
the business at the earliest opportunity, aud 
if it Ixi true that farmers aro the hardest 
worked, most oppressed, poorest paid, least 
influential body of business men in the coun¬ 
try, why should youug men lie expected or 
asked to become or remain farmers, not to 
say to expend time and money in special pre- 
partion for the business? 
Much of current writing in agricultural 
papers and speaking at agricultural meetings 
is misleading in its effects, although honestly 
designed. Tho disadvantages aud the small 
profits of forming are clearly seen; the bright 
side und the exceptional cases of groat pros¬ 
perity iu professional, commercial or manu¬ 
facturing life are also seen and sharply pre¬ 
sented. 
It Is both foolish and harmful to attempt to 
make farming uppear an easy and 
very profitable business. 1 believe it both uu- 
true and harmful to claim that it is peculiar¬ 
ly laborious or unprofitable. I believe it true 
that a larger percentage of those well fitted 
for work will make a fair success iu farming 
than of those who engage in professional, 
commercial, manufacturing or speculative 
lines of work. The chances of extraordinary 
success are slight, but the degree of failure is 
less than in most other lines of work. I be¬ 
lieve it wise to encourage rather than discour¬ 
age those who think of making special pre¬ 
paration for the business of farming, and 
that we might reasonably expect to see a 
larger number of this class if we all showed 
our faith in the business instead of unfavora¬ 
bly comparing it wuth other kinds of work. 
G. e. morrow. 
University, Champaign, Ill. 
Burnl (Topics. 
BUCEPHALUS BROWN’S NOTION’S AND 
IDEAS. 
Don’t Waste Manure.— Not long ago I 
heard an agricultural college graduate (who, 
it may surprise some to hear, is a practical 
farmer and a good one,) say that when he 
began to farm be thought science was every¬ 
thing; but he was now willing to swap all his 
science if he could get in return all the good 
manure he could use. This was, of course, only 
a joking way of insisting upon the importance 
of liberal manuring. In truth his science had 
enabled him greatly to increase the quantity 
of manure on his fields, over that got by 
some of his neighbors from an equal number 
of animals equally well fed. He has done 
this, in a considerable degree, by skillful feed¬ 
ing; but chiefly by saving all his manure, 
liquid as well as solid, and by a scientific in¬ 
stead of a hap-hazard application of that and 
of his purchased fertilizers. 
The Liquid Manure.— Oue of the best old- 
fashioned farmers I am acquainted with 
lately expressed to me bis belief that there Is 
really very little manurial value in urine,— 
not enough to make it worth while to save it. 
He said he had made some trials of it, but it 
had no effect at all. I discovered, by a little 
questioning, that disbelieving in its value to 
begin with, he had put it on in such large 
quantities that nothing at ail grew on the 
spot. Dr. J. R. Nichols, editor of the Boston 
Journal of Chemistry, is au enthusiastic far¬ 
mer, and has published an analysis made by 
himself of the dung and urine of his own 
cows, in pouuds, as follows; 
III LOW lbs. Solids. Liquids. 
Nitrogen. 5.1 17.5 
Potash. 8.00 15.0 
Phosphoric Aeld.8,55 10.1 
Solubility of Manures.— As all food is 
taken up by the roots of plants and only as it is 
dissolved in the water of the soil, and as the 
plant-food in urine is already dissolved and 
has only to lie largely diluted in order to be¬ 
come fit for absorption, it would seem to follow 
that urine, even if no richer than dung, is 
worth more, on account of its ready availa¬ 
bility. The dung has to undergo decomposi¬ 
tion—rot iu the ground—before its elements 
can all become available, aud iu the mean¬ 
time it is subject to waste. Another point of 
advantage iu the fluids is, that as they soak 
into the soil they become more equally distrib¬ 
uted thau manure can be, if they were even¬ 
ly applied, as they could be by the use of a 
machine like a street sprinkler. 
Not Well Balanced.— Urine is evidently 
more immediately and completely available 
than the most soluble commercial fertilizers, 
but the analysis shows that in comparison 
with standard fertilizers urine has a great ex¬ 
cess of uitrogeu and of potash. The Rural 
Experimental Farmer seems to regard 600 
pounds of a standard fertilizer containing 12 per 
cent, of avaiiuble phosphoric acid as sufficient 
for au acre of most farm crops, when used 
alone. This would be 72 pounds of available 
phosphoric acid, which would be also coutaiued 
iu 7,000 pounds of urine, as above. But this 
quantity of uriue would hold 105 pounds of 
potash and 122 pounds of nitrogen, while the 
600 pouuds of fertilizer would probably con¬ 
tain not more thau 25 pounds of each. A sim¬ 
ilar, though not so great a discrepancy, would 
exist iuthe case of dung. 
Economical Use of Urine.— By the analy¬ 
sis it is made plain that, as a fertilizer, uriue 
is best adapted to crops which demand much 
uitrogeu, such as onions, cabbages, tobacco, 
strawberries ami hops. But as urine is pro¬ 
duced iu the greatest abundance on stock 
farms, and is not transportable to a distance, 
the questiou arises, how can it be most econ¬ 
omically used for the production of grass aud 
grain? Used alone, for the small grains, iu a 
quantity which would give no excess of nitro¬ 
gen, it would very inadequately supply the 
demand of such crops for phosphoric acid. 
Used more ubuudautly it would give a rank 
growth, cause lodging aud a failure of the 
crop. Used freely ou grass whore the soil is 
fairly good, it would give one or more heavy- 
crops aud then seem a failure. Ou root crops 
a like result might be expected. Plainly, no 
one can depend upon urine alone iu this class 
of farming. Even were the urine aud the 
dung used in conjunction iu quantities suffic¬ 
ient to supply an adequate quantity of phos¬ 
phoric acid, the crops would not be apt to 
prove satisfactory. 
More Phosphoric Acid.— The solution of 
this problem seems to be in the free application 
of phosphoric acid, iu connection with rich 
and carefully saved animal excrement of both 
sorts And this will recall to your older read¬ 
ers the fact that iu the early days of com¬ 
mercial fertilization,plain phosphates, and af¬ 
terwards plain superphosphates, were used 
with great success on many crops. In fact 
the present class of complete fertilizers has 
sprang up and come into use in this country 
mainly as a result ot the theories put forth by 
Professor Stockbridge. They are certainly 
indispensable where fertilizers alone must be 
used, and especially for the growing of great 
staples, like cottou, where animal manures 
are not to be had. But the plain superphos¬ 
phate, and even plain phosphates, such as fine 
steamed bone, or the softer mineral phosphates 
reduced to impalpable dust, have an import¬ 
ant place to fill in connection with the rich 
animal manure, liquid and solid, which re¬ 
sults from the high stall feeding practiced 
on many of our farms. 
Fire-fanged Manure.— I like to talk with 
the old farmers who are fond of putting for¬ 
ward their experience against what they like 
to call the new-fangled ideas of scientific farm¬ 
ing. One of these has told me many times 
that fire-fanging did not hart mauure any, if 
it did not go too far. He would always pay as 
much for fanged manure iu the village as for 
any other, aud claimed that he made a good 
trade in doing so. Now it is evident that the 
heat of fermeutation expels a great deal of 
moisture from a manure heap, and if. in pass¬ 
ing off, this moisture takes with it only that 
proportion of nitrogenous matter which is in 
excess, relatively' to the potash and phospheric 
acid, it would seem plain that what remains is 
of more value, ton for ton, than before fer¬ 
mentation began. It is not more wise to 
refuse the wisdom that comes from observing 
practices than to neglect the teachings of in¬ 
quisitive science. We must, in fact, always 
bring the latter to the test of the former, be¬ 
fore we can be fully assured of its worth. 
RUMINATION. 
HENRY STEWART. 
Sir. J. B. Lawes has become au acknowl¬ 
edged authority upon matters pertaining to 
agricultural science aud practice in America 
as well as iu England. No other teacher is 
more careful to express himself cautiously 
aud to avoid dogmatism than he. But there 
is danger tha t his views may be superficially 
considered by readers aud consequently mis¬ 
represented by writers who refer to them. I 
think Bucephalus Bruwu has fallen in this er¬ 
ror when he says (page 21 s !) "according to Sir 
John manure will only supply the same quan¬ 
tity of nitrogen annually by repeating annu¬ 
ally the same full dressing.” The meaning of 
this seems to be that manure is then exhausted 
in one year. But Sir J. B. Lawes has fre¬ 
quently given evidence aud made statements 
iu regard to unexhausted manures and the 
value of the unused fertility- remaining after 
one, two or three years. This unexhausted 
fertility is considered as bal ing a certain 
money value among English farmers and land- 
owners. and as belonging to the tenant who 
applied the manure. If this is all true—and 
the experience of all farmers justifies it—it is 
clear “Mr. Brown” has misunderstood the 
meaning of Sir. J. B. Lawes. 
I have for years past expressed myself most 
favorably in regard to artificial manures. I 
have had no reason to take anything back 
which I have ever said, but, on the contrary, 
1 am every year more and more impressed 
with the indispensable necessity for them in 
the ordinary farm operations. But stable 
manure is no less indispensable. I have al¬ 
ways plowed in the’manure, by which the soil 
is deepened,aud have applied the fertilizers on 
the surface, where they quickly dissolve aud 
do the most good. As an instance of their rapid 
action, I once applied SIX! pounds per acre of 
a “complete ’ spring grain and grass top-dress¬ 
ing to a field of Orchard Grass and clover. A 
rain stopped the work before noon, and the 
next noon, the ground beiug dried again, the 
lino where I stopped sowing the fertilizer was 
distinctly visible by the darker green of the 
herbage, and it was not necessary to follow the 
stakes planted for this purpose. 
Why do heavy dressings of manure cause 
small grains to lodge? Is it not that the ni¬ 
trogen of the manure becomes quickly availa¬ 
ble by its decomposition and the mineral ele¬ 
ments do not; aud heuce the straw is deficient 
in the lime, potash aud silica required to sup¬ 
port it iu position, aud the potash and phos¬ 
phoric acid required by the grain are not 
available? When lime is applied, however, 
with the manure—which is a very common 
custom in many of the best farming localities 
