« 
NOV.22 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
753 
took over 20 prizes in open shows in Scotland, 
where her dam also won several first premit 
urns. The second prize was awarded to the 
same owner’s Nellie Riddle, bred by W. Wi¬ 
ley, winner of two first prizes m Scotland. She 
was also one of the herd of Ayrshires that won 
the gold medal and diploma at the Centennial 
Exhibition in 1876- Mr. C’e Lillie was awarded 
first prize as the best two-year-old, and his 
Dew Drop 6th also took a first prize. He like¬ 
wise received theherdprizeof $25on Ayrshires, 
and, altogether, bore away nine premiums on 
his herd of this breed. 
In Guernseys Mr. Crozier’s imported Venus 
took first prize in the three-year-old cow class. 
The same owner also took first prize in the 
two-year-old and also in the one-year-old cow 
class, and also the first prize for Guernsey 
bulls. In fact, he took every prize that was 
offered in all cases where he made entries for 
premiums, winning, in all, $250. 
Many excellent judges of live stock, from 
South Carolina to California, attended the fair 
aud were well rewarded for their trouble. 
Besides the Jerseys, Ayrshires and Guernseys 
above mentioned, there were on exhibition 
there the best specimens of Holsteins the owner 
could find iu the native land of the breed. 
No better Devons could be anywhere found 
than those shown at this fair; aud on all 
hands the Short-horns were acknowledged 
to be excelleut. As for the half-bred and 
grades exhibited there, they have not been 
equaled at auy show I have seen this year. 
The Holsteius were purchased shortly before 
in their native country regardless of expense, 
and. although they had no competitors, they 
certainly deserved all the premiums they 
obtained. In short, all the neat cattle shown 
at this fair were worthy of attention, both on 
account of their remarkable merits, and of 
the high honors many of them had won in 
Europe, before their importation into this 
country. 
South Down sheep were exhibited by John 
Taylor of Bayside, Long Island, that could not 
have been surpassed in England, as they were 
bred direct from the first-prize ram of the 
Royal Agricultural Society’s Show. In swine 
it would be no easy task to excel the beauti¬ 
ful Berkshires, that deservedly won a great 
deal of attention there. Though the poultry 
exhibit was small, the birds wore of fine quality 
and the highest strains of blood. On the 
whole, I must protest that there was at the 
Queens’ County show a great deal worthy of 
notice. w. c. 
The impression appears to prevail that there 
are considerable differences in the quality of 
different varieties of Indian corn. Some of 
the popular ideas are certainly erroneous, as 
will appear from the examination of seventeen 
analyses recently made in the laboratory of 
the Station, thirteen analyses executed at the 
Agricultural College of Michigau under the 
direction of Prof. Kedeie, and eight analyses 
made by Dr. Atwater of Middletown. 
So far as can be judged from these analyses, 
the following conclusions are correct, viz.: 
1. From the point of view of chemical com¬ 
position, there are, broadly speaking, two 
kinds of Indian corn, the common and the 
sweet. 
2. The average composition of these two 
kinds in the water-free condition, is as follows: 
Average Composition of American Maize. 
Sweet. Common. 
Ash.2.2 1.7 
Albuminoids.14.o U.9 
I-'iber.•..2.7 2.1 
Carbhydrates (starch, sugar, gum.).72.1 79.it 
Fat.9.0 5.3 
11X1.0 100.0 
The sweet corn contained, on the average, 9.9 
per cent, of water and the common contained 
11.7 per cent., but the samples were unequal¬ 
ly dried, and the analyses probably do not 
show the proportions of water that exist in 
corn iu bulk, as found in the crib or in market. 
The figures above given for Go-mmon com 
are the average of 28 analyses, and may be 
considered as substantially correct; those giveu 
for sioeet com, are the average of only three 
analyses and will need revision, as analyses 
accumulate, but the greater richuess of sweet 
com in albuminoids and fat is very decided, 
aud indicates a higher nutritive value than 
that of common corn. 
3. The range of variation in the several in¬ 
gredients is shown by the following statement 
of the lowest and highest percentages as found 
in these analyses: 
Range of Composition of American Maize. 
Sweet. Common. 
Ash. 
.. 2.1 - 
2.3 
1.4 
- 2.0 
Albuminoids. 
...12.5 — 
15.9 
10.2 
— 13.9 
Fiber. 
... 2.1 — 
3.0 
0.9 
— 3.0 
Carbhvdratos. 
...69.6 — 
73.9 
76.2 
— 82.3 
Fat. 
... 8.3 — 
10.1 
4.4 
— 6.3 
Sweet oorn iu all the analyses contains more 
ash, more fat and Icbs car bhydrates than com¬ 
mon corn. 
4. Flint and Dent Corns have practically the 
same composition, as will be seen from the 
average of 11 Flints aud 14 Dents. 
Average Composition of Flint and Dent Corn. 
riraiiir anti (Useful 
♦ 
CONNECTICUT AGRICULTURAL EXPERI¬ 
MENT STATION. 
Bulletin 35.—Nov. 8, 1879. 
Analyses of Maize Kernel. 
XXXIX.—Coe’s Prolific, crop of 1878. From 
W. W. Fowler, Guilford. 
XL.—Old-fashioned Yellow, crop of 1878. 
From Bethuel Broekett, North Haven. 
XLI.—Benton, crop of 1878. From G. W. 
Benton, Guilford. 
XLII.—Mammoth Sweet, crop of 1878. From 
8. D. Woodruff, Orange. 
XLIII.—8cioto, crop of 1878. From Rufus 
Lcete. Guilford. 
, XLIV.—White Ohio, crop of 1878. From F. 
Johnsou, Brauford. 
XLV.—Wiscousin, crop of 1878. From Ru¬ 
fus Lcete, Guilford. 
LXX.—White Prolific, crop of 1878. From 
G. W. Bradley, Hamden. 
LXXI.—Extra Early Adams, crop of 1878. 
From E. B. Clark, Milford. 
Flint. 
Dent. 
Ash. 
. 1.7 
1.7 
Albuminoids. 
.11.7 
12.0 
Fiber. 
2.2 
Carbhydrates. 
78.8 
Fat..... 
. 5.2 
6.3 
loo.o 
100.0 
The average water content of Flint corn was 
found to be 11.7 per cent., that of Dent corn 
11.4 per cent. 
5. Western corn has about the same nutritive 
value as Eastern corn. Below is the average 
composition of 15 samples of corn raised at 
the East, aud. 10 samples of corn raised at the 
West. 
Average Composition of Eastern and Western 
Corn. 
Ash. 
Albuminoids. 
Fiber. 
Carbhydrates. 
Fat. 
Eastern. 
.. 1.7 
.. 11.8 
.. 1.9 
. .79.1 
.. 5.2 
Western. 
1.6 
12.3 
2.5 
78.2 
5.4 
100.9 100.0 
The Eastern corn averaged 10.7 per cent, of 
water and the Western 13 per cent. To insti¬ 
tute a strict comparison, any constant differ¬ 
ence in water content should be taken into the 
account. It is not certain that the differences 
shown by the analyses are true of corn in bulk, 
but if they do represent a real difference, 100 
pounds of shelled corn contain : 
COMPOSITION OF MAIZE KERNEL. 
AIR DRV. 
XXXIX 
XL 
XLI 
XLII 
XLIII 
XLIV 
XLV 
LXX 
LXVI 
Water. 
9.55 
10.68 
10.70 
9.43 
10.43 
9.70 
9.72 
10.14 
10.94 
Ash.... 
1.45 
1.43 
1.57 
1.93 
1.58 
1.79 
1.66 
1.67 
1.75 
Albuminoids. 
10.13 
9.81 
9.98 
12.32 
9.25 
11.28 
11.60 
9.19 
10.81 
Fiber. 
2.19 
1.39 
1.36 
2.75 
1.80 
1.73 
2.06 
1.34 
1.48 
Carbhydrates. 
72.70 
72.lt 
71.40 
00.09 
72.98 
71.30 
70.17 
73.38 
70.21 
Fat.. 
3.9H 
4.08 
5.00 
7.48 
4.01 
4.20 
1 4.89 
4.28 
4.81 
WEIGHT 
OF CORN AND ( 
COB, CURED. 
Corn, weight in grams. 
454 
467 
509 
124 
518 
467 
1 574 
344 
336 
Cob, “ “ “ . 
98 
94 
84 
110 
78 
111 
103 
57 
89 
Relation of cob to corn. 
1:4.9 
1:4.0 
1:6.0 
1:3.0 
1:6.6 
1:4.2 
1:5.5 
1:6 
1:3.8 
Cob expressed in per cent. 
of corn. 
20.1 
1 16.5 
16.5 
1 27.3 
15.1 
| 23.8 
| 18.0 
16.3 
26.5 
COMPOSITION OF MAIZE KERNEL. 
WATER-FREE. 
Coe’s Prolific. 
Old-fashioned 
Yellow, 
Benton. 
Mammoth 
Sweet, 
Scioto. 
White Ohio. 
O 
1 
J 
White Prolif¬ 
ic. 
Early Adams. 
Ash. 
1.60 
1.60 
1.76 
2.13 
1.71 
1.88 
1.73 
1.86 
1.97 
Albuminoids. 
11.21 
10.99 
11.18 
13.00 
12.50 
12.85 
10.23 
12.14 
Fiber. 
2.42 
1.66 
1.52 
3,04 
2.01 
1.92 
2.28 
1.49 
1.06 
Carbhydrates. 
80.36 
80.63 
79.94 
72.97 
81.49 
78.96 
77.72 
81.86 
78.83 
Fat. 
4.41 
6.23 
5.60 
8.26 
4.48 
4.66 
5.42 
4.76 
5.40 
100.00 
100.00 
100.00 
100.00 
100.00 
100.00 
100.00 
100.00 
UXI.OO 
DIGESTIBLE NUTRIENTS, ETC., OF MAIZE KERNEL IN PER CENT. OF AIR-DRY SUBSTANCE. 
Albuminoids. 
9.42 
9.23 
9.39 
11.42 
8.66 
10.60 
10.79 
7.36 
8.73 
Curbhydratos. 
78.40 
76.30 
75.70 
69.72 
77.34 
74.92 
73.90 
66.19 
63.97 
Fat,... 
3.36 
3.97 
4.26 
6.28 
3.41 
3.63 
4.12 
3.10 
3.61 
Nutritive Ratio. 
1:9.2 
1:9.3 
1:9.2 
1:7.6 
1:9.9 
1:7.9 
1:7.8 
1:10.1 
1:8.3 
Calculated vaL IP 100 lb. 
31.26 
1.26 
1.27 
1.39 
1.22 
1.38 
1.81 
1.06 
1.11 
Eastern. 
Western. 
Water.. 
13.0 
Ash.... 
. 1.5 
1.4 
Albuminoids... 
10.7 
Fiber. 
. 1.7 
2.2 
Carbhydrates. 
07.9 
Fat. 
. 4.6 
4.8 
100.0 
100.0 
The slightly higher content of albuminoids 
and fat in the corn raised at the West, if it 
should be shown by further analyses to be 
constant, is due either to difference in climatic 
conditions and the methods of cultivation, or 
to difference in the chemical composition of 
the varieties most commonly cultivated in the 
two sections. 
We have no analyses of varieties known to 
be identical, raised in the East and also at the 
West, except of Tuscarora, which makes a 
third kind, intermediate in composition be¬ 
tween common and sweet corn. The analysis 
by Prof. Kedzie, and that made at the Station 
are fairly accordant. Among those analyzed 
in this laboratory are three:—Ohio Dent, White 
Ohio, and Wisconsin, which were raised in 
Connecticut, whose names suggest a Western 
origin, though the history of the seed is un¬ 
known. 
The average of these is as follows: 
Water. 
Albuminoids.. 
Fiber. 
Carbhydrates 
Fat. 
10.1 
1.6 
11.0 
1.7 
70.9 
4.7 
100.0 
It results that these corns, pound for pound, 
are worth fully as much or slightly more than 
corn raised at the Weat. 
It should be said here, that the popular idea 
that Westeru corn is inferior to Eastern corn, 
is probably correct, if by Western corn ” is 
meant the corn as it comes in bulk from the 
West to be ground for feed. 
The samples of Western corn whose average 
composition is given above, were, no doubt, 
taken from the field or barn to the laboratory, 
and had been properly cured and stored. But 
when corn is raised on a large scale for market, 
at the West, it cannot be as carefully cured as 
with us. Many times it cannot be put under 
cover at all, but is stacked in the field, and 
necessarily deteriorates, from exposure to the 
weather. A single analysis of such corn. mad e 
by Dr. Atwater of Middletown, gave the fol¬ 
lowing result—calculated on a water-free basis : 
Ash... 1.5 
Albuminoids. 10.3 
Fiber. 1.8 
Carbhydrates.81.8 
Fat. 4.6 
100 
It will be seen that it has one and a half per 
cent, less albuminoids, and six-tenths per cent, 
less fat than the average of Eastern corn, and 
two and four-tenths per oeut. more of carb¬ 
hydrates. while the ash and fiber are approxi¬ 
mately the same. Dr. Atwater says the sample 
contained unsound kernels, bits of cobs, fine 
prairie soil, and other refuse. 
6. Unripe maize, so far as its composition is 
illustrated by three analyses of the same kind 
of sweet corn, is richest in albuminoids—the 
rarest and most costly element of food. 
These samples of sweet corn, harvested by 
Mr. Gold Aug. 9, Aug. 25 and Sept. 25, 1877, 
respectively, had the subjoined composition : 
Aug-. 9. 
Auk. 26. 
Sept 25. 
Wutor. 
..10.1 
10.1 
9.5 
Ash.. 
.. 2.2 
2.1 
2.1 
Albuminoids. 
.14.5 
15.3 
14.4 
Fiber.. 
.. 2.6 
2.5 
1.9 
Carbhydrates. starch, etc 
. .02.7 
61.8 
63.0 
Fat. 
.. 7.9 
8.2 
9.1 
100.0 
loo.o 
100.0 
The albuminoids found in the earliest are 
indeed scarcely more than those of the latest 
corn. But the earliest-cut sample was very 
small and immature, and was shelled from a 
cob that contained 8.6 per cent, of albumi¬ 
noids, while the others were from cobs of 3.0 
and 2.7 per cent- albuminoids, respectively. 
The comparison Is therefore properly between 
the corn of Aug. 25 and that of Sept. 25. 
The mature corn contains a less percentage 
of albuminoids thau the immature because, in 
the latter stages of growth, starch and sugar, 
as well as fat (oil), are formed iu the seed at a 
more rapid rate thau albuminoids. The per¬ 
centage of fat increases from 7.9 to 9.1. 
7. The ripe grain, as a crop, contains abso¬ 
lutely more of every ingredient than the un¬ 
ripe. The yield of vegetable matter per acre 
in the three crops, is not known; but the rela¬ 
tive yield of the two later crops is as follows 
per 1,000 pounds of total harvest, reckoned 
water-free: 
Corn. Cob. Fodder. Total. 
August 26.304 88 608 1,000 
September 25. . 366 94 560 1,000 
Doubtless 1,000 pounds of the dry matter of 
the standing crop ou Aug. 25, would have in¬ 
creased to 1,250 pounds, more or less, by Sept. 
25, so that the acreage yield of total vegetable 
substance, as well as the relative proportion of 
grain, would iucreaso to the tm'" ~f full ripe¬ 
ness, while the cob and stover would increase 
absolutely, but not so rapidly as the grain, and 
relatively to grain would appear to diminish. 
In fact the grain increases at the expense of 
stover and cob as well as of root6, while the 
entire plant gains by growth as long as the 
leaves are green aud uushrlveled. 
S. W. Johnson, Director. 
;$arm (faraomj. 
SOME REMARKS ABOUT HARROWS. 
H. L. WYSOR. 
Several years ago, I bought one of Colton’s 
all-iron-and-steel coulter harrows. This har¬ 
row, as is perhaps known to many readers of 
the Rural, is made in sections two feet in 
width, the bars of which are curved somewhat 
in the form of the letter S, and the teeth bolted 
in the bends of the curves. There are eight 
teeth in a section, all having the shape of a 
common coulter, except that they are on a 
much smaller scale, and the harrow is gener¬ 
ally composed of three sections hinged together. 
I found, on using this implement, that on ac¬ 
count of the shape of the teeth, it clogged 
badly, even in ground comparatively free of 
weeds aud trash. Briers, roots, aud everything 
which came iu Us path, caught across the 
broad foot-pieces of the coulters, so that the 
burrow could not be cleaned except by taking 
the sections apart, and tearing out the accu¬ 
mulations with the hands. I bethought me ot 
a plan to remedy this defect, which I here pre¬ 
sent for the benefit of any Rural readers who 
may have been troubled in like manner. 
I bad the teeth turned round in the frame till 
the foot-pieces, instead of pointing forward as 1 
before, pointed backward. I then had a black¬ 
smith to flatten them and give them a curved 
fron t edge,somewhat in the shape of a butcher’s- 
knife, keepiug them wedge-shaped from back 
to front, so that they would always wear them¬ 
selves sharp. They now stand nearly perpen¬ 
dicularly on the point, while the curved front 
edge gives all the advantages which are claimed 
for harrows in which the teeth are inclined 
backward, and at the same time the work is 
better done. Iu all ordinary case6, the teeth 
dean themselves, as they draw over all trash 
that may lie in the way. In firm soils, the 
harrow may now be used to cultivate corn 
without regard to the rows, but in very loose 
or sandy soils, it will tear up too large a pro¬ 
portion of the plants. The only fault which 
can be urged, is that the teeth, having been 
originally set in the frame to allow for the 
width of the coulter, are now, *fter then- 
change of form, rather too far apart. I have 
also had hooks put on both ends of the harrow, 
so that, if desired, it may be used with the 
teeth pointing forward in the manner of a bull- 
tongue. 
A great deal has of late been claimed for 
hinged or jointed harrows, it being said that 
they adapt themselves to the inequalities of the 
land. This, In my opinion, is no advantage 
whatever, since the ridges and holes are simply 
smoothed over and left as before, while the 
stiff-framed implement will reduce the inequal¬ 
ities by filling up the hollows and leveling 
down the ridges. Ou steep hill-sides the sec¬ 
tions are particularly troublesome, as they 
frequently come apart, or keep the harrows 
slipping down hill. Iu point of form, there is 
no harrow so convenient for passing obstruc¬ 
tions, such as stumps or large stones, as the 
A-shaped, which passes easily and works suffi¬ 
ciently close to them. 
I think the wheel harrow now coming into 
use, will be found to answer all the purposes 
for which the harrow is designed, better than 
any other implement of the kind. The draft 
on the horses is greater in this sort of work 
than in anything which is done on the farm. 
The use ol wheels will greatly diminish this 
draft, while the weight of the harrow can be 
greatly increased. Some of these implements 
are made to weigh 500 pounds, a weight which 
ou teeth could not be drawn bj two horses. 
They penetrate the soil from five to six inches, 
and yet it is impossible for them to get clogged. 
Pulaski Co., Ya. 
--♦ 
Wlnd-MUU for Farmers, 
Few farmers who have never had experience 
with wind mills, know their real value when 
used as a power upou the farm. Doubtless, 
they are most uselnl for pumping water for 
stock, for which purpose they are not only 
very convenient, bui almost perfectly reliable, 
if properly managed. But pumping water is 
not the only use to which they can be put. 
They may be geared so as to propel a corn 
sheiler. saw wood, turn a grind-stone, etc. All 
good tarmers know the advantage gained iu 
haviug plenty of pure water in their barnyards 
and stables in winter. When stock of any 
kind are obliged to go a considerable distance 
for water in cold, stormy weather, they be¬ 
come chilled by the large draughts of iee water 
which they drink and the exposure while 
going and returning, so that more feed is re¬ 
quired to keep them in good condition than 
would be needed were they confined in a shel¬ 
tered yard. The late improved mills are so 
constructed as to combine strength, durability 
and beauty. They are self-governing and will 
an t blow aw ay. in the fall of 1876 we erected 
a 10-foot Halladay’s standard wiud mill on our 
barn. So far, it has given perfect satisfaction 
as a light power. We have used it for pump¬ 
ing water, sawing wood, shelling corn, turning 
a grind-stone, and washing wagous. It has stood 
the most severe storm of wiud that our oldest 
inhabitants have ever witnessed, without in¬ 
jury, aud although a large tobacco shed but a 
short distance from it, was moved Irom its 
foundations, the wind-mill stood firm and was 
not in the least harmed. o. g. 
