1000. 
THE RURYYU NEW-YORKER 
433 
RATIONS FOR MILCH COWS. 
I have read somewhere that a good 
general rule for feeding dairy cows is to 
give one pound of grain for each three 
pounds of milk produced. Do you con¬ 
sider this about right on an average? Is 
it true that gluten feed is unsafe except 
in small quantities? I have been informed 
that it is liable to cause garget, stringy 
milk, loss of teats, etc. Are Ajax flakes 
equal to gluten as a milk producer? 
They analyze considerably higher both in 
protein and fat, but my experience is that 
gluten is hard to beat. I have never used 
the Ajax, but have been told that it 
equals gluten as a milk producer, is a 
safer feed, keeps the cows in better health, 
and costs about the same. f. w. p. 
One pound of grain for each three 
pounds of milk produced is a good gen¬ 
eral rule, but it must be in the form 
of a well-balanced practical ration, or 
it will fall short of this amount of 
milk. It is, however, about right on 
an average. My experience with gluten 
feed leads me to believe that a great 
deal of it is not fit to use. First, 
because it causes too much udder 
trouble, such as you mention, and, sec¬ 
ond, on account of nearly one per cent 
of poisonous coloring matter which 
some brands contain. I have therefore 
discarded gluten feed entirely, and am 
using a ration composed of Ajax flakes, 
cotton-seed meal and corn-and-cob 
meal. I have had no trouble with caked 
udders since making this change, and 
the flow of milk is all that could reason¬ 
ably be expected. I prefer Ajax 
flakes to gluten feed for producing 
milk. As they are very light you do 
not need to use any wheat bran in the 
ration. If you will try a ration mixed 
in the proportion of four pounds Ajax 
flakes, two pounds of cornmeal or 
hominy and two pounds of cotton-seed 
meal, I am sure you will not want any 
more gluten. c. s. greene. 
INCUBATOR RUN FROM FURNACE. 
Where incubator is managed' in cellar of 
furnace-heated house, steam. Dot water or 
hot air, is it practical to supply heat from 
Use furnace, thus doing away with the 
nuisance and danger of lamps? 
I would not say that it is imprac¬ 
ticable to run incubators by heat de¬ 
rived from a furnace, but 1 have never 
seen it done. I have seen electricity 
used to heat the air in an incubator, 
and it works very well. The resistance 
coils which are the cause of the heat 
are partly cut out of the circuit when 
the heat is too great and cut in 
again when the heat is reduced. Where 
a steady current can be had all the 
24 hours, electricity becomes the model 
way to heat incubators, as there is 
iK) lamp fume or vitiation of the 
atmosphere whatever. All the regulat¬ 
ing apparatus on an incubator does 
is to let off the surplus heat, if the 
heat supplied is not sufficient at any 
time, the regulator does not add any; 
therefore, the heat from a furnace, 
< ither steam, hot water or hot air, 
would have to be very constant in sup¬ 
ply. GEO. A. COSGROVE. 
This is getting into the realms of the 
experimental. Large incubators are 
run by hot-water heaters made for the 
express purpose, but running an or¬ 
dinary one from the house furnace would 
require skillful arrangement. In the 
first place, it would never do to let 
the fire drop below 103 degrees—as the 
ordinary furnace heat often does. Ex¬ 
cess heat above that point could be 
taken care of by regulators. It would 
also be necessary to supply moisture 
probably. If one cared to try the ex¬ 
periment he could arrange a small aux¬ 
ilary hot-water heater or a steam one 
to run direct from the heater to the 
incubator, connecting with the tank sys¬ 
tem of the latter, or if hot air is used 
he could jacket part of the heater a..d 
conduct to the incubator. The hot air 
supply might be controlled by a butter¬ 
fly valve or damper in the pipe worked 
by a regulation thermostat. Whatever 
arrangement was made to supply the 
heat of the furnace to the incubator, 
another temperature controlling device 
would be essential on the incubator. In 
my lamp-operated incubator I am now 
putting in this extra ventilator, entirely 
independent of the lamp, in the top of 
the machine, 6perated by the tusual 
wafer thermostat to take care of the 
extra heat generated by the eggs and 
outside temperature. Practical incuba¬ 
tor men tell me the furnace scheme 
is not workable, chiefly because the 
fire is so liable to fall below the re¬ 
quired temperature in mild weather. 
Nevertheless, the idea might be worked 
out by one fond of experimenting, with 
the chances against success. 
W. H. MILLER. 
I know of no great difficulties in 
the way of heating the incubator from 
the hot-water heater in the cellar. The 
greatest would be that on warm days 
in the Spring the fire would have to 
be kept running just the same as in 
cold weather, and some one would have 
to watch the fire very closely. I do 
not think steam or hot air would work 
at all. FLOYD Q. WHITE. 
Self Propelling Swing. 
IP. H. P., Tiowmansville, Canada .—I 
would like a description and measurement 
of a self-propelled swing. I want to make 
ene for the children. I have material, 10 
feet, and would like it that height. A 
single seat would be simpler than a double 
and I would prefer that. 
Ans.—M ake platform four feet long, 
three feet wide; slat floor, put slats 
close enough together so that feet can¬ 
not catch. Make seat three feet wide, 
14 inches deep, back any height de¬ 
sired. In cut, uprights work at AAAA 
on iron rods run through platform 
frame, at BB on iron rods, hung in any 
way desired, from a tree or frame. 
Sketch shows how seat is fastened to 
uprights. Dimensions of stuff are im¬ 
material so long as it is strong enough 
for safety. Swing is worked by get¬ 
ting a leverage with the legs and push¬ 
ing on the platform. When two seats 
are used the occupants press and push 
alternately. The trick is more quickly 
learned with a little practice than by 
description. The construction is ex¬ 
actly the same for one seat as for two, 
except that one seat is left off. These 
dimensions are not at all arbitrary, and 
may be varied to suit, but the propor¬ 
tions are about the usual thing here¬ 
abouts. The longer the uprights the 
easier the apparatus will work. 
w. H. M. 
“Silas, we don’t know nothin’ about 
the sufferin’ among the poor until 
we read the papers.” said a Bradford 
woman to her husband. “What have 
you found?” asked Silas. “Why. 
right here they’re advertising to sell un¬ 
dressed kids at so much a pair.”—Tit- 
Bits. 
Keen Sportsmen 
Never Waste Ammunition on 
DEAD DUCKS” 
C£ 
The De Laval Company in their advertisements beg to be excused for devoting 
so much space to the United States Separator, which they consider a “dead duck 
competitively.” This is a sweeping admission on their part that the United 
States Separator is not dead hut is the most vigorous duck in the whole flock. 
Keen sportsmen never waste ammunition on “ dead ducks.” 
The facts showing who was the original Inventor of the first practical continuous 
flow Centrifugal Cream Separator, as disclosed by the records in the Patent Office 
at Washington, make it plain that Dr. I)e Laval was not the original inventor. 
These records show that De Laval, beaten in bis claim of priority by other appli¬ 
cants, bought up the Houston & Thomson application (which ante-dated his own), 
in which lie filed a substitute application and added the identical claims that he 
was beaten on, in the interference with the other applicants. 
The Patent Office then allowed these claims to Houston & Thomson and the 
Patent went to issue. 
# 
The United States Circuit Court of Appeals afterwards decided 
in effect that Houston & Thomson were not entitled to the broad 
claims, and Dr. De Laval “was not in it.” 
De Laval bought the Houston & Thomson application to deprive the rightful In¬ 
ventors of their invention and then De Laval got beaten at his own game in the 
Courts. 
The De Laval in their advertisements accuse the United States of utilizing in 
their Separator an invention which they purchased. 
This is not true, as an examination of the De Laval patent referred to and the 
United States Separator patents will readily disclose the falsity of the De Laval 
claim. This is another “ word claim ” of theirs. 
The 1909 Model United States Separator is covered by patents (720,154 ; 726,438; 
732,750; 806,346; and 859,185) owned by the U. S. and which cover its scientific features 
which make the United States Separator so much superior to the De Laval and 
every other Separator on the market. These are but a few of the nearly 40 patents 
owned by the United States. 
Another thing, they accuse the United States of being responsible for the nulli¬ 
fication by the Courts of a patent purchased by the De Laval in their efforts to 
“squelch” the United States Separator, which patent they admit they never used 
but which they bought and paid $20,000.00 for, according to the Court records, in the 
hope that it would “squelch” the United States Separator that was beating them so 
vigorously in the market. 
It is true the Court decided that they had spent their $20,- 
000.00 in vain. The United States Separator accomplished 
better results with a bowl of half the diameter and with less than 
one third as many parts as the De Laval had. 
The De Laval whine because the United States holds the World’s record in a test 
with the De Laval of 50 consecutive runs on 10 different breeds of cows. 
If this record is so ancient and so non-progressive, what is the reason they have 
not been able to beat it in all these eight years they have been attempting to do so. 
Let them show a more progressive record in this Country or any other, if they can 
do so. 
The U. S. is still eight years ahead of the De Lava!. 
The De Laval Company claim that the La Grange Creamery is a little Creamery 
and admit that it is near Poughkeepsie. 
If it is so small and of so little consequence, why did they spend so much money 
at the Dutchess County Fair, Poughkeepsie, N. Y. in the Fall of 1899 and get the 
President of that. Fair to offer a money premium fora test at the Fair between the 
De Laval and the United States Separators? Why if it was so inconse¬ 
quential did they stop their Factory and turn out ail their men 
withoutlossofpayto“whoopitup”onthedayofthis great test ? 
It was apparent to the public that the De Laval Co. felt satisfied they had things 
fixed to win the contest, but the test of the Cream showed that the United States 
had secured more butter fat from the quantity of milk than had the De Laval. 
Again if it is so inconsequential why did they have eight of their best canvassers 
immediately thereafter in that one locality to solicit orders and to prevent, if 
possible, the farmers from buying the United States Separator; and yet when the 
canvass was closed there were three times as many farmers who had taken the 
United States, as there were who had taken the De Laval. 
The De Laval accuse us of changing from year to year the date of President 
Hoyt’s letter. This is a falsehood. We do not find it necessary to falsify records 
and thus deceive the people. The facts remain true as Wlr. Hoyt states 
them, that there are three United States Separators to everyone 
of the De Laval. 
The De Laval Company advertise that they make more trade allowances for old 
L T nited States Separators than for any other make of Separator. 
We guess that is true, for there are more United States Separators in use and we 
have been repeatedly informed by the users of United States Separators that the De. 
Laval agents have bored them to death to exchange and before giving up their per¬ 
sistence, have offered to give a new De Laval in even exchange for an old United 
States. 
Quite a number of former traveling salesmen of the De Laval Company have 
informed us that they have been instructed from Headquarters to give a new De- 
Laval Separator for an Old United States Separator, if they could not make any 
better trade and that their instructions have been from the De Laval Headquarters, 
that the repairs on the De Laval in a short time would make a good handsome profit 
on this kind of an exchange. 
The De Laval Company refer to their farm sizes of Separators as the “Baby” type. 
The United States Spanked the “Bahy” so hard in days gone by that they 
seemed fora while to try to tell the truth and not make such extravagant claims, but 
they have got into their old tricks again, making extravagant, false statements and 
“ word claims.” 
The above we think is sufficient for this time; to be continued later on, but in the 
meantime send for Catalogue No. 159. 
Vermont Farm Machine Co., Bellows Falls, Vermont 
Warehouses in every dairy section ot the United States and Canada. 
Stickney GasolineEngines 
■mmb ARE THE BEST^^^M 
Why ? Because of the outside igniter, 
modern open cooling system, straight, 
line valve motion and ball-bearing gov- 
ernor. Thousands in successful op- 
eration because of our years 
of experience in building tho best. 
Seven sizes: IK to 16 H. F. 
Send for our Free Catalog and 
our Catechism telling fifty-seven 
reasons why Stlckncy En¬ 
gines are the Best . 
Agents everywhere sell them. 
Charles A.Stickney Company 
MAIN OFFICE & FACTORY ST. PAUL. MINN. 
Prices Now 
Slashed 
on 
QUICK 
EXCELL STEEL AND IRON 
ROOFING OR SIDING 
Get your name in quick so we can give 
you all the benefit of cut prices on iron 
and stool roofing and siding. Can’t last 
long. Get book and free samples. 
SEND NO MONEY 
you take no risk. You see what you 
before paying. Pay nothing unless 
satisfied. Lowest prices ever offered 
roofing supplies sold straight to you from 
Factory at real Factory Prices. Don't buy till you get cut 
prices and FREE Roofers' Guide —Write lor Book today. 
Th^msItei^actorie^COj^epl^^J^^leveland^^ 
