238 
THE CULTIVATOR 
Am 
UUEI©M ? § TREATISE 0M 9IILCH COWS. 
The subject of this work is noticed in the Report of 
the Commissioner of Patents. It is observed, (p. 20b) 
that according to a recent report by M. Yvart, to the 
central convention of Agriculture in Paris, the follow¬ 
ing appears to be the present state of this alleged 
discovery: 
“It is admitted that there is some general cor¬ 
respondence, as respects cows, but the signs are defi¬ 
cient as to the male animals. The classification which 
M. Guenon has proposed, is altogether too minute and 
extensive to be of practical value, as the pretended dis¬ 
tinctions of the subdivisions are not verified on exami¬ 
nation.” 
Since the publication of this work in this country, I 
have devoted some attention to the theory it embraces, 
and have come to the following conclusions, viz: 1. That 
a majority of cows have marks similar to what Gue¬ 
non describes as “ escutcheons,” and that where these 
are found, there is a correspondence with his rules, so 
far as regards the leading qualities; that is, where the 
animals are kept under the same circumstances, those 
which have the marks of the first or highest class and 
order, gives the most milk, and those having the marks 
of the lowest, give the least. 2. That there are many 
cows that have none of Guenon’s “ escutcheons,” and 
among them are frequently found those of the highest 
milking qualities; to such the rules can have no refer¬ 
ence whatever. 3. That the theory claims too much , 
even in respect to those cows to w T hich it is at all ap¬ 
plicable,* because it pretends to state the 'precise quan¬ 
tity of milk given by cows of each of the classes and 
orders, and the exact time they will continue in milk 
after having calved; whereas it is evident that the milk¬ 
ing property depends in so great a degree on the quan¬ 
tity and quality of the food eaten by the animals, the 
care bestowed, and all the circumstances in which they 
are placed, that any external marks can be only indica¬ 
tions of general qualities. 
But there are other objections to the system of Gue¬ 
non. It proposes to select and breed animals with ex¬ 
clusive regard to a single quality—that of giving a 
large quantity of milk—it notices only the points sup¬ 
posed to denote this, and overlooks others which are 
essential to constitute the most profitable animal, even 
for the dairy. A coarse, large-boned, weak-constitu- 
tioned cow, may, when full fed, without regard to ex¬ 
pense, give a large quantity of milk; but this by no 
means proves that she is a good animal. Such cows are 
known to be enormous consumers, and to require extra 
attention in feeding and sheltering; and though they 
may, when supplied with good food to an unlimited de¬ 
gree, show the largest yield at the pail, yet when pla¬ 
ced in a poor or rugged pasture, w*ith ordinary expo¬ 
sure, a cow of proper proportions and muscular vigor, 
would yield a more valuable product. Besides, as 
breeders , animals of coarse bone and poor constitution 
are not to be encouraged—their tendency to various 
diseases, and general defects, is often manifested in an 
increased degree in their progeny, till the stock from 
their loose frames, unwieldy carcases and unhealthy ha¬ 
bits, is rendered actually worthless. 
The selection of sheep, for breeders, that possess the 
greatest possible fineness of w*ool, to the sacrifice of 
hardiness of constitution and other properties essential 
to profit , has been found injudicious; and so it will prove 
in selecting cows solely for the quantity of milk they 
may give. The properties of the dairy should certainly 
be secured, but the proper form and constitution should 
be added also. 
Again, it is an error to suppose that the quantity of 
milk yielded by a cow is a criterion of her value for or¬ 
dinary dairy purposes-*-it does not show what would be 
the amount or value of the butter or cheese she may 
yield; so that if Guenon’s system were correct, the ob¬ 
ject sought for, (the most valuable cow,) could not be 
obtained, except in cases where the quality of milk 
was not regarded. It is admitted that in the prelimi¬ 
naries to his tables of “ escutcheons,” it is said that 
the quality of milk can be foretold, yet no signs are 
laid down for this purpose, and the tables and rules on¬ 
ly refer to the quantity-—to the number of “ litre s” of 
milk the cows of the different classes and orders will 
give.^ 
It is a system, therefore, which at the best could on¬ 
ly be adapted to those who sell milk with whom quan¬ 
tity is, of course, the only object. 
A reference to those cows which have been the most 
remarkable for the production of butter, will support 
the remark that the quantity of milk^is not a proper 
criterion of value in such cases. 
The most extraordinary production of butter of which 
we have any account, is that by the “ Cramp cow,” 
so called, owned in Sussex, England. For five years 
this cow yielded an average of 545 pounds of butter 
per year, and in one year, (1807,) she produced 675 
pounds. The greatest quantity of milk given by this 
cow in any one day, was twenty quarts, and the great¬ 
est quantity of butter produced in a week was eighteen 
pounds. 
The celebrated “ Oaks cow,” which was owned in 
Massachusetts, yielded for three years an average of 
394 pounds of butter per year, and in one year, (1816) 
she produced 484^ pounds. The greatest quantity of 
milk given by her in one day, was eighteen quarts, 
(beer measure.) While this cow was owned by Hon. 
Mr. Quincy, he states that on several trials, five quarts 
of her milk afforded a pound of butter. 
Now, cows are sometimes heard of which give from 
thirty to forty quarts of milk per day; but can any such 
product of butter as is above given, be shown from 
them? On the other hand, is it not a fact that the 
milk of such cows is generally deficient in the butyra- 
ceous quality, and that the butter it yields is often of loose 
consistence and inferior flavor ? A Dairyman. 
A Profitable Speech. —A correspondent of the 
Fanner’s Cabinet, says that after hearing an excellent 
speech from Dr. Darlington, before the Philadelphia 
Agricultural Society, on the proper use and care of im¬ 
plements, he was induced to make such useful repairs, 
provide a tool-house, and beep his implements in so 
much better order than before, that “he calculates his 
savings in wear and tear of tools, since the delivery of 
that speech, has not been less than $50 per annum; 
while the time gained by having everything in its place, 
was worth as much more”—adding $100 a year to his 
iucome. 
New use of India Rubber. —A stratum of India 
rubber placed under the rails of railroads, is found to 
prevent in a great measure, the jar experienced when 
passing in cars over ordinary railroads. Would not a 
layer of the rubber between the hoof and shoe of a 
horse, be useful in preventing concussions which so 
much injure the animal when driven on pavements or 
hard roads? 
