46 
THE CULTIVATOR 
We have not room to notice all the so called “au¬ 
thority” which the Agriculturist brings forward, but 
will select a few examples, which may be taken as fair 
specimens of the whole. 
The first example cited, is that of a Short-horn cow 
mentioned by Youatt, which is said to have yielded 372 
lbs. of butter in 32 weeks. To prove that this beats the 
Oaks cow, the Agriculturist says—“ Had this rate been 
continued for 52 weeks, she would have given 606 pounds.” 
Sage conclusion! This is the rule assumed: If a cow 
will produce, say, 14 lbs. of butter in a week, soon after 
calving, and will continue to produce at the same “ rate” 
for a year, she will give 728 lbs! Suppose we try the 
Oaks cow by this rule, and see how she will compare 
with this Short-horn. In thirty-two weeks and two days, 
the Oaks cow gave 467^ lbs. of butter; and at the same 
u rate” for a year, she would have given 785 lbs! But 
every sensible person knows that such a rule is utterly 
fallacious, and that such a case as is supposed, could not, 
in the nature of cows, occur—it being virtually impossi¬ 
ble that the same “rate” of produce in milk or butter 
should be continued for a year, that is yielded for a short 
time after calving. The case mentioned by Youatt is 
stated in his treatise on cattle, p. 247, (English edition,) 
where the number of pounds of butter given each week 
is put down; and the improbability of the same “ rate” 
being continued for a year, may be inferred from the fact 
that during the last three weeks of the trial, she gave 
iust seven pounds of butter each week! 
Another example given by the Agriculturist , is that 
of a Short-horn cow owned by Mr. Vail, of Troy, which 
in one produced 19£ lbs. of butter. This one week ap¬ 
pears to have comprised the entire trial. But look at 
the deduction which our cotemporary makes from it. He 
says—“ Thus, a thorough-bred Short-horn produced over 
2 pounds 12£ ounces of butter per day, which rather ex¬ 
ceeds the quantity yielded by the Oaks cow.” And yet, 
according to the same article, the Oaks cow produced— 
“ a fraction over an average of 2| pounds per day,” from 
the 5th of April to the 25th of September! 
Next follows a statement,—on whose “authority,” 
except that of the Agriculturist, does not appear, as it 
is supported by no reference,—in regard to the produc¬ 
tion of butter from Col. Powell’s cow Belina. It is as¬ 
serted that she gave an average of sixteen pounds of 
butter per week from the 20th of September 1830, to 
the 20th of May following. 
The only account of the butter produced by this cow 
which we have been able to obtain, (although we have 
written to Col. Powell on the subject,) is that published 
in a work entitled “ Hints for American Husbandmen 
with Communications to the Pennsylvania Agricultural 
Society,”—1827. It is there stated that, 
“ Belina produced milk between Thursday morning 
the 24th, and Saturday evening the 26th [May 1827,] 
he., in three days, from which eight pounds thirteen 
ounces of butter were obtained—at the rate of 20£ pounds 
per week.” 
So much for three days. Will the Agriculturist inform 
us where we can find an authentic record of the state¬ 
ment that the cow in question produced sixteen pounds 
of butter per week from the 20th of September to the 
20th of May? 
Jan. 
National Agricultural Bureau. 
President Fillmoee, in his late Message, reiterates his 
former recommendation for the organization of an Agri¬ 
cultural Bureau. He says: 
Agriculture may justly be regarded as the great in¬ 
terest of our people. Four-fifths of our active popula¬ 
tion are employed in the cultivation of the soil, and the 
rapid expansion of our settlements over new territory is 
daily adding to the number of those engaged in that vo¬ 
cation. Justice and sound policy, therefore, alike re¬ 
quire that the Government should use all the means au¬ 
thorized by the Constitution to promote the interests and 
welfare of that important class of our fellow citizens. 
And yet it is a singular fact, that whilst the manufactur¬ 
ing and commercial interests have engaged the attention 
of Congress during a large portion of every session, and 
our statutes abound in provisions for their protection and 
encouragement, little has been done directly for the ad¬ 
vancement of agriculture. It is time that this reproach 
to our legislation should be removed; and I sincerely 
hope that the present Congress will not close their labors 
without adopting efficient means to supply the omissions 
of those who have preceded them. 
An Agricultural Bureau, charged with the duty of 
collecting and disseminating correct information as to the 
best modes of cultivation, and of the most effectual 
means of preserving and restoring the fertility of the soil, 
and of procuring and distributing seeds and plants and 
other vegetable productions, with instructions in regard 
to the soil, climate and treatment best adapted to their 
growth, could not fail to be, in the language of Wash¬ 
ington, in his last annual message to Congress, a “ very 
cheap instrument of immense national benefit.” 
Trial of Reaping Machines. 
The English papers inform us of the result of a trial 
which took place on the 25th and 27th of September, 
between Hussey’s and McCormick’s reaping machines, 
under the auspices of the Cleveland Agricultural Society 
It was a trial agreed on by the parties interested in the re 
spective machines, who signed an agreement by which 
the reapers were placed in the hands of thirteen jurors 
who were directed to ascertain which of the two— 
1. Cuts the corn in the best manner. 
2. Causes the least waste. 
3. Does the most work in a given time. 
4. Leaves the corn in the best order for gathering and 
binding. 
5. Is best adapted for ridge and furrow. 
6. Is the least liable to get out of repair. 
7. At first cost is less price. 
8. Requires the least amount of horse labor. 
9. Requires the least amount of manual labor. 
Whichever of the two, so tried, a majority of the jury 
ascertained to combine .the greater number of the above 
qualities, was to be pronounced the best implement. 
The following is the substance of the report of the 
jury: 
The jury regret exceedingly the most unfavorable state 
of the weather on the days of trial (a perfect hurricane 
raging the whole of the first day,) and their consequent 
inability to make so full and satisfactory a trial as they 
could have wished. 
The machines were tested on a crop of wheat, com¬ 
puted at 25 bushels per acre, very much laid; and on 
barley at 25 bushels per acre, very short in the straw, 
and if possible more laid than the wheat. 
The jury , taking the different points submitted to them 
into consideration, express— 
1. Their unanimous opinion that Mr. Hussey’s ma¬ 
chine, as exhibited by Messrs. William Dray and Com¬ 
pany, cut the corn in the best manner, especially across 
ridge and furrow, and when the machine was working in 
the direction the corn laid 
