120 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
without ears, and the snouts cut ofl’to the opening of the jaws, and the 
brains and bloody gristle taken away, and the remaindef made up of 
side, neck and tail pieces, is branded “Prime Pork.” The third,- of 
which there is not in a barrel more than thirty pounds of head, and four 
shoulders, and the remainder being merchantable pork,- is branded 
“ Cargo Pork.” This pork so repacked is cut from the backbone to 
the belly in pieces about five inches wide, weighing not less than four 
pounds ; otherwise the barrels are not branded as merchantable. 
For every barrel branded there is required 16 quarts of salt, equal 
in weight to Turks Island salt, and a strong new pickle; but if pork 
be inspected and branded when fresh, not less than 24 quarts of such 
salt, exclusive of such pickle, is reqnsite. 
Thin, soft, rusty, meazly or tainted pork is never branded, but the 
inspector marks the head of the barrel with paint, and his name, which 
designates its true character; and the altering his mark or brand, or 
adding thereto, contrary to law, is punishable for every barrel so al¬ 
tered or shipped, or attempted to be shipped, by a fine of 10 dollars, 
to the use of the person suing therefor. 
No beef is repacked for exportation unless of fat cattle, not under 
three years old, in pieces as square as may be, not exceeding 12 nor 
under 4 lbs. weight. Such beef is divided into four sorts: “ Extra 
Mess,” consisting of the most choice pieces of the fattest cattle, weigh¬ 
ing not less than 600 lbs. exclusive of hide and tallow. “ Mess Beef,” 
of the choice pieces of large and fat cattle, without hocks, shanks, 
clods or necks, and may contain two choice rounds not exceeding 10 lbs. 
each. “ Prime Beef,” of pieces of good fat cattle, containing in a bar¬ 
rel not more than one half neck, two shanks with the hocks cut off the 
hind legs at the smallest place above the joint. “Cargo Beef,” of such 
cattle, with a proportion of good pieces, not more than one-half of a 
neck, three shanks with the hocks cut off as above, in a barrel, and to 
be otherwise merchantable. And these names are respectively brand¬ 
ed upon casks containing the respective qualities, by the inspector. 
Into every barrel of beef inspected and repacked, there is put not less 
than 20 quarts of salt, 4 oz. of saltpetre, and a new strong pickle. All 
bloody and neck pieces offered for inspection, before put up are pro¬ 
perly cleansed. 
On the head of each cask of merchantable beef or pork, are branded 
the weight of its contents, with the initial of the Christian name and 
the surname at full length of the inspector, or both at full length, with 
the words “New-York City,” if inspected therein; and the name of 
the county and the words “State of New-York,” if inspected in any 
other county. 
The inspector is entitled to 15 cents for each barrel, 10 cents for each 
half, repacked and inspected, 10 cents for flagging, pegging, nailing, 
salting and pickling ; 3 cents for each hoop put on; payable before the 
inspected cask is taken from his storage. 
No inspector may be concerned in the purchase of cattle or hogs, 
with intention to pack them for sale, or in any manner partake of the 
profit or loss of any beef or pork, when intended for packing, under 
penalty of 500 dollars for each offence, nor may he inspect or brand 
;;..y cask out of his proper district; nor in any case lend or hire his 
brands, under penalty of 25 dollars for each barrel so inspected or 
branded. 
The storage of the inspector of the city of New-York must be on the 
margin of the East or North river; and he may.not inspect or repack 
at any other place, under penalty of $15 for every barrel. Any person 
other than an inspector, branding such cask, forfeits a like sum. 
No dealer in beef or pork, may suffer it, after inspection, to be ex 
posed to the heat of the sun, or inclement weather, longer than 12 
hours, under penalty of five dollars for each offence. 
Any person intermixing, taking out, or shifting beef or pork of casks 
inspected, or putting into such casks other beef or pork, for sale or 
exportation, or altering or changing the brand or mark of the inspect¬ 
or, forfeits $25 for each cask. 
Every person slaughtering cattle or hogs to be barrelled for inspec¬ 
tion, contrary to law, forfeits $25 for every head. 
Any person selling or disposing of empty barrels, or the heads of 
barrels, that have contained beef or pork, without having first oblite¬ 
rated the inspector’s brands or marks, forfeits five dollars for each bar¬ 
rel or head, to the use of the person suing therefor. 
regulations relative to the package of butter, lard and hay. 
The firkin in which butter or lard is packed, for sale, has the true 
weight thereof stamped or marked in a legible and durable manner, on 
one of the staves or heads, with the initials of the packer, which is, on 
every sale, deemed the tare. The offering for sale of any firkin of 
butter or lard not so marked, is punishable by a fine of three dollars; 
and the putting any false mark on such firkin, or selling, or offering to 
sell any butter or lard in any firkin known to be falsely marked, by a 
fine of five dollars. Such fines to be applied to the use of the city, 
town, or village, in which the offence is committed, and recoverable in 
the name of any officer appointed thereby to sue therefor. 
Every person putting up and pressing any bundle of hay for market, 
marks or brands in a legible manner the initials of his Christian, and 
his full surname, and the name of the town in which he resides, on 
some board or wood attached to the bundle; and may not put or con¬ 
ceal in any such bundle, any wet or damaged hay, or other materials 
or hay of inferior quality to that which plainly appears on the outside, 
under penalty of prosecution by the person aggrieved; and if the 
court, before whom the suit is brought, be satisfied that any of the 
preceding provisions has been violated, it renders judgment of one dol¬ 
lar for the plaintiff, with such damages as he' has suffered thereby, and 
costs: but if the court be satisfied that no such violation has been com¬ 
mitted, the costs are awarded against the plaintiff. 
Such hay may be sold with or without inspection or deduction for 
tare, and by the weights, as marked, or any other standard weight, as 
agreed between buyer and seller. 
No person may receive any fees or compensation for inspecting 
pressed or other hay Where he is the purchaser, for himself, or as 
agent for any other person. 
CORRESPONDENCE. 
CHESS OR CHEx\T. 
Our correspondents, to-day, have fully verified our remark, that the question 
as to the transmutation of wheat into chess is well settled, in the opinions 
of the advocates upon both sides—both pertinaciously claiming to be right. 
Since we wrote our articles upon the subject, we have made tiie subject of 
some enquiry, and have heard various statements pro and con, sufficient to 
make a strong case on either side. These it is not worth while to detail; 
and we content ourselves with remarking, that the only practical benefit 
likely to grow out of tne controversy, is a general admission, that as chess 
will produce chess, the less of it that is sown, the less it is likely to abound 
in the crop—and that consequently good farmers will be admonished to sow 
none but perfectly clean seed. We fear that a farther continuance of the 
controversy, will be neither otherwise profitable, nor pleasant, to the mass 
ot our readers, and therefore would respectfully ask leave of our correspon¬ 
dents to bid adieu to it. 
Judge Buel —In the Cultivator for the present month, I have read 
an editorial on the subject of chess, which leans to the doctrine of the 
mutability of wheat. As all controversy is deprecated, permit me to 
submit one or two facts in opposition to those adduced in the ar¬ 
ticle in question. Some eight or ten years ago, my farm became very- 
much infested with this weed—which proceeded probably from negli¬ 
gence—insomuch that I was even unable to save grass seeds that were 
clear of it. I determined, if possible, to extirpate it; bought my grass 
seed in order to have that which was pure ; and caused my seed wheat 
to be thoroughly cleansed of all foreign matter. I did not depend upon 
those in my employment to judge for me, as to when it was sufficiently 
cleansed. I therefore went to work knowingly —and I had the pleasure 
of seeing the quantity of cheat diminish at every succeeding harvest. 
The consequence is, that for some years past, out of the annual pro¬ 
duct of about fifty acres, I have not perhaps reaped a peck of cheat. 
My facts however, have reference to the last, and present years, about 
which I will bemore particular in my statement. Itis wellknown Iliat 
the two past winters have been very disastrous to the wheat crop. 
iThat of ’34—’35 caused the destruction of probably three fourths of 
[the young plants, many of which, however did not finally perish until 
the spring. Some of the plants therefore must necessarily have been 
“ diseased;” but notwithstanding this and all other causes, proximate 
or remote, I was unable to find a single grain of cheat when my crop 
was thrashed out. Most of my neighbors’crops on the contrary, abound¬ 
ed in it; and it was, as usual, regarded as degenerate wheat. In re¬ 
gard to the present year, the wheat had not only to contend against the 
elfects of the winter; but it had to withstand the ravages of the hessian 
fly, which was more numerous in the spring than I have ever before 
known. When it was time for the ears to be developed, every person 
was surprised to see such a quantity of cheat; and some were amazed 
to behold their fields exhibit scarcely any thing else. Under these cir¬ 
cumstances, and when a large number of the stools did not have strength 
enough to shoot, (being consequently grievously “diseased”) I was 
not able to find a single plant of cheat during a search over a considera¬ 
ble portion of my field. Now I venture to ask, why my own field, which 
was no better cultivated than those of my neighbors, and which also 
contained “ springy places,” should have been more exempt than theirs 
from this pest f 
After my own experience, I cannot but believe that those who detail 
facts to prove the transmutation of wheat, state them with much loose¬ 
ness. Do they know that the seed was pure, and that there was no filth 
in the ground when it was prepared ? Unless their premises are cau¬ 
tiously laid, their deductions are entitled to nt) consideration, even from 
themselves. From what I know of those whom I am acquainted with, 
and judging of others by them, I am certain they are not cognizant of 
all the circumstances on which this result should be made to depend. 
Every fact detailed in the Cultivator is of this character, with one or 
two exceptions—the most important of which is that G. W. Feather- 
