1868 .] 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST. 
95 
must drain a few acres at a time every spring, 
as we can afford it. What we do should be 
done well. It is not wise to insist on having 
the drains four feet deep. The depth must de- 
dend on circumstances. A four-foot drain will 
dry a wider area on each side than a three-foot 
drain, and while tiles are so high this is quite a 
point. But the great difficulty in most cases is 
to get a good outlet the necessary depth, with¬ 
out going on to adjoining farms. And in this 
case it requires no little diplomacy to induce 
the neighbors to unite in deepening the main 
ditch and keeping it clean afterwards. I know 
two or three cases where a system of drains 
has been choked up and rendered almost use¬ 
less from, this cause. Till we have a law, some¬ 
what similar to the one in Michigan, compell¬ 
ing the towns to keep the streams and ditches 
clear, deep underdraining will be an up-hill 
business. One of the most effective drains I 
have is not more than 20 inches deep at the out¬ 
let. As the drains get up into the higher land 
they are three feet deep, and tap several springs. 
Of course I would prefer to have the outlet deep¬ 
er, and there is 13 feet fall from it to the main 
stream; but I have to discharge into an open 
ditch that runs through a neighbor’s farm, and 
as this .ditch is not more than 20 inches deep, 
what can I do ? Better have a shallow outlet 
that is free, than a deep one liable to choke up. 
Mark you, I am not arguing against deep drain¬ 
ing. I believe in it most fully, but as things are, 
it is useless to insist on four-foot drains in all 
cases. Make sure of a free outlet, and then go 
as deep as you can. The spring is the best 
time to underdrain. The land is not so hard; 
the men, after the comparatively leisure season 
of winter, are more vigorous and are less likely 
to get discouraged when they come to a tough 
spot; and there will be water enough in the 
drain to enable 3 r ou to get a smooth and uniform 
bottom. The water is decidedly the best level. 
I wish we had a good hand machine for sow¬ 
ing clover seed. It would not only do the work 
more expeditiously, but we should not have to 
give up the work when the ground was in good 
order, as now frequently happens, simply be¬ 
cause of the wind. When the land has been 
thoroughly cultivated and is in fine condition, 
five quarts of clover seed and four quarts of 
timothy per acre is abundant; but many of our 
best farmers are becoming more in favor of 
thicker seeding, and a peck of clover seed per 
acre isnot uncommon, and I have heard of farm¬ 
ers who think it pays to sow even more than 
this, as the clover is so much finer and of better 
quality. My own opinion is, that more depends 
on the land than on the amount of seed. There 
is said to be over 250,000 seeds of red clover in 
a pound, if we sow five quarts, or ten pounds, 
on an acre, we put on 2,500,000 seeds, and as 
there are 43,560 square feet in an acre, we sow 
about 57 seeds on each square foot. 
1[n a pound of timothy there are about one 
million seeds. If we sow four quarts, say 5’ [ 2 
pounds, there would be 126 seeds to a square 
foot. It is evident that if half these seeds grow, 
we are in the habit of seeding thick enough. 
Still, there are so many chances of failure that 
it is better to sow liberally. 
We shall all agree on one point: few of us 
in the wheat district sow enough land to clover. 
We sow too much barley and oats as summer 
crops, to precede wheat. The practice is a prof¬ 
itable one, provided we can make the land rich 
enough. But we take three cereal crops in suc¬ 
cession-corn, barley, (or oats), and wheat. We 
ought in some way to get in another crop of 
clover, or, on heavy land, a summer fallow. If 
land is clean and rich, we might mow clover 
the first year, for hay, and the second crop for 
seed; pasture it the next summer, and then 
plow it up and sow wheat, and seed it down 
again. If the land could be top-dressed after 
taking off the clover seed, or early the next 
spring, it would give good pasture and add great¬ 
ly to the wheat crop. And by raising large 
crops of clover we should be able to make rich 
manure and thus keep up the land. 
“I know what I shall do for the next five 
years,” said an enterprizing young farmer of this 
neighborhood. “I shall put in all the wheat I 
can. That is what pays. Two or three more 
crops will pay for the farm. Stock is played 
out.” This is quite a general feeling. We shall 
rush into grain growing as we did into sheep. 
And the result will be the same. We shall im¬ 
poverish our farms, and fail to enrich ourselves. 
Better be content with sowing a less area, and 
try to raise heavier crops. This is the true policy. 
When Mr. Sheldon, of Geneva, bought his 
farm eleven years ago, lie cut 76 loads of hay 
the first season. He now pastures three times 
the stock, cuts between 430 and 440 loads of 
hay of the very best quality, and raises quite as 
much grain. 
John Johnston writes me that he is drawing 
swamp muck into his sheep and cattle J'ards, 
and covering it with litter. Outside his sheep 
yard there is a low spot into which the liquid 
from his manure piles runs. He has put 20 loads 
of muck into it. He says: “I have owned the 
yard 43 years, and have lost a vast amount of 
excellent manure from that leak. I could never 
find muck convenient till this year, and I now 
draw it 2 1 [ 2 miles. I have got 83 loads home, 
and if I can get 150 loads this winter and have 
it heaped up among the yard manures, wont I 
have a fine lot to apply next autumn !” 
If the old gentleman knew that I have thous¬ 
ands of loads of muck within two hundred rods 
of my horse barn, and that the horse manure, so 
far this winter has lain in a heap by itself, it’s 
a good Scotch scolding he would give me. 
“ Wont it pay to draw out?” Pay ! I guess it 
would—three times over. “ Then why don’t 
you do it ?” Why don’t you ? 
Mr. J. says: “Land keeps advancing here¬ 
abouts. Mr. Black has sold his farm for over 
$150 per acre. Buildings only moderate, and 
land so hilly that much of it can be plowed only 
witli side-hill plows. I understand the pur. 
chaser intends to erect a cheese factory.” Wil¬ 
lard thinks the cheese business is going to be 
overdone, and there is some danger of it. 
Cheese factories are starting up in the wheat 
sections, and we shall soon be able to export ten 
times as much cheese as before the war. I mis¬ 
take the signs of the times, however, if there 
will not be" a vastly greater consumption of 
cheese at home than formerly. 
The true plan, in the grain growing districts 
at least, will be to combine beef raising with 
dairying. We shall have grade Short-horn 
cows that can be readily fattened as soon as they 
are past their prime as milkers. Having abun¬ 
dance of winter fodder we can adopt this sys¬ 
tem with advantage to ourselves and to the land. 
Why would it not pay us to sow more white 
clover? True, where the land is well drained 
and rich enough it springs up itself. And so 
does red clover. But we do not depend on this. 
We sow red clover; why not white clover also ? 
For pasture there is nothing superior to it, es¬ 
pecially for sheep. There are twice as many 
seeds in a pound as of red clover, and a quart 
per acre, in addition to the usual quantity of 
clover and timothy seed, would suffice. The ex¬ 
pense would be little, and the benefit consider¬ 
able. But the land must be in fine condition. 
It looks now as though men could be hired 
cheaper this season than last If we had only 
more cottages on the farms there would be no 
trouble in getting good men at reasonable rates. 
The wages of married men who board them¬ 
selves are nothing like as high as those of 
single men who board in the family—taking the 
cost of boarding into the account. The men 
are more reliable, and it lessens the work in 
the house. I have three married men living in 
houses on the farm, and mean to haVe another. 
There is no trouble about finding work enough, 
even in winter. In many cases we could profit¬ 
ably spend half the winter in drawing muck 
from the swamps. In hiring, the best way is 
to give as few perquisites as possible—and as 
many afterwards as you please. A good man 
likes to get more than he bargained for, and it 
will pay to treat him liberally. 
—- I m - 
Raising rather than Buying Cows. 
Two of the best milk farmers of Connecticut 
said at the meeting of the Board of Agriculture 
that they bought no cows,—that they could not 
buy so good as they could raise. We were not 
a little gratified at hearing this pronounced un¬ 
qualifiedly, because the contrary practice so 
commonly prevails. Milk farmers go about to 
pick up fresh cows in autumn so as to keep their 
winter supply of milk good, and instead of 
keeping up their herd from their own calves, 
either market them as “bobs,” or, as they say in 
the Connecticut valley, “ deacon” them, that is, 
kill and skin them when first dropped. These 
two farmers, both men of good judgment, expe¬ 
rience, and means, cannot afford to buy cows. 
The question is pertinent,—can any good farm¬ 
er afford to? We think not. The price at 
which as good cows as a man may raise should 
be sold, ought to be so high that one who can 
raise them cannot afford to buy. It costs as 
much to raise a poor cow as a good one, and 
with hay at $20 per ton that is a good deal. If, 
however, the cow gives an average of one quart 
of milk more at a milking for 250 days she 
will soon make good her extra cost. At 5 cents 
a quart the amount will be $12.50 a year. 
How may good cows be raised with com¬ 
parative certainty ? This is the question. We 
answer: first, by never using a common, or 
grade bull under any circumstances, if within 10 
miles of a well bred one of any breed. By 
using a well bred bull one is sure of something 
definite and good; otherwise there is no cer¬ 
tainty at all. Ayrshire bulls are almost sure to 
impart to their heifer calves a tendency to be¬ 
come deep milkers; Jersey bulls bring butter 
makers; Short horns, fine large cows, which, if 
allowed to come in young, well fed, and milk 
secretion especially excited, often make very 
deep milkers; Devon bulls, if from good milk¬ 
ing stock, as is true also with the Short-horns, 
will be the sires of good milch stock. 
Opinions have varied in regard to what kind 
of cows will give the most milk in proportion 
to the food consumed. Grade Short-horns have 
had their advocates, and grade Ayrshires theirs. 
Few of those who sell milk as the most im¬ 
portant article of farm produce have hitherto 
advocated keeping, still less kept, full-bloods 
as milk producers. Mr. J. M. Wells, one of the 
