94 
THE CULTIVATOR. 
for mutton, and in all sections where sheep can be rais¬ 
ed as stores, and driven to the vicinity of those markets 
for fatting, mutton sheep, properly so called, of whatever 
breed, are, and must be always, by far the most profitable 
to breed ; for instance, it is just as feasible to raise a 
sheep in the counties of Westchester, Putnam, and 
Dutchess, that would at maturity, bring in the New- 
York market, from $10 to $20, as to raise a Saxon or 
Merino, that would bring but from $3 to $6, and it is 
just as practicable for the farmers living in the western 
counties of this state, and on whom we are in the 
former section dependent for stores, to give us a 
sheep worth from 5 to 10 dollars, as one that is not 
worth but from one dollar to five. All the difference 
of these prices are and have been realized, by the farm¬ 
ers in these different sections, for a number of years 
past. For proof of this I will state that as low as the 
markets have been the present winter, I have obtained 
for a part of my lot of two shear wethers, from 15 to 17 
cents per pound for the carcass, and several of my 
choicest I have yet on hand, having refused them at 
those prices. Last year you will see I obtained 25 cents 
per pound. I trust that it will not be thought by you 
out of place to state that both last year and the present, 
my Lincoln wethers have been considered by the butch¬ 
ers, Avho saw them both alive and dead, as superior to 
any other breed of sheep in their fine qualities of mut¬ 
ton, that has yet been introduced into the New-York 
market; for proof of this, the price obtained clearly de¬ 
monstrates, it being as they say, both last year and this, 
higher by some 5 or 6 cents per pound, than they had 
paid for any thing of the kind. If, Messrs. Editors, 
such facts as these will not be duly appreciated by all 
those wishing to improve their breeds of sheep, I am 
yet content to breed the Lincolns, for the butcher only. 
L. D. CLIFT. 
Somers P. 0., N. Y., March 4, 1840. 
Durham Cattle—Crossing. 
Messrs. Editors —In the March number of the Cul¬ 
tivator, in a synopsis of the proceedings of the High¬ 
land Agricultural Society, you publish the remarks of 
Mr. Heriot in relation to that family of the Improved 
Short Horn breed of cattle, known as the “Alloy" —so 
incorrect in themselves, and so misleading in their ten¬ 
dency, that they should not be suffered to go forth 
without correction. The connection which Mr. Heriot 
appears in to the Highland Society, and the fact that 
he speaks as from personal knowledge and observation, 
attach to his assertions a degree of credit, which they 
do not deserve. The history of the precise manner in 
which the celebrated cross between the Short Horns 
and polled Galloways was effected, from which sprung 
the Alloy, though of little importance compared with 
the great point— the consequences of that cross —should 
nevertheless be truly stated, for the information of suc¬ 
ceeding breeders, and even this, Mr. H. has not done. 
The following paragraph, which I quote from the Lon¬ 
don Farmer’s Magazine, (the substance of which was 
given in the Cultivator,) presents his assertions in full, 
on both points: 
“ In the number just published of the English Agricultu¬ 
ral Society, a distinguished nobleman, in his article on the 
breeding of oattle and sheep, has been led into an error ; for 
that noble lord says—“ The most successful cross between 
two different breeds of cattle, of which I am aware, was the 
one between a Durham bull and a Galloway Scotch cow, 
made by Mr. Charles Colling. The produce of this cross 
sold for enormous prices at his sale, and at the present day, 
a majority of the best Short Homed cattle are descending 
from it.” This is certainly a mistake. The cross was be¬ 
tween a Galloway bull and Short Horned cows. From this 
cross were produced several splendid females ; but eventu¬ 
ally, he gained neither fame nor profit by the experiment; 
and, although by this time the stain is probably washed out, 
breeders who possess the best herds, have always carefully 
guarded against the blood thrown in by this cross, which 
has ever since been technically called “ the Alloy.” 
The “noble lord” so categorically set right by Mr. 
Heriot, was Earl Spencer,* the President of the Eng¬ 
lish Agricultural Society, of the Smithfield Club, &c. 
and probably the most extensive breeder of pure Short 
Horns in the world ! It does not appear from the Herd 
Book, that Mr. Heriot has been the breeder or owner 
of one ! The following is the real history of the cross, 
by the Rev. Henry Berry, and as it is adopted by Mr. 
Youatt in his history of British cattle. It should be re¬ 
marked, too, that it is fully confirmed by the Herd 
Book, (an authority which Mr. Heriot acknowledges in 
a preceding part of the same paragraph, a portion of 
which is quoted!) as may be seen by referring to the 
pedigree of any of the animals mentioned by Mr. Berry. 
“Mr. Ceiling’s Short Horned bull “ Bolingbroke,” was 
put to a beautiful red polled Galloway cow, and the produce 
being a bull calf, was in due time put (o Johanna, a pure 
Short Horn—she also producing a bull calf. This grandson 
of Bolingbroke was the sire of the cow, Lady, by another 
pure Short Horn dam, and from Lady lias sprung the highly 
valuable family of unproved Short Horns, termed in re 
proach the Alloy. How- far the alloy was derogatory, let 
facts testify. It will probably be admitted that the preju¬ 
dice against this cross, was at the highest at the time of Mr. 
Charles Collmg’s sate. * * * * Lady, before mention¬ 
ed, at fourteen years old, sold for two hundred and six gui¬ 
neas. Countess, her daughter, nine years old, for four hun¬ 
dred guineas. Laura, another daughter, four years old, for 
two hundred and ten guineas. Major and George, two of 
her sons, the former three years old, the latter a calf, for 
two hundred guineas, and one hundred and thirty ; beside a 
* Better known perhaps to breeders under his former title 
of Lord AHliorp. 
number of others, more remotely descended from Lady, 
which all sold for high prices—in fact, in a sale of forty- 
eight lots, realizing £7,115 17s. Lady and her descendants 
sold for a larger sum than any other family obtained.” 
The sale here referred to affords a pretty decisive 
commentary on the statement, that Coiling “ gained 
neither fame nor profit by the experiment!” Mr. Heri- 
ot’s closing assertion in the paragraph quoted above, 
that “ breeders who possess the best herds, have al¬ 
ways carefully guarded against the blood thrown in by 
this cross,” is as inexcusably untrue. Earl Spencer, 
Rev. H. Berry, Mr. Charge, Mr. Champion, Major 
Bower, Mr. Whittaker, and a multitude of others among 
the most distinguished breeders of England, have bred 
the Alloy , and many of them have given it a decided 
preference. This was particularly the case with Mr. 
Whittaker, who, until his retirement, was perhaps the 
most fashionable breeder of England, and the most suc¬ 
cessful seller of Short Horned stock. His bull “ Fre¬ 
deric,” considered by him, I believe, the best animal of 
the kind in England, and “ Charles” (sired by the lat¬ 
ter) the names of one of which occur in the pedigree 
of almost every animal bred by him, were of the alloy. 
Mr. Berry’s Actonia, whose portrait graces the work 
on cattle in the ( Farmers’ Series,’ as splendid a model of 
a Short Horn cow as any knewn, was of the Alloy. The 
American breeders almost to a man, have bred more or 
less deeply into this blood. The names of Williams, 
Munson, Rodman, Powell, Rotch, Orne, Henry Watson, 
Clay, Gibbons, Bement, the Messrs. Allen, the Ohio 
Company, &c. occur to me. Col. Powell’s imported 
bulls, Gloucester, Bolivar, Bertram,* &c. were ai/oy-ed. 
Wye Comet, (owned by Henry Watson,) so celebrated 
in the eastern and northern states, possessed this blood. 
The present President of our State Agricultural Socie¬ 
ty,! acknowledgedly the most eminent breeder in the 
state, though commencing with animals clear of the al¬ 
loy, has since introduced it into bis herd, and his stock 
bulls for several years have all been of this strain. I 
might go on with the enumeration, but perhaps enough 
has been said to test conclusively the correctness of Mr. 
Heriot’s assertion. 
The consequences of Mr. Colling’s successful expe¬ 
riment, have established decisively, the correctness of 
the principle of crossing, where circumstances require 
it. He resorted to it to obviate the deterioration pro¬ 
duced by in-and-in breeding, which was slowly but sure¬ 
ly leading to a hereditary debility of constitution. He 
not only renovated the blood of the Short Horns by the 
new infusion, without injury to them otherwise, but with 
masterly skill he improved a breed already near per¬ 
fection, by engrafting on it the peculiar excellencies of 
another breed, in the main far inferior ! This splendid 
solution of a mueh mooted and very interesting ques¬ 
tion, is too important in its general application, to be 
lost sight of or discredited under the assaults of any of 
that antiquated class of sticklers for the ancien regime 
of Short Horn blood, to which Air. Heriot seems 
to belong. Mr. George Coates (compiler of the Herd- 
Book) was a memorable example of the same class. 
Once the possessor of one of the most valuable herds 
of Short Horns in England, he disdained to cross with 
the alloy, and Charles Colling soon distanced him in 
the competition for popular favor. Mr. Coates’ herd 
sunk into obscurity and disrepute.! 
I do not design to be understood as advocating any 
new cross, having for its object the improvement of the 
full blooded Short Horns of the present day. As a va¬ 
riety they do not need it. That system of in-and-in 
breeding, which onee made it necessary, has, as a ge¬ 
neral thing, long since been abandoned. It 3eems asto¬ 
nishing that intelligent breeders should ever have been 
willing to permit the incestuous connexion between the 
* All of the three named, were sired by Mr. Whittaker’s 
Frederick. 
f Francis Rotcb, Esq. of Louisville, Otsego Co. 
! Note by the Editors —The error of Mr. Heriot is ably 
exposed by our correspondent; but, as the subject is one of 
considerable importance to the cattle breeder, and has been 
mueh misunderstood in this country, as well ns, it seems, 
in England, we have introduced here a statement by H. 
Cotterell, Esq. one of the best authorities on the matter. It 
is from the Farmer’s Magazine for Dec. and corroborates ful¬ 
ly the position of our correspondent: 
“ In the next paragraph [of Mr. Heriot’s statement,] Mr. C. 
Colling perceiving that by continuing- this close breeding, he 
was rendering the stock delicate, took the remarkable step 
of putting a Galloway bull to some of his best cows ; and 
that a noble lord [Earl Spencer] was in err jr in saying, 
“ The most successful cross botween two breeds of cattle, 
of which he was aware, was the one between a Durham 
bull and a Galloway Scotch cow, made by Mr. Colling.” 
“ Here, again, Mr. Heriot is in error. Mr. C. Colling did 
not breed as here asserted by Mr. Heriot, nor are his Im¬ 
proved Short Horns got by a Scotch bull, but the cross was 
as asserted by his lordship. 
“The celebrated cow, Lady, (page 354) was got by a 
grandson of Bolingbroke—dam, Phcenix, by Faljambe. 
“'fhe grandson of Bolingbroke (No. 285) was got by O’Cal- 
laglian, son of Bolingbroke—dam, by C. Collimr’s lame bull. 
“ O’Callaghnn’s, son of Bolingbroke, (No. 469) was got by 
Bolingbroke—dam, a red polled Galloway Scotch cow. 
“ What breeder of Improved Short Horns would not be 
possessed of Major, or Western Comet, Lady’s son and 
grandson. 
“ This gentleman [Mr. Heriot] appears to be running a 
wrong scent. Hubback’s pedigree was endeavored to be 
stained by the assertion of having Scotch blood in him ; 
not only John Hunter (whose father bred his dam) denies 
it, but Mr. Charles Colling informed me, that he had not 
the least doubt but Hubbaek was a true bred Short Horn." 
sire and his own progeny, his progeny’s progeny, and so 
on to the third and fourth generation, yet such was the 
fact! The sire and grandsire of the celebrated Comet, 
sold by Colling for $5,GOO,was the same animal,Favorite. 
The Herd-Book abounds in instances where this direct 
in-and-in breeding has extended much farther. Indeed 
it was difficult, when the entire variety consisted of hut 
few animals, to avoid entirely such a course, without 
merging to some extent their newly attained characte¬ 
ristics. When those characteristics became sufficiently 
stamped on the improved breed, to render their heredi¬ 
tary transmission certain, Colling had recourse to the 
Galloway cross. Had Bakewell resorted to a similar 
step, it is probable that the once famous New Leices- 
ters would not have passed away, as they have done, 
like a dream. The number of Short Horns is now so 
extended, that it is practicable to breed from affinities 
too remote to produce any evil consequences, and, as¬ 
suming that they are already the best breed, it is, as I 
have already remarked, unnecessary to cross them. 
But, if a breed “near perfection,” have been improv¬ 
ed in certain particulars by admixture with an “ inferior 
breed,” the same experiment establishes conclusively, 
that the inferior breed received the greatest advantage 
from the cross. In other words, Lady, and her descend¬ 
ants were more improved from the Galloway cow, from 
which they sprung, than from their Durham ancestors; 
but with this difference—the Short Horn took hut one 
cross of the Galloway, and then bred back to the pure 
blood: the Galloway blood, on the other hand, was 
merged and nearly extinguished by repeated admixture 
with the Short Horn. This is by no means a solitary 
example of the improvements effected by judicious 
crossing; and as it is a subject of much interest to our 
stock raisers, I will cite a few examples. The Ayr- 
shires, so celebrated for the dairy, are, as has been re¬ 
marked on a former occasion, the produce of a cross 
between the miserable and stinted original breed of 
Cunningham, and some of the earlier Short Horns. 
The admixture between the Durham and Holderness, 
or, in other words, between the improved and unimprov¬ 
ed Short Horns, was signally successful; the produce 
being the favorite cow of all the English metropolitan 
dairies. The cross between the Short Horn and North 
Devon has increased the size of the latter, and very de¬ 
cidedly improved their qualities as milkers. An intel¬ 
ligent writer in the work on Cattle, in the Farmer’s Se¬ 
ries, says— 
“I have seen many excellent beasts bred from Improved 
Short Horned bulls and Long Horn (Leicester) cows : in¬ 
deed, I never knew one of these bulls put to any cow, 
where the produce was not superior to the dam ; but the 
cross which 1 advocate, and with which lam best acquaint¬ 
ed, is that with the Devon cow. I have uniformly remark¬ 
ed, that each succeeding cross was attended with a propor¬ 
tionate improvement in size, quality of flesh, and aptitude 
to fatten. In every instance, they have shown themselves 
superior milkers. * * * A friend of mine had about a 
dozen North Devon cows, small in size, but nice in quality, 
and from these he commenced, about twenty years since, 
breeding with Short Horn bulls. He has since invariably 
used those bulls. With every succeeding cross the stock 
have rapidly improved in every essential, and the only trace 
of the Devons I could perceive, was a peculiar richness in 
their color.” 
It is well known that Mr. Berry was very partial to 
this cross. The various sub-varieties of Long Horns 
existing in the midland counties of England, and in 
Ireland, have been interbred with the Durham, with 
manifest advantage to the milking and grazing quali¬ 
ties. And, lastly, that heterogeneous melange, known 
as the “ native breed” in the United States, have been 
equally ameliorated by a Short Horn cross—rendered 
more valuable for the dairy and the shambles, improv¬ 
ed in the property of early maturity, and in docility of 
temper. I do not recollect to have seen this last fact 
publicly noticed, yet experience has amply convinced 
me of its correctness.* Mr.Jaques’ “ cream-pot breed,” 
as he chooses to designate them, are but one among a 
thousand instances of successful interbreeding between 
the Short Horn and our “ native” cows. To sum it all 
up, substantially, in the language of Mr. Bolton, quo¬ 
ted above, “ the produce of any cow (of another breed) 
put to a Short Horn bull, will be superior to its dam.” 
“ Take but one cross," it is often said, and this is cor¬ 
rect in one point of view. It must he understood to 
mean, however, “ take but one cross” of native or other 
inferior blood, and then breed steadily towards the Dur¬ 
ham. The produce of the first cross will possess one- 
half of the Short Horn blood; the second,three-fourths ; 
the third, seven-eighths; the fourth, fifteen-sixteenths, 
and so on. The contrary course, that is, the taking of 
but one cross of the Durham, and then breeding back to 
the inferior variety, has always resulted in ill success 
and disappointment. Did limits permit, I might cite 
many instances both on record, and which have come 
under my personal observation. I will name but one. 
I have alluded, in a former paper, to some admirable 
cows in Cortland county, the produce of a son of Wye 
Comet and common cows. The descendants of these 
cows, bred back toward the native stock, after the first 
generation, are in no way distinguishable from common 
cattle. 
I have formerly alluded to the individual characte¬ 
ristics of the Short Horn bull, and native cow, supposed 
* I have never known a pure Short Horn that would kick; 
and rarely a bull of this breed of any age, that would even 
menace with his horns. The grades invariably, so far as 
my knowledge has extended, preserve the same characte¬ 
ristic. 
