Milch Cows and Dairy Farming / Comprising the Breeds, Breeding, and Management, in Health and Disease, of Dairy and Other Stock, the Selection of Milch Cows, with a Full Explanation of Guenon's Method; The Culture of Forage Plants, and the Production of Milk, Butter, and Cheese: Embodying the Most Recent Improvements, and Adapted to Farming in the United States and British Provinces. With a Treatise upon the Dairy Husbandry of Holland; To Which Is Added Horsfall's System of Dairy Management

by Charles Louis Flint

The North Devons.

—The last of the pure-bred races which it will be necessary to describe as prominent among our American cattle is the Devon, a middle-horned breed, now very generally distributed in some sections of the country.

This beautiful race of cattle dates further back than any well-established breed among us. It goes generally under the simple name of Devon; but the cattle of the southern part of the county, from which the race derives its name, differ somewhat from those of the northern, having a larger and coarser frame, and far less tendency to fatten, though their dairy qualities are superior.

The North Devons are remarkable for hardihood, symmetry, and beauty, and are generally bred for work and for beef rather than for the dairy. The head is fine and well set on; the horns of medium length, generally curved; color usually bright blood-red, but sometimes inclining to yellow; skin thin and orange-yellow; hair of medium length, soft and silky, making the animals remarkable as handlers; muzzle of the nose white; eyes full and mild; ears yellowish, or orange color inside, of moderate size; neck rather long, with little dewlap; shoulders oblique; legs small and straight, and feet in proportion; chest of good width; ribs round and expanded; loins of first-rate quality, long, wide, and fleshy; hips round, of medium width; rump level; tail full near the setting on, tapering to the tip; thighs of the bull and ox muscular and full, and high in the flank, though in the cow sometimes thought to be too light; the size medium, generally called small. The proportion of meat on the valuable parts is greater, and the offal less, than on most other breeds, while it is well settled that they consume less food in its production. The Devons are popular with the Smithfield butchers, and their beef is well marbled or grained.

As working oxen, the Devons perhaps excel all other races in quickness, docility, and beauty, and the ease with which they are matched. With a reasonable load, they are said to be equal to horses as walkers on the road, and when they are no longer wanted for work they fatten easily and turn well.

As milkers, they do not excel, perhaps they may be said not to equal, the other breeds, and they have a reputation of being decidedly below the average. In their native country the general average of a dairy is one pound of butter per day during the summer.

They are bred for beef and for work, and not for the dairy; and their yield of milk is small, though of a rich quality. I have, however, had occasion to examine several animals from the celebrated Patterson herd, which would have been remarkable as milkers even among good milking stock. They had not, to be sure, the beautiful symmetry of form and fineness of bone which characterize most of the modern and highly improved pure-bred North Devons, and had evidently been bred for many years with special reference to the development of the milking qualities, great care having been taken to use bulls and cows as breeders from the best milking stock, rather than of the finest forms. The use of bulls distinguished only for symmetry of form, and of a race deficient in milk-secreting qualities, will be sure to deteriorate, instead of improving, the stock for the dairy.

Fig. 12. Devon Bull.

On the whole, whatever may be our judgment of this breed, the faults of the North Devon cow can hardly be overlooked from our present point of view. The rotundity of form and compactness of frame, though they contribute to her remarkable beauty, constitute an objection to her as a dairy cow, since it is generally thought that the peculiarity of form which disposes an animal to take on fat is somewhat incompatible with good milking qualities, and hence Youatt says: “For the dairy the North Devons must be acknowledged to be inferior to several other breeds. The milk is good, and yields more than the average proportion of cream and butter; but it is deficient in quantity.” He also maintains that its property as a milker could not be improved without probable or certain detriment to its grazing qualities.

But the fairest test of its fitness for the dairy is to be found in the estimation in which distinguished Devon breeders themselves have held it in this respect. A scale of points of excellence in this breed was established, some time ago, by the best judges in England; and it has since been adopted, with but slight changes, in this country. These judges, naturally prejudiced in favor of the breed, if prejudiced at all, made this scale to embrace one hundred points, no animal to be regarded as perfect unless it excelled in all of them. Each part of the body was assigned its real value in the scale: a faultless head, for instance, was estimated at four; a deep, round chest, at fifteen, &c. If the animal was defective in any part, the number of points which represented the value of that part in the scale was to be deducted pro rata from the hundred, in determining its merits. But in this scale the cow is so lightly esteemed for the dairy, that the udder, the size and shape of which is of the utmost consequence in determining the capacity of the milch cow, is set down as worth only one point, while, in the same scale, the horns and ears are valued at two points each, and the color of the nose, and the expression of the eye, are valued at four points each. Supposing, therefore, that each of these points were valued at one dollar, and a perfect North Devon cow was valued at one hundred dollars; then another cow of the same blood, and equal to the first in every respect except in her udder, which is such as to make it certain that she can never be capable of giving milk enough to nourish her calf, must be worth, according to the estimation of the best Devon breeders, ninety-nine dollars! It is safe, therefore, to say that an animal whose udder and lacteal glands are regarded, by those who best know her capacities and her merits, as of only one quarter part as much consequence as the color of her nose, or half as much as the shape and size of her horns, cannot be recommended for the dairy. The improved North Devon cow may be classed, in this respect, with the Hereford, neither of which has well-developed milk-vessels—a point of the utmost consequence to the practical dairyman.

The list of pure-bred races in America may be said to end here; for, though other and well-established breeds, like the long-horns, the Galloways, the Spanish, &c., have, at times, been imported, and have had some influence on our American stock, they have not been kept distinct to such an extent as to have become the prevailing stock of any particular section, so far as I am aware, and hence a notice of them properly comes in the next chapter.

---

CHAPTER II.
AMERICAN GRADE OF NATIVE CATTLE.—THE PRINCIPLES OF BREEDING.

We have dwelt thus far mainly upon the prominent breeds of cattle known among us, and especially those adapted to the dairy. But a large proportion—by far the largest proportion, indeed—cannot be included under any of the races alluded to.

The term breed, properly understood, applies only to animals of the same species, possessing, besides the general characteristics of that species, other characteristics peculiar to themselves, which they owe to the influence of soil, climate, nourishment, and habits of life to which they are subjected, and which they transmit with certainty to their progeny. The characteristics of certain breeds or families are so well marked, that if an individual supposed to belong to any one of them were to produce an offspring not possessing them, or possessing them only in part, with others not belonging to the breed, it would be just ground for suspecting a want of purity of blood.

If this definition of the term breed be correct, no grade animals, and no animals not possessing fixed peculiarities or characteristics which they share with all other animals of the class of which they are a type, and which they are capable of transmitting with certainty to their descendants, can be recognized by breeders as belonging to any one distinct race, breed, or family.

The term “native,” or “scrub,” is applied to a vast majority of our American cattle, which, though born on the soil, and thus in one sense natives, do not constitute a breed, race, or family, as properly understood by breeders. They do not possess characteristics peculiar to them all, which they transmit with any certainty to their offspring, either of form, size, color, milking or working properties. But, though an animal may be made up of a mixture of blood almost to infinity, it does not follow that for specific purposes, it may not, as an individual animal, be one of the best of the species. And for particular purposes individual animals might be selected from among those commonly called natives in New England, and scrubs at the West and South, equal, and perhaps superior, to any among the races produced by the most skilful breeding. There can be no impropriety in the use of the term “native,” therefore, when it is understood as descriptive of no known breed, but only as applied to the common stock of the country, which does not constitute a breed. But perhaps the whole class of animals commonly called “natives” would be better described as grades, since they are well known to have sprung from a great variety of cattle procured in different places and at different times on the continent of Europe, in England, and in the Spanish West Indies, brought together without any regard to fixed principles of breeding, but only from individual convenience, and by accident.

The first importations to this country were doubtless those taken to Virginia previous to 1609, though the exact date of their arrival is not known. Several cows were carried there from the West Indies in 1610, and the next year no less than one hundred arrived there from abroad.

The earliest cattle imported into the Plymouth colony, and undoubtedly the earliest introduced into New England, arrived in 1624. At the division of cattle which took place in 1627, three years after, one or two are distinctly described as black, or black and white, others as brindle, showing that there was no uniformity of color. Soon after this, a large number of cattle were brought over from England for the settlers at Salem. These importations formed the original stock of Massachusetts.

In 1625 the first importation was made into New York from Holland, by the Dutch West India Company, and the foundation was then laid for an exceedingly valuable race of animals, which subsequent importations from the same country, as well as from England, have greatly improved.

Dairy farming in some parts of Holland, it may be remarked in passing, became a highly important branch of industry at a very early date, and a large and valuable race of dairy cattle existed there long before the efforts of modern breeders began in England. The attention of farmers there is at the present time devoted especially to the dairy, and the manufacture of butter and cheese. They support themselves, to a considerable extent, upon this branch of farming; and hence it is held in the highest respect, and carried to a greater degree of exactness and perfection, perhaps, than in any other part of the world. They are especially particular in the breeding, keeping, and care of milch cows, as on them very much of their success depends. The principles on which they practise, in selecting a cow to breed from, are as follows: She should have, they say, considerable size—not less than four and a half or five feet girth, with a length of body corresponding; legs proportionally short; a finely-formed head, with a forehead or face somewhat concave; clear, large, mild, and sparkling eyes, yet with no expression of wildness; tolerably large and stout ears, standing out from the head; fine, well-curved horns; a rather short than long, thick, broad neck, well set against the chest and withers; the front part of the breast and the shoulders must be broad and fleshy; the low-hanging dewlap must be soft to the touch; the back and loins must be properly projected, somewhat broad, the bones not too sharp, but well covered with flesh; the animal should have long, curved ribs, which form a broad breast-bone; the body must be round and deep, but not sunken into a hanging belly; the rump must not be uneven, the hip-bones should not stand out too broad and spreading, but all the parts should be level and well filled up; a fine tail, set moderately high up and tolerably long, but slender, with a thick, bushy tuft of hair at the end, hanging down below the hocks; the legs must be short and low, but strong in the bony structure; the knees broad, with flexible joints; the muscles and sinews must be firm and sound, the hoofs broad and flat, and the position of the legs natural, not too close and crowded; the hide, covered with fine glossy hair, must be soft and mellow to the touch, and set loose upon the body. A large, rather long, white and loose udder, extending well back, with four long teats, serves also as a characteristic mark of a good milch cow. Large and prominent milk-veins must extend from the navel back to the udder; the belly of a good milch cow should not be too deep and hanging. The color of the North Dutch cattle is mostly variegated. Cows with only one color are no favorites. Red or black variegated, gray and blue variegated, roan, spotted and white variegated cows, are especially liked.

The annexed [cut] gives a correct idea of the cow most esteemed in Holland; the type of the race so noted for the production of milk, and of the excellent round Dutch cheeses.

Fig. 13. Dutch Dairy Cow.

In 1627, cattle were brought from Sweden to the settlements on the Delaware by the Swedish West India Company. In 1631, 1632, and 1633, several importations were made into New Hampshire by Capt. John Mason, who, with Gorges, procured the patent of large tracts of land in the vicinity of Piscataqua River, and immediately formed settlements there. The object of Mason was to carry on the manufacture of potash. For this purpose he employed the Danes; and it was in his voyages to and from Denmark that he procured many Danish cattle and horses, which were subsequently diffused over that whole region, and large numbers of which were driven to the vicinity of Boston and sold. These facts are authenticated by original documents and depositions now on file in the office of the Secretary of State of New Hampshire. The Danish cattle are there described as large and coarse, of a yellow color; and it is supposed that they were procured by Mason as being best capable of enduring the severity of the climate and the hardships to which they were to be subjected. However this may have been, they very soon spread among the colonists of the Massachusetts Bay, and have undoubtedly left their marks on the stock of New England and the Middle States, which exist to some extent even to the present day, mixed in with an infinite multitude of crosses with the Devons, the Dutch cattle already alluded to, the black cattle of Spain and Wales, and the long-horn and the short-horn, most of which crosses were accidental, or due to local circumstances or individual convenience. Many of these cattle, the descendants of such crosses, are of a very high order of merit, but to what particular cross it is due it is impossible to say. They make generally hardy, strong, and docile oxen, easily broken to the yoke and quick to work, with a fair tendency to fatten when well fed; while the cows, though often ill-shaped, are sometimes remarkably good milkers, especially as regards the quantity they give.

I have very often heard the best judges of stock say that if they desired to select a dairy of cows for milk for sale, they would go around and select cows commonly called native, rather than resort to pure-bred animals of any of the established breeds, and that they believed they should find such a dairy the most profitable.

In color, the natives, made up as already indicated, are exceedingly various. The old Denmarks, which to a considerable extent laid the foundation of the stock of Maine and New Hampshire, were light yellow. The Dutch of New York and the Middle States were black and white; the Spanish and Welsh were generally black; the Devons, which are supposed to have laid the foundation of the stock of some of the states, were red. Crosses of the Denmark with the Spanish and Welsh naturally made a dark brindle. Crosses of the Denmark and Devon often made a lighter or yellowish brindle, while the more recent importations of Jerseys and short-horns have generally produced a beautiful spotted progeny. The deep red has long been a favorite color in New England; but the prejudice in its favor is fast giving way to more variegated colors.

But, though we have already an exceedingly valuable foundation for improvement, no one will pretend to deny that our cattle, as a whole, are susceptible of it in many respects. They possess neither the size, the symmetry, nor the early maturity, of the short-horns; they do not, as a general thing, possess the fineness of bone, the beauty of form and color, nor the activity, of the Devons or the Herefords; they do not possess that uniform richness of milk, united with generous quantity, of the Ayrshires, nor the surpassing richness of milk of the Jerseys; but, above all, they do not possess the power of transmitting the many good qualities which they often have to their offspring, which is a characteristic of all well-established breeds.

Equally certain is it, in the opinion of many good judges, that the dairy stock of New England has not been improved in its intrinsic good qualities during the last thirty or forty years. Cows of the very highest order as milkers were as frequently met with, they say, in 1825, as at the present time. Any increased product of our dairies they ascribe to improved care and feeding, rather than to improvement in the dairy qualities of the stock.

This may not be true of some other sections of the country, where the dairy has been a more special object of pursuit, and where the custom of raising the best male calves of the neighborhood, or those that came from the best dairy cows, and then of using only the best-formed bulls, has long prevailed. In this way some progress has, doubtless, been made.

There is an old adage among the dairy farmers of Ayrshire, that “The cow gives her milk by the mou’,” which was slightly varied from an old German proverb, that “The cow milks only through the throat.” It is fortunate, indeed, that wiser and more humane ideas prevail with regard to the care of stock of all kinds; for it is well known that the treatment the stock of the country received for the first two centuries after its settlement was often barbarous and cruel in the extreme, and that thousands perished, in the early history of the colonies, from exposure and starvation. Even within my own distinct recollection, it was thought, for miles around my native place, that cows and young stock should remain out of doors exposed to the cold winter days, to “toughen;” and that, too, by men who styled themselves “practical” farmers.

Mr. Henry Colman truly asserted, in 1841, that the general treatment of cows in New England would not be an inapt subject of presentment by a grand jury. There were, at that time, it is true, many honorable exceptions; but the assertion was strictly correct so far as it applied to the section of which I then had a personal knowledge. Judging from the anxiety manifested by those who enter superior milch cows for the premiums offered by agricultural societies to show that they have had nothing, or next to nothing, to eat, it is evident that the false ideas with regard to the feeding and treatment of this animal have not yet wholly disappeared. But, if little improvement has been made in our dairy stock except that produced by more liberal feeding, it simply shows that our efforts have not been made in the right direction.

The raising of cattle has now become a source of profit in many sections to a greater extent, at least, than formerly, and it becomes a matter of great practical importance to our farmers to take the proper steps to improve them. Indeed, the questions, what is the best breed, and what are the best crosses, and how shall I improve my stock, are now almost daily asked; and their practical solution would add many thousand dollars to the aggregate wealth of the farmers of the country, if they would all study their own interests. The time is gradually passing away when the intelligent practical farmer will be willing to put his cows to any mere “runt” of a bull, simply because his service may be had for twenty-five cents; for, even if the progeny is to go to the butcher, the calf sired by a pure-bred bull, particularly of a race distinguished for fineness of bone, symmetry of form, and early maturity, will bring a much higher price at the same age than the calf sired by a scrub. Blood has a money value, which will, sooner or later, be generally appreciated. The first and most important object of the farmer is to get the greatest money-return for his labor and his produce; and it is for his interest to obtain an animal—a calf, for instance—that will yield the largest profit on the outlay. If a calf, for which the original outlay was five dollars, will bring at the same age, and on the same keep, more real net profit than another, the original outlay for which was but twenty-five cents, it is certainly for the farmer’s interest to pay the larger original outlay, and have the superior animal. Setting all fancy aside, it is merely a question of dollars and cents; but one thing is certain, and that is, that the farmer cannot afford to keep poor stock. It eats as much, and requires nearly the same amount of care and attention, as stock of the best quality; while it is equally certain that stock of ever so good a quality, whether grade, “native,” or thorough-bred, will be sure to deteriorate and sink to the level of poor stock, by neglect and want of proper attention.

How, then, are we to improve our stock? Not, surely, by that indiscriminate crossing, with a total disregard to all well-established principles, which has thus far marked our efforts generally with foreign stock, and which is one prominent reason why so little improvement has been made in our dairies; nor by leaving all the results to chance, when, by a careful and judicious selection, they may be within our own control. Two modes of improvement seem to suggest themselves to the mind of the breeder, either of which, apparently, promises good results. The first is, to select from among our native cattle the most perfect animals not known or suspected to be related to any of the well-established breeds, and to use them as breeders. This is a mode of improvement simple enough, if adopted and carried on with animals of any known breed; and, indeed, it is the only mode of improvement which preserves the purity of blood; but, to do it successfully, requires great experience, a good and sure eye for stock, a mind free from prejudice, and indefatigable patience and perseverance. It is absolutely necessary, also, to pay special attention to the calves thus produced; to furnish them at all times, summer and winter, with an abundant supply of nutritious food, and to regulate it according to their growth. Few men are to be found willing to undertake the herculean task of building up a new breed in this way from grade stock. An objection meets us at the very outset, which is that it would require a long series of years to arrive at any satisfactory results, from the fact that no two animals, made up, as our “native” cattle are, of such a variety of elements and crosses, could be found sufficiently alike to produce their kind. The principle that like produces like may be perfectly true, and in the well-known breeds it is not difficult to find two animals that will be sure to transmit their own characteristics to their offspring; but, with two animals which cannot be classed with any breed, the defects of an ill-bred ancestry will be liable to appear through several generations, and thus thwart and disappoint the expectations of the breeder. The objection of time, and expense, and disappointment, attending this method, should have no weight, if there were no more speedy method of accomplishing equally desirable results.

The second mode is somewhat more feasible; and that is, to select animals from races already improved and well-nigh perfected, to cross with our cattle, using none but good specimens of pure-bred males, and selecting, if our object is to improve stock for the dairy, only such as belong to a race distinguished for dairy qualities; or, if resort is had to other breeds less remarkable for such qualities, such only as are descended from large and generous milkers. And here it may be remarked that these qualities do not belong to any one breed exclusively, though, as they depend mainly on structure and temperament, which are hereditary to a considerable extent, they are themselves transmissible. In almost every breed we can find individual good milkers which greatly surpass the average of the cows of the same race or family, and from such many suppose that good crosses may be expected. How often do we see farmers raising the calves of their best milking-cows simply because they are the best cows, without regard to the qualities of the bull, or to the progenitors of either parent; and how often are they disappointed, at the end of three or four years of labor and expense! Now, though a cow of a bad milking family, or of a breed not at all distinguished for dairy qualities, may turn out to be an excellent milker, and all else that may be desirable in a cow, yet these qualities in her are accidental. They are not supposed to be transmissible with anything like the certainty which exists where they are the fixed and constant characteristics of the family. She is an exception to the rule of her race. A good calf from her, though not, of course, an impossibility, would be very much the result of chance. The resort to any but a distinguished breed of milkers cannot, therefore, be recommended, nor can we expect to improve our dairies by it. A disregard of this important matter has led to endless disappointment, and has done much to raise up unjust prejudices against the use of all improved stock on our native cows. As if we could expect nature to go out of her regular course to give us a good animal, when we have violated her laws!

The offspring of these crosses will be grades; but grades are often better for the practical purposes of the farmer than pure-bred animals. The skill of the breeder is especially manifest in the selection of animals to breed from, since both parents undoubtedly have a great influence in transmitting the milking qualities of the race. But this method of improvement requires less exact and critical knowledge than the first, from the fact that it is easier to appreciate the good points of an animal already perfected, or greatly improved, than to discover them in animals which it is our desire to improve, and which are inferior in form, possessing only the elements of a better stock. It has also an immense advantage, since results may be far more rapidly attained, and improvements effected which, by the first method,—that of creating or building up a race from the so-called natives, by judicious selections,—would be looked for in vain in the ordinary life of man. All grades are produced by this second method; but all grades are not equally good, nor equally well adapted to meet the farmer’s wants. It is desirable to know, then, what, on the whole, are the best and most profitable to the practical farmer.

We want cattle for distinct purposes, as for milk, beef, or labor. In a large majority of cases,—especially in the dairy districts, comprising the Middle and Eastern States, at least,—the farmer cares more for the milking qualities of his cows, especially for the quantity they give, than for their fitness for grazing, or aptness to fatten. These latter points become more important in the Western and some of the Southern States, where far greater attention is paid to breeding and to feeding, and where comparatively little attention is given to the productions of the dairy. A stock of cattle that might suit one farmer might be wholly unsuited to another; and in each particular case the breeder should have some special object in view, and select his animals with reference to it. But there are some general principles that apply to breeding everywhere, and which, in many cases, are not well understood.

It would not be desirable, even if it were possible, by crossing, to breed out all the general characteristics of many of our native cattle. They have many valuable qualities adapted to our climate and soil, and to the geological structure of the country; and these should be preserved, while we improve the points in which many of them are deficient, such as a want of precocity and aptitude to fatten, where it is an object to attain this quality, coarseness of bone, and lack of symmetry, which is often apparent, especially when the form of the animal does not indicate a near relation to some of the established breeds.

It’s a well-known fact that, in crossing, the produce most frequently takes after the male parent, especially, it is thought, in exterior form, in its organs of locomotion, such as the bones, the muscles, &c. Particularly is this the case when the male belongs to an old and well-established breed, and the female belongs to no known breed, and has no strongly-marked and fixed points. Put a Galloway bull, for instance, to a native cow, and the calf will, as a general rule, be hornless. Put a ram without horns to ewes with horns, and most of the lambs will be destitute of horns; that is, they take the characteristics of the father rather than the dam; and this rule holds good generally in breeding, though, like all other rules, it has, of course, its exceptions. Hence, if this position be correct, the first principle which the good sense of the farmer would dictate would be to select a bull from a breed most noted for the qualities he wishes to obtain in their greatest perfection, and especially if the cow is deficient in those qualities. A bull, for instance, of fine bone, and other good points in perfection, will make up for the deficiency of some of these points in the cow.

On the other hand, say the advocates of this doctrine, in the physiology of breeding the internal structure of the offspring, the organs of secretion, the mucous membranes, the respiratory organs, &c., are imparted chiefly by the dam. Hence it has sometimes been found that by taking a cow remarkable for milking properties, though deficient in many other points, as in the coarseness of bone and in early maturity, and putting to her a bull remarkable for symmetry of form and fineness of bone, the offspring has been superior to the cow in beauty of form and proportions, and has still retained the milking qualities of the dam. This principle, as already intimated, is questioned by some, who say that the milking qualities, as well as the external form, &c., are transmitted through the male offspring.

Mr. James Dickson, an experienced breeder and drover, who views the subject from his own standpoint, says: “A great part of the art of breeding lies in the principle of judicious crossing; for it is only by attending properly to this that success is to be attained, and animals produced that shall yield the greatest amount of profit for the food they consume. All eminent breeders know full well that ill-bred animals are unprofitable both to the breeder and feeder. To carry out the system of crossing judiciously, certain breeds of cattle, sheep, pigs, &c., must be kept pure of their kind—males especially; indeed, as a general rule, no animal possessing spurious blood, or admixture with other breeds, should be used. The produce in almost all cases assimilates to the male parent; and I should say that in crossing the use of any males not pure-bred is injudicious, and ought to be avoided.”

If, therefore, a cross is effected with satisfactory results, it should be continued by resorting to pure-bred bulls, and not by the use of any grade bulls thus obtained; for, though a grade bull may be a very fine animal, it has been found that he does not transmit his good qualities with anything like the certainty of a pure-bred one. The more desirable qualities are united in the bull, the better; but the special reason for the use of a pure-bred male in crossing is not so much that the particular individual selected has these qualities most perfectly developed in himself; as that they are hereditary in the breed to which he belongs. The moment the line is crossed, and the pedigree broken, uncertainty commences. Although the form of the grade bull may, in individual cases, be even superior to that of his pure-bred sire, yet there is less likelihood of his transmitting the qualities for which his breed is most noted; and when it is considered that during his life he may scatter his progeny over a considerable section of country, and thus affect the cattle of his whole neighborhood, attention to this becomes a matter of no small public importance.

This principle, so far as its application to breeding for the shambles is concerned, seems to me to be sound, and fully established by long experience and practice. Perhaps it is equally so, also, in breeding for the dairy. But it may be well to consider whether there are not other rational modes of judgment in the selection of animals for breeding with this specific object in view.

There is a difference of opinion with regard to the practical value of the system of classification and judgment of milch cows discovered and developed by Guénon: some being inclined to ridicule it, as absurd; others to adopt it implicitly, and follow it out in all its details; and others still—and among this class I generally find a very large number of the most sensible practical judges of stock—to admit that in the main it is correct, though they discredit the practicability of carrying it so far, and so minutely into detail, as its author did.

It may be remarked, at the outset, that the fact that the best of the signs of a great and good milker adopted by Guénon are generally found united with the best forms and marks almost universally admitted and practised upon by good judges, gives, at least, some plausibility to the system, while the importance of it, if it be correct, is sufficient to demand a careful examination. Every good judge of a milch cow, for instance, wants to see in her a small, fine head, with short and yellowish horns; a soft, delicate, and close coat of hair; a skin soft and flexible over the rump; broad, well-spread ribs, covered with a loose skin of medium thickness; a broad chest; a long, slender tail; straight hind legs; a large, regularly-formed udder, covered with short, close, silky hair; four teats of equal size and length, set wide apart; large, projecting lacteal veins, which run along under the belly from the udder towards the fore legs, forming a fork at the end, and finally losing themselves in a round cavity; and when these points, or any considerable number of them, are found united in a cow, she would be pronounced a good milker. An animal in which these signs are found would rarely fail of having a good “milk-mirror,” or escutcheon; on which Guénon, after many years of careful observation and experiment, came to lay particular stress; and on the basis of which he built up a system or theory so complicated as to be of little practical value compared with what it might have been had he seen fit to simplify it so as to bring it within the easy comprehension of the farmer. As one means of forming a judgment of the milking qualities, however, it must be regarded as very important, since it is unquestionably sustained by facts in a very large majority of cases.

The milk-mirror, or escutcheon, is formed by the hair above the udder, extending upwards between the thighs, growing in an opposite direction from that of other parts of the body. In well-formed mirrors, found only in cows which have the arteries which supply the milky glands large and fully developed, it ordinarily begins between the four teats in the middle, and ascends to the vulva, and sometimes even higher, the hair growing upwards. The direction of the hair is subordinate to that of the arteries; for the relation existing between the direction of the hair above the udder and the activity of the milky glands is apparent on a careful examination of all the cases. When the lower part of the mirror is large and broad, with the hair growing from below upwards, and extending well out on the thighs, it indicates that the arteries which supply the milky glands, and which are situated just behind it, are large and capable of conveying much blood, and of giving great activity to the functions of secretion.

Now, in the bull, the arteries which correspond to the mammary or lacteal arteries of the cow are not so fully developed; and the escutcheons are smaller, shorter, and narrower. Guénon applied the same name, milk-mirror, to these marks in the bull; and the natural inference was, that there should exist a correspondence or similarity in the mirror of the bull and the cow which are coupled for the purpose of producing an offspring fit for the dairy,—that the mirror in the bull should be of the same class, or of a better class than that of the cow.

It is confidently asserted by the advocates of Guénon’s method, and with much show of reason, that the very large proportion of cows of bad or indifferent milking qualities, compared with the good, is owing to the mistakes in selecting bulls without reference to the proper marks or points. As to the transmission of the milk-mirror, it has been found in many cases that bulls sprung from cows with good mirrors had smaller and more heart-shaped mirrors, spreading out pretty broad upon the thighs. Pabst, a successful German breeder, says that he has used such bulls for three years, and that the milk-mirrors were transmitted in the majority of the male progeny, and in nearly every case very large and beautiful mirrors were given to the heifer-calves. A son of the bull with which he began was serving at the time of which he speaks, having a mirror more highly developed than his sire, and the first calves of his get had also very large milk-mirrors. The female offspring of the first bull of good milk-mirror promised first rate, though they had not then come in. His inference is, that in breeding from cows noted as milkers regard should be had to the form of the mirror on the bull, and the chance of his transmitting it. If any credit is due to this ingenious method, it may be laid down, as a principle in the selection of a bull to get dairy stock, that the one possessing the largest and best-developed milk-mirror is the best for the purpose, and will be most likely to get milkers of large quantity and continued flow. This method will be more fully developed in the chapter on the [Selection of Milch Cows].

But, however careful we may be to select good milkers, and to breed from them with the hope of improvement, it is by no means easy to select such as are capable of transmitting their qualities to their offspring. This is rendered still more difficult by the fact that there is no known mark to indicate it, and we are left to use our own judgment; for, in the case of bulls, we are often obliged to give them up before their progeny have arrived at an age to show their qualities by actual trial. We are thrown back, therefore, upon their external marks. But, as M. Magne, a very sensible French writer, justly observes in his admirable little work (Choix des Vaches Latières, p. 86, Paris, 1857), the fixed characteristics which have existed in races for several generations will be transmitted with most certainty. Hence the importance, he says, of selecting milch cows from good breeds and good families, and especially, in breeding stock, of selecting carefully both male and female. The male designed to get dairy stock ought to possess the structure which, in the cow, indicates the greatest activity of the mammary glands, as fineness of form, mellowness of skin, large hind quarters, large and well-developed veins and escutcheon.

A cow of a race or family not noted as milkers may chance to be an excellent milker, and this is enough, if we do not desire to breed from her; but she would not transmit her exceptional qualities like a cow of which these qualities were the fixed characteristics, constant and transmissible in the breed. These considerations apply also, as already said, in the choice of a bull. The attention of practical men has been so much directed to the best points of good cows, of late years, that it becomes necessary to study to propagate these, if the breeder desires to find buyers for his stock. The buyer judges more from external signs than from the intrinsic qualities of the cow, with which he may not be acquainted.

To explain the variations in the transmission of milking qualities, we should bear in mind that these qualities are not found in wild cows, and that they are developed only when man can, by a particular course of treatment, as by the act of milking, the separation of the sexes, etc., cause certain natural powers to act with greater strength than others; that they incline to disappear as soon as these powers, the nature of the soil, the peculiarities of climate, the properties of plants, and the temperament of the cows, are permitted to act according to the original plan of creation; so that the variations which we consider as sports of nature are incontestible proofs of the uniformity of her works.

It is only by observing animals carefully, by noting accurately their good qualities and their faults, by watching the circumstances in which individuals are produced, raised, and kept, that we can account for what seems to us a sport or caprice of nature. We can then tell, first, how the same bull and cow have produced three calves with different properties; and, secondly, trace out the rules which we are to follow, to be almost uniformly successful in obtaining stock of the best quality.

Experience shows that the qualities which are transmitted with most certainty depend on the most important organs of life; and so, in the forms of the viscera and the skeleton, variations are rare, not only in breeds of the same species, but in different species of the same genera.

Moreover, in cases where the transmission of properties is so uncertain as to seem the result of caprice in nature, these properties are formed by superficial organs,—by the skin, the horns, the state of the hair, etc.

But it is in qualities which are, in a measure, artificial, qualities produced by domestication, and often more injurious than useful to the health of animals, that variations most commonly occur. These change not only with the breed of one species, but with the different individuals of the same breed, of the same half-breed, and often of the same family.

Bearing these elementary principles of natural history and physiology in mind, we shall comprehend how cows and bulls well marked in regard to escutcheons have produced stock which did not resemble them. M. Lefebvre Sainte Marie asserts that the influence of the escutcheons is very feeble in the act of reproduction.

In this view, the escutcheon is almost nothing in itself. It depends on the state of the hair, on one of the most fleeting of peculiarities, on that which is least hereditary in animals. It has no value as a mark of good getters of stock, unless it is supported by marks superior to it from their stability,—a larger skeleton, double loins, a wide rump, highly-developed blood-vessels,—unless it is united with a spacious chest, round ribs, large lungs, and a strong constitution.

The more complete the correspondence between these marks, the more the milking quality is connected with the general condition of the animal, the greater the chances of transmission; and when, with a view to breeding, we shall choose only animals having the two-fold character of general vigor of constitution and activity of the mammary system, and place the progeny under favorable circumstances, the qualities will rarely prove defective. Thus far the conclusions of Magne.

Another well-known fact in natural history is, that the size of animals depends very much upon the fertility of the region they inhabit. Where food is abundant and nutritious, they increase in size in proportion to the quantity and quality; and this size, under the same circumstances, will run through generations, unless interrupted by artificial means. So, if the food is more difficult to obtain, and the pastures are short, the pliancy of the animal organization is such that it naturally becomes adapted to it, and the animal is of smaller size; and hence Mr. Cline observes that “the general mistake in crossing has arisen from an attempt to increase the size of a native race of animals, being a fruitless effort to counteract the laws of nature.” Mr. Cline also says, in his treatise “On the Form of Animals:” “Experience has proved that crossing has only succeeded in an eminent degree in those instances in which the females were larger than the usual proportion of females to males; and that it has generally failed when the males were disproportionally large. When the male is much larger than the female, the offspring is generally of an imperfect form; if the female be proportionally larger than the male, the offspring is generally of an improved form. For instance, if a well-formed large ram be put to ewes proportionally smaller, the lambs will not be so well shaped as their parents; but, if a small ram be put to larger ewes, the lambs will be of an improved form.” “The improvement depends on the principle that the power of the female to supply her offspring with nourishment is in proportion to her size, and to the power of nourishing herself from the excellence of her constitution; as larger animals eat more, the larger female may afford most nourishment to her young.”

This should, I am inclined to think, be regarded as another principle of breeding,—that, when improvement in form is desired, the size of the female selected should be proportionally larger than the male; though Lord Spencer, a successful breeder, strongly contested it, and Mr. Dickson, an excellent judge of stock, advised the attempt to build up a new breed by selecting some Zetland cows, a very diminutive breed of Scotch cattle, of good symmetry, points, and handling, and a high-bred West Highland bull to put to them. “The produce would probably be,” says he, “a neat, handsome little animal, of a medium size, between the two breeds. The shaggy hide, long horns, symmetry, and fine points, of the West Highlanders, would be imparted to this cross, which would not only be a good feeder and very hardy, but the beef of superior quality. The great point would, of course, be the proper selection of breeding animals. The next step towards improving this would be the crossing of these crosses with a pure Hereford bull, which would improve the size, and impart still finer points, more substance, with greater aptitude to fatten. By combining those favorite breeds, the produce would, in all probability, be very superior, not only attaining to good weights, but feeding well, and arriving at maturity at an early age. The breeder must not be satisfied and rest here, but go a point further, and cross the heifers of the third cross with a short-horn bull.” These successive steps imply the use of a bull of larger breed, though not necessarily, perhaps, proportionally larger than the cow, in any individual case.

This, it will be perceived, is a case of breeding with less reference to the milking or dairy qualities than the grazing. Great milkers are found of all shapes, and the chief object of improving their form is to improve their feeding qualities, or, in other words, to unite, as far as possible, the somewhat incompatible properties of grazing and milking. Graceful, well-rounded, and compact forms, which constitute beauty in the eyes of the grazier, as well as in the estimation of those not accustomed to consider the intrinsic qualities of an animal, or not capable of appreciating them in a milch cow, will very rarely be found united, to any considerable extent, with active mammary glands or milk vessels. The best milkers often look coarse and flabby; for, even if their bony structure is good and symmetrical, they will appear, especially when in milk, to have large, raw bones and sharp points, particularly if they are largely developed in the hind quarters, which is most frequently the case, as is strikingly seen in the form of the [Oakes cow], a native animal, the most celebrated of her time, in Massachusetts, and winner of the first premium at the State Fair of 1816.

She yielded in that year no less than four hundred and sixty-seven and a quarter pounds of butter from May 15th to December 20th, at which time she was giving over eight quarts of milk, beer measure, a day. The weight of her milk in the height of the season, in June, was but forty-four and a half pounds; not so great as that of some cows of the present day, on far less feed in proportion to their size. Many cows can be named in New England, at the present time, whose yield, under the most favorable circumstances, exceeds fifty pounds a day, and some, whose yield will be fifty-five pounds, on less feed than the Oakes cow had.

Fig. 14. Oakes Cow.

The flesh on the hindquarters of most large milkers bears little proportion to the bone; the hips protrude, the pelvis is broad, the legs far apart, giving great space for the receptacle of large milk-vessels; whilst great flow of blood to the milky glands, incident to this peculiar structure, keeps them in more constant and greater activity than any other organs, so that the muscles develop less than they otherwise would, remain slender, and leave the buttocks and thighs small and narrow. Such animals will seldom acquire the reputation of being beautiful in form, and if they are not decidedly ugly, the owner may console himself with the adage that “handsome is that handsome does.”

But, though it is to the influence of the male that we are chiefly to look for improvements in the form, size, muscular development, and general appearance, of our stock, and for transmitting their milking qualities, to a considerable extent, the influence of the female is no less important; and undoubtedly the safest course to pursue, to obtain improved animals, is to select the best-formed animals, on both sides, from the greatest milking families.

With regard to the particular breeds to select for crossing with our natives, opinions will naturally differ widely. Those who are favored with luxuriant pastures and abundance of winter feed will have no objection to large-sized animals, and will naturally wish to obtain or possess grade short-horns. There is no breed in the world to which it is more desirable to resort, under such circumstances, particularly where improvement in form, early maturity, and general symmetry, are sought, in union with other qualities. It is well known that some families of short-horns have been bred for the pail, while most others have been bred chiefly for beef. If resort is had to this breed, therefore, great care and caution should be observed to select bulls from the milking families only; and, unless this is done we shall run the risk of losing the milking qualities of our stock, for which the improvement in form and early maturity can be little compensation, when breeding for the dairy.

It is a remarkable and significant fact that the large dairies of London are nearly filled with the short-horns, or short-horn and Yorkshire grades; and the fact that this breed is selected in such circumstances for the production of milk to supply the milk-market speaks volumes in favor of this cross. It is found that grade short-horns, after yielding extraordinary quantities of milk, during which they very naturally present the most ungainly appearance, will, when dried off and fed, take on flesh very rapidly, and yield large weights of beef. This is one prominent reason for keeping them; and another is, that they occupy less space than would be required to produce the same quantity of milk from smaller animals, which might give even more milk per cow in proportion to size and food consumed.

The cross of the well-bred short-horn and the native or Dutch cows of the dairy districts of New York is very highly esteemed; and six hundred pounds of cheese a year is no uncommon yield for such grades in Herkimer and adjacent counties.

The Ayrshires have been tried in the London dairies, but it was found that they were too difficult to obtain in sufficient numbers, and at sufficiently low prices; and that where quantity was the chief object, as in a milk-dairy, and space a matter of great importance, they could not compete with the short-horn and the Yorkshire cows, and crosses between these races.

It often happens, particularly in milk-dairies, that the farmer is so situated as not to desire to raise his calves, but disposes of them at the highest price to the butcher. He will obtain the greatest weight and the highest quality of veal from the use of a pure-bred short-horn or Hereford bull. But, on poorer pastures, where there is too little feed to bring young stock to their most perfect development, the pure-bred short-horns and high grades of the short-horn are thought, by some, to be too large, and consequently unprofitable. How far this objection to them might be obviated by stall feeding or soiling, and the use of roots, is for each one to consider who has these facilities at command. For most parts of New England they are unquestionably too large to be well maintained.

As to the Herefords, they cannot be recommended for the dairy, either as pure bloods or grades; but in grazing districts, devoted to raising beef or working cattle, they are highly and justly prized.

The same may be said of the North Devons. The pure-bred Devon bull, put to a good, young native cow, produces a beautiful and valuable cross, either for the yoke or the shambles; and if the cow is a remarkably good milker to begin with, and the bull from a milking family, there would be no fear of materially lessening the quantity in the offspring, while its form, and other qualities, would probably be greatly improved.

Grade Devons are very much sought for working oxen, and high prices are readily obtained for them, while as beef cattle they are by some highly esteemed. But, unfortunately, very few herds are to be found where attention has been paid to breeding for milk; and great milkers are the exception, and very rarely met with among the pure breeds. In their native country they are bred almost exclusively for beef. The estimation in which they are held as dairy stock, even by Devon breeders themselves, both in England and in this country, has been shown in the low value placed upon the development of the udder in the establishment of the scale of points spoken of on a preceding [page]; from which it is evident that, in judging of them, it was not contemplated that their milking qualities should be taken into consideration. As cows for the dairy, therefore, they possess no advantages over our common stock, and we should hardly look for improvement from them in this respect.

The Jerseys, as already seen, are justly celebrated for the richness of their milk and the butter made from it. In this respect no pure breed can excel them. They are, therefore, as a dairy breed, worthy of attention. On farms where the making of butter is an object of pursuit and profit, an infusion of Jersey blood will be likely to secure richness of milk, and high-flavored, delicious butter. Many good judges of stock recommend this cross for dairy purposes; and the chief objection that can be urged against them is that they are, as a breed, very deficient in quantity, which in a milk-dairy would be fatal to them, while, at the same time, they have little to recommend them, as the Devons have, on the score of beautiful forms and symmetrical proportions. Put upon a large and roomy native cow, remarkable as a milker, the produce would be likely to be a very superior animal.

The Ayrshires, as already seen, have been bred with reference both to quality and quantity of milk, and the grades are usually of a very high order. The best milkers I have ever known, in proportion to their size and food, have been grade Ayrshires; and this is also the experience of many who keep dairies for the manufacture of butter and cheese, as well as for the sale of milk. A cross obtained from an Ayrshire bull of good size and a pure-bred short-horn cow will produce a stock which it will be hard to beat at the pail, especially if the cow belong to any of the families of short-horns which have been bred with reference to their milking qualities, as some of them have. I have taken great pains to inquire of dairymen as to the breed or grade of their best cows, and what they consider the best cows for milk for their purposes; and the answer has almost invariably been the Ayrshire and the native. The Ayrshires have by no means been a failure in this country, although I do not think that, as a general thing, we have been so fortunate hitherto as to import the best specimens of them. If any improvement has been made in our dairy stock apart from that effected by a higher and more liberal course of feeding, it has come, in a great measure, from the Ayrshires; and, had the facilities been offered to cross our common stock with them to greater extent, there can be little doubt that the improvement would have been greater and more perceptible.

It should, however, be said, that in sections where the feed is naturally luxuriant, and adapted to grazing large animals, some families of the short-horns crossed with our natives have produced an equally good stock for cheese and milk dairies.

Before closing this part of the subject, it is proper to observe that among the earlier importations were several varieties of hornless cattle, and that they have been kept distinct in some sections, or where they have been crossed with the common stock there has been a tendency to produce hornless grades. These are not unfrequently known under the name of buffalo cattle. They were, in many cases, supposed to have belonged to the Galloway breed; or, which is more likely, to the Suffolk dun, a variety of the Galloway, and a far better milking-stock than the Galloways, from which it sprung. The polled, or hornless cattle, vary in color and qualities, but they are usually very good milkers when well kept, and many of them fatten well, and attain good weights.

The Hungarian cattle have also been imported, to some extent, into different parts of the country, and have been crossed upon the natives with some success. Many other strains of blood from different breeds have contributed to build up the common stock of the country of the present day; and there can be no question that its appearance and value have been largely improved during the last quarter of a century, nor that improvements are still in progress which will lead to satisfactory results in future.

---

CHAPTER III.
THE SELECTION OF MILCH COWS.

We have now reviewed the prominent races of cattle found in American dairy herds, and devoted some space to an examination of the principles to be followed in the breeding of dairy stock; and this has involved, to some extent, the choice of breeds, and the selection of individual animals, with special reference, however, to transmitting and improving their milking properties. But the selection of cows for the dairy is of such importance as to demand the most careful consideration.

The objects of a dairy are three-fold: the production of milk for sale, mainly confined to milk-dairies, and to smaller farms in the vicinity of large towns, where a mixed husbandry is followed; the production of butter, chiefly confined to farms at a distance from cities and large towns, which furnish a ready market for milk; and the fabrication of cheese, carried on under circumstances somewhat, similar to the manufacture of butter, and sometimes united with it as an object of pursuit, on the farm.

These different objects should, therefore, be kept in view, in the selection of cows; for animals which would be most profitable for the milk-dairy might be very unprofitable in the butter-dairy—a fact of almost daily experience. The productiveness of the cow does not depend on her breed so much as upon her food and management, her temperament and health, and the activity and energy of the organs of digestion and secretion. These latter, it is true, depending upon the structure of the chest and other parts, are far better developed, and more permanently fixed, in some races than in others, and are derived more or less by descent, and capable of being transmitted. The breed, therefore, cannot be wholly disregarded, inasmuch as it is an element in forming a judgment of the merits of a milch cow.

Cows, of whatever breed, having the best developed external marks of good milkers, will very rarely disappoint the practised eye or the skilful hand; while cows of breeds in highest repute for the dairy, and which do not show these marks, will as certainly fail to answer the expectations of those who select them simply for the breed. Those who would obtain skill in judging of these marks, and by means of them be able to estimate the value of a cow, need not expect to attain this end without long study and practical observation, for which some men have far greater talent than others; being able, while examining a particular mark or favorite characteristic of a milker, to take in all others at a glance, and so, while appearing to form their opinion from one or two important points, actually to estimate the whole development of the animal, while others must examine in detail each point by itself. Long practice is required, therefore, to become an adept in the judgment and selection of milch cows; but still much assistance may, unquestionably, be derived by careful attention to the external signs which have been long observed to indicate the milking qualities.

It is important, in the first place, to be able to judge of the age of the cow. Few farmers wish to purchase a cow for the dairy after she has passed her prime, which will ordinarily be at the age of nine or ten years, varying, of course, according to care, feeding, &c., in the earlier part of her life.

The most usual mode of forming an estimate of the age of cattle is by an examination of the horn. At three years old, as a general rule, the horns are perfectly smooth; after this, a ring appears near the root, and annually afterward a new one is formed; so that, by adding two years to the first ring, the age is calculated. This is a very uncertain mode of judging. The rings are distinct only in the cow; and it is well known that, if a heifer goes to bull when she is two years old, or a little before or after that time, a change takes place in the horn, and the first ring appears; so that a real three-year-old would carry the mark of a four-year-old.

The rings on the horns of a bull are either not seen until five, or they cannot be traced at all; while in the ox they do not appear till he is five years old, and then are often very indistinct. In addition to this, it is by no means an uncommon practice to file the horns, so as to make them smooth, and to give the animal the appearance of being much younger than it really is. This is, therefore, an exceedingly fallacious guide, and we cannot rely on it without being subject to imposition.

Fig. 15. Teeth at birth.

Fig. 16. Second week.

The surest indication of the age is given by the teeth. The calf, at birth, will usually have two incisor or front teeth; in some cases just appearing through the gums; in others, fully set, varying as the cow falls short or exceeds her regular time of calving. If she overruns several days, the teeth will have set and attained considerable size, as appears in [Fig. 15]. During the second week, a tooth will usually be added on each side, and the mouth will generally appear as in [Fig. 16]; and, before the end of the third week, the animal will generally have six incisor teeth, as shown in [Fig. 17]; and in a week from that time the full number of incisors will have appeared, as seen in [Fig. 18].

Fig. 17. Third week.

Fig. 18. Month.

These teeth are temporary, and are often called milk-teeth. Their edge is very sharp; and, as the animal begins to live upon more solid food, this edge becomes worn, showing the bony part of the tooth beneath, and indicates, with considerable precision, the length of time they have been used. The centre or oldest teeth show the marks of age first, and often become somewhat worn before the corner teeth appear. At eight weeks, the four inner teeth are nearly as sharp as before. They appear worn not so much on the outer edge or line of the tooth, as inside this line; but, after this, the edge begins gradually to lose its sharpness, and to present a more flattened surface; while the next outer teeth wear down like the four central ones; and at three months this wearing off is very apparent, till at four months all the incisor teeth appear worn, but the inner ones the most. Now the teeth begin slowly to diminish in size by a kind of contraction, as well as wearing down, and the distance apart becomes more and more apparent.

Fig. 19. Five to eight months.

Fig. 20. Ten months.

Fig. 21. Twelve months.

Fig. 22. Fifteen months.

From the fifth to the eighth month the inner teeth will usually appear as in [Fig. 19]; and at ten months this change shows more clearly, as in [Fig. 20], and the spaces between them begin to show very plainly, till at a year old they ordinarily present the appearance of [Fig. 21]; and at the age of fifteen months that shown in [Fig. 22], where the corner teeth are not more than half the original size, and the centre ones still smaller.

Fig. 23. Eighteen months.

Fig. 24. Two years past.

The permanent teeth are now rapidly growing, and preparing to take the place of the milk-teeth, which are gradually absorbed till they disappear, or are pushed out to give place to the two permanent central incisors, which, at a year and a half, will generally present the appearance indicated in [Fig. 23], which shows the internal structure of the lower jaw at this time, with the cells of the teeth, the two central ones protruding into the mouth, the two next pushing up, but not quite grown to the surface, with the third pair just perceptible. These changes require time; and at two years past the jaw will usually appear as in [Fig. 24], where four of the permanent central incisors are seen. After this the other milk-teeth decrease rapidly, but are slow to disappear; and at three years old the third pair of permanent teeth are but formed, as in [Fig. 25]; and at four years the last pair of incisors will be up, as in [Fig. 26]; but the outside ones are not yet fully grown, and the beast can hardly be said to be full-mouthed till the age of five years. But before this age, or at the age of four years, the two inner pairs of permanent teeth are beginning to wear at the edges, as shown in [Fig. 26], while at five years old the whole set becomes somewhat worn down at the top, and on the two centre ones a darker line appears in the middle, along a line of harder bone, as appears in [Fig. 27].

Fig. 25. Three years past.

Fig. 26. Four years past.

Now will come a year or two, and sometimes three, when the teeth do not so clearly indicate the exact age, and the judgment must be guided by the extent to which the dark middle lines are worn. This will depend somewhat upon the exposure and feeding of the animal; but at seven years these lines extend over all the teeth. At eight years another change begins, which cannot be mistaken. A kind of absorption begins with the two central incisors, slow, at first, but perceptible, and these two teeth become smaller than the rest, while the dark lines are worn into one in all but the corner teeth, till at ten years four of the central incisors have become smaller in size, with a smaller and fainter mark, as seen in [Fig. 28]. At eleven the six inner teeth are smaller than the corner ones; and at twelve all become smaller than they were, while the dark lines are nearly gone, except in the corner teeth, and the inner edge is worn to the gum.

Fig. 27. Five years past.

Fig. 28. Ten years past.

After being satisfied with regard to the age of a cow, we should examine her with reference to her soundness of constitution. A good constitution is indicated by large lungs, which are found in a deep, broad, and prominent chest, broad and well-spread ribs, a respiration somewhat slow and regular, a good appetite, and if in milk a strong inclination to drink, which a large secretion of milk almost invariably stimulates. In such cows the digestive organs are active and energetic, and they make an abundance of good blood, which in turn stimulates the activity of the nervous system, and furnishes the milky glands with the means of abundant secretion. Such cows, when dry, readily take on fat. When activity of the milk-glands is found united with close ribs, small and feeble lungs, and a slow appetite, often attended by great thirst, the cow will generally possess only a weak and feeble constitution; and if the milk is plentiful, it will generally be of bad quality, while the animal, if she does not die of diseased lungs, will not take on fat readily when dry and fed.

Other external marks of great milkers have already been given in part. They should be found united, as far as possible; for, though no one of them, however well developed, can be taken as a sure indication of extraordinary milking powers, several of them united may, as a general rule, be implicitly relied on.

In order to have no superfluous flesh, the cow should have a small, clean, and rather long head, tapering towards the muzzle. A cow with a large, coarse head will seldom fatten readily, or give a large quantity of milk. A coarse head increases the proportion of weight of the least valuable parts, while it is a sure indication that the whole bony structure is too heavy. The mouth should be large and broad; the eye bright and sparkling, but of a peculiar placidness of expression, with no indication of wildness, but rather a mild and feminine look. These points will indicate gentleness of disposition. Such cows seem to like to be milked, are fond of being caressed, and often return caresses. The horns should be small, short, tapering, yellowish, and glistening. The neck should be small, thin, and tapering towards the head, but thickening when it approaches the shoulder; the dewlaps small. The fore quarters should be rather small when compared with the hind quarters. The form of the barrel will be large, and each rib should project further than the preceding one, up to the loins. She should be well formed across the hips and in the rump.

The spine or back-bone should be straight and long, rather loosely hung, or open along the middle part, the result of the distance between the dorsal vertebræ, which sometimes causes a slight depression, or sway back. By some good judges this mark is regarded as of great importance, especially when the bones of the hind quarters are also rather loosely put together, leaving the rump of great width, and the pelvis large, and the organs and milk-vessels lodged in the cavities largely developed. The skin over the rump should be loose and flexible. This point is of great importance; and as, when the cow is in low condition, or very poor, it will appear somewhat harder and closer than it otherwise would, some practice and close observation are required to judge well of this mark. The skin, indeed, all over the body, should be soft and mellow to the touch, with soft and glossy hair. The tail, if thick at the setting on, should taper and be fine below.

But the udder is of special importance. It should be large in proportion to the size of the animal, and the skin thin, with soft, loose folds extending well back, capable of great distension when filled, but shrinking to a small compass when entirely empty. It must be free from lumps in every part, and provided with four teats set well apart, and of medium size. Nor are the milk-veins less important to be carefully observed. The principal ones under the belly should be large and prominent, and extend forward to the navel, losing themselves, apparently, in the very best milkers, in a large cavity in the flesh, into which the end of the finger can be inserted; but, when the cow is not in full milk, the milk-vein, at other times very prominent, is not so distinctly traced; and hence, to judge of its size when the cow is dry, or nearly so, this vein may be pressed near its end, or at its entrance into the body, when it will immediately fill up to its full size. This vein does not carry the milk to the udder, as some suppose, but is the channel by which the blood returns; and its contents consist of the refuse of the secretion, or what has not been taken up in forming milk. There are, also, veins in the udder, and the perineum, or the space above the udder, and between that and the buttocks, which it is of special importance to observe. These veins should be largely developed, and irregular or knotted, especially those of the udder. They may be seen in [Figs. 29], [30], [31], &c. They are largest in great milkers.

The knotted veins of the perineum, extending from above downwards in a winding line, are not readily seen in young heifers, and are very difficult to find in poor cows, or cows of only a medium quality. They are easily found in very good milkers, and, if not at first apparent, they are made so by pressing upon them at the base of the perineum, when they swell up, and send the blood back towards the vulva. They form a kind of thick network under the skin of the perineum, raising it up somewhat, in some cases near the vulva, in others lower down and nearer to the udder. It is important to look for these veins, as they often form a very important guide, and by some they would be considered as furnishing the surest indications of the milking qualities of the cow. Their full development almost always indicates an abundant secretion of milk; but they are far better developed after the cow has had two or three calves, when two or three years’ milking has given full activity to the milky glands, and attracted a large flow of blood. The larger and more prominent these veins, the better. It is needless to say that in observing them some regard should be had to the condition of the cow, the thickness of skin and fat by which they may be surrounded, and the general activity and food of the animal. Food calculated to stimulate the greatest flow of milk will naturally increase these veins, and give them more than usual prominence.

We come now to an examination of the system of Guénon, whose discovery, whatever may be said of it, has proved of immense importance to agriculture. Guénon was a man of remarkable practical sagacity, a close observer of stock, and an excellent judge. This gave him a great advantage in securing the respect of those with whom he came in contact, and assisted him vastly in introducing his ideas to the knowledge of intelligent men. Born in France, in the vicinity of Bordeaux, in humble circumstances, he early had the care of cows, and spent his whole life with them. His discovery, for which a gold medal was awarded by the agricultural society of Bordeaux, on the 4th of July, 1837, consisted in the connection between the milking qualities of the cow and certain external marks on the udder, and on the space above it, called the perineum, extending to the buttocks. To these marks he gave the name of milk-mirror, or escutcheon, which consists in certain perceptible spots rising up from the udder in different directions, forms, and sizes, on which the hair grows upwards, whilst the hair on other parts of the body grows downwards. To these spots various names have been given, according to their size and position, as tufts, fringes, figures or escutcheons, which last, is the most common term used. The reduction of these marks into a system, explaining the value of particular forms and sizes of the milk-mirror, belongs, so far as I know, exclusively to Guénon, though the connection of the milking qualities of the cow and the size of the ovals with downward-growing hair on the back part of the udder above the teats was observed and known in Massachusetts more than forty years age, and some of the old farmers of that day were accustomed to say that when these spots were large and well developed the cow would be a good milker.

Guénon divided the milk-mirror into eight classes, and each class into eight orders, making in all no less than sixty-four divisions, which he afterwards increased by sub-divisions, making the whole system complicated in the extreme, especially as he professed to be able to judge with accuracy, by means of the milk-mirror, not only of the exact quantity a cow would give, but also the quality of the milk and the length of time it would continue. He tried to prove too much, and the consequence was that he was himself frequently at fault, notwithstanding his excellent knowledge of other general characteristics of milch cows, while others, of less knowledge, and far more liable to err in judgment, were inclined to view the whole system with distrust.

My own attention was called to Guénon’s method of judging of cows some eight or ten years ago, and since that time I have examined many hundreds, with a view to ascertain the correctness of its main features, inquiring, at the same time, after the views and opinions of the best breeders and judges of stock, with regard to their experience and judgment of it merits; and the result of my observation has been, that cows with the most perfectly-developed milk-mirrors, or escutcheons, are, with rare exceptions, the best milkers of their breed, and that cows with small and slightly-developed mirrors are, in the majority of cases, bad milkers.

I say the best milkers of their breed; for I do not believe that precisely the same sized and formed milk-mirrors on a Hereford or a Devon, and an Ayrshire or a native, will indicate anything like the same or equal milking properties. It will not do, in my opinion, to disregard the general and well-known characteristics of the breed, and rely wholly on the milk-mirror. But I think it may be safely said that, as a general rule the best-marked Hereford will turn out to be the best milker among the Herefords, all of which are poor milkers; the best-marked Devon the best among the Devons, and the best-marked Ayrshire the best among the Ayrshires; that is, it will not do to compare two animals of entirely distinct breeds, by the milk-mirrors alone, without regard to the fixed habits and education, so to speak, of the breed or family to which they belong.

There are cows with very small mirrors, which are, nevertheless, very fair in the yield of milk; and among these with middling quality of mirrors instances of rather more than ordinary milkers often occur, while at the same time it is true that now and then cases occur where the very best marked and developed mirrors are found on very poor milkers. I once owned a cow of most extraordinary marks, the milk-mirror extending out broadly upon the thighs, and rising broad and very distinctly marked to the buttocks, giving every indication, to good judges, of being as great a milker as ever stood over a pail; and yet, when she calved, the calf was feeble and half nourished, and she actually gave too little to feed it. But I believe that this exception, and most others which appear to be direct contradictions, could be clearly explained by the fact, of which I was not aware at the time, that she had been largely over-fed before she came into my possession. I mention this case simply to show how impossible it is to estimate with mathematical accuracy either the quantity, the quality, or the duration of the milk, since it is affected by so many chance circumstances, which cannot always be known or estimated by even the most skilful judge; as the food, the treatment, the temperament, accidental diseases, inflammation of the udder, premature calving, the climate and season, the manner in which she has been milked, and a thousand other things which interrupt or influence the flow of milk, without, materially changing the size or the shape of the milk-mirror. M. Magne, who appears to me to have simplified and explained the system of Guénon, and to have freed it from many of the useless details with which it is encumbered in the original work, while he has preserved all that is of practical value, very justly observes that we often see cows, equally well formed, with precisely the same milk-mirror, and kept in the same circumstances, yet giving neither equal quantities nor similar qualities of milk. Nor could it be otherwise; for, assuming a particular tuft on two cows to be of equal value at birth, it could not be the same in the course of years, since innumerable circumstances occur to change the activity of the milky glands without changing the form or size of the tuft; or, in other words, the action of the organs depends not merely on their size and form, but, to a great extent, on the general condition of each individual.

Te give a more distinct idea of the milk-mirror, it will be necessary to refer to the figures, and the explanations of these I translate literally from the little work already referred to, the Choix des Vaches Latières, or, the Choice of Milch Cows.

The different forms of milk-mirrors are represented by the shaded part of [figures 29], [30], [31], etc.; but it is necessary to premise that upon the cows themselves they are always partly concealed by the thighs, the udder, and the folds of the skin, which are not shown, and so they are not always so uniform in nature as they appear in the cuts.

Their size varies as the skin is more or less folded or stretched, while we have supposed in the figures that the skin is uniform or free from folds, but not stretched out. In order to understand the differences which the milk-mirrors present in respect to size, according to the state of the skin, the milk-mirror is shown in two ways in [Figs. 52] and [53]. In [Fig. 53] the proportions are preserved the same as in the other mirrors represented, but an effort is made to represent the folds of the skin; while in [Fig. 52] the mirror is just as it would have been had the folds of the udder been smoothed out, and the skin between the udder and the thighs stretched out; or, in other words, as if the skin, covered with up-growing hair, had been fully extended.

This mirror, but little developed, just as shown in [Fig. 53], was observed on a very large Norman cow.

It is usually very easy to distinguish the milk-mirrors by the upward direction of the hair which forms them. They are sometimes marked by a line of bristly hair growing in the opposite direction, which surrounds them, forming a sort of outline by the upward and downward growing hair. Yet, when the hair is very fine and short, mixed with longer hairs, and the skin much folded, and the udder voluminous and pressed by the thighs, it is necessary, in order to distinguish the part enclosed between the udder and the legs, and examine the full size of the mirrors, to observe them attentively, and to place the legs wide apart, and to smooth out the skin, in order to avoid the folds.

The mirrors may also be observed by holding the back of the hand against the perineum, and drawing it from above downwards, when the nails rubbing against the up-growing hair, make the parts covered by it very perceptible.

As the hair of the milk-mirror has not the same direction as the hair which surrounds it, it may often be distinguished by a difference in the shade reflected by it. It is then sufficient to place it properly to the light to see the difference in shade, and to make out the part covered by the upward-growing hair. Most frequently, however, the hair of the milk-mirror is thin and fine, and the color of the skin can easily be seen. If we trust alone to the eye, we shall often be deceived. Thus, in [Figs. 52] and [53], the shaded part, which extends from the vulva to the mirror E, represents a strip of hair of a brownish tint, which covered the perineum, and which might easily have been taken for a part of the milk-mirror.

In some countries cattle-dealers shave the back part of the cows. Just after this operation the mirrors can neither be seen nor felt; but this inconvenience ceases in a few days. It may be added that the shaving, designed, as the dealers say, to beautify the cow, is generally intended simply to destroy the milk-mirror, and to deprive buyers of one means of judging of the milking qualities of the cows.

It is not necessary to add that the cows most carefully shaven are those which are badly marked, and that it is prudent to take it for granted that cows so shorn are bad milkers.

Milk-mirrors vary in position, extent, and the figure they represent. They may be divided, according to their position, into mirrors or escutcheons, properly so called, or into lower and upper tufts, or escutcheons. The latter are very small in comparison with the former, and are situated in close proximity to the vulva, as seen at S in [Figs. 38], [39], [40], etc. They are very common on cows of bad milking races, but are very rarely seen on the best milch cows. They consist of one or two ovals, or small bands of up-growing hair, and serve to indicate the continuance of the flow of milk. The period is short in proportion as the tufts are large. They must not be confounded with the escutcheon proper, which is often extended up to the vulva. They are separated from it by bands of hair, more or less large, as in [Figs. 40], [42], &c.

The mirrors shown in [Figs. 38] to [42], and [29] to [35], &c., exist, more or less developed, on nearly all cows, and indicate the quantity of milk, which will be in proportion to their size. Sometimes they form only a small plate on the posterior surface of the udder, as in [Fig. 49]. In other cases they cover the udder, the inner surface of the legs and the thighs, the perineum, and a part of the buttocks, as in [Figs. 29], [30], [31], &c.

Two parts may be distinguished in the lower tufts: one situated on the udder, the legs, and the thighs, as at M M, [Fig. 30]; and the other on the perineum, extending sometimes more or less out upon the thighs, as at P P, in the same figure.

The first part is represented by itself, in [Figs. 37] and [49]. We shall call the former mammary, and the latter perinean. The former is sometimes large, extending over the milky glands, the thighs, and the legs, as shown in [Figs. 29] to [37]; and sometimes circumscribed, or more or less checked over with tufts of downward-growing hair, as in [Figs. 43] to [52]. It is sometimes terminated towards the upper part of the udder by a horizontal line, straight, as in [Fig. 37], or angular, as in [Fig. 49]; but more frequently it continues without interruption over the perineum, and constitutes the perinean part.

Fig. 29.

Fig. 30.

Fig. 31.

Fig. 32.

This presents a large band, [Fig. 30], straight, as in [Fig. 43], and bounded on the sides by two parallel lines, as seen in the same figures, or by curved lines, as in [Fig. 34]. It sometimes rises scarcely a fourth part up the perineum, as in [Fig. 38]; at others, it reaches or passes beyond that part, forming a straight band, as in [Figs. 35] and [43], or is folded into squares, as in [Figs. 31] and [36], or truncated, [Fig. 38], or terminated by one or several points, [Figs. 32], [33], [41], [50]. In some cows this band extends as far as the base of the vulva, [Figs. 40] and [48]; in others, it embraces more or less of the lower part of the vulva, [Figs. 29], [30], [39], and [47].

Milk-mirrors are sometimes symmetrical, as in [Figs. 29], [30], [34], [35], [37], and [38]; sometimes without symmetry, as in [Figs. 42], [45], and [50]. When there is a great difference in the extent of the two halves, it almost always happens that the teats on the side where the mirror is best developed give, as we shall see, more milk than those of the opposite side. We will remark here that the left half of the mirror is almost always the largest; and so, when the perinean part is folded into a square, it is on this side of the body that it unfolds, as in [Figs. 31], [36], and [42]. Of three thousand cows in Denmark, M. Andersen found only a single one whose escutcheon varied even a little from this rule. We have observed the contrary only in a single case, and that was on a bull. The perinean part of the mirror formed a band of an inch to an inch and a half in breadth, irregular, but situated, in great measure, on the right side of the body. Stretching towards the upper part of the perineum, it formed a kind of square, with a small projecting point on the right, [Fig. 51].

Fig. 33.

Fig. 34.

Fig. 35.

Fig. 36.

Fig. 37.

The mirrors having a value in proportion to the space they occupy, it is of great importance to attend to all the rows of down-growing hairs, which diminish its extent of surface, whether these tufts are in the midst of the mirror, [Figs. 45], [46], and [47], or form indentations on its edges, as in [Figs. 42], [44], [45], [46], and [48].

These indentations, concealed in part by the folds of the skin, are sometimes seen with difficulty; but it is important to take them into account, since in a great many cows they materially lessen the size of the mirror. We often find cows whose milk-mirror at first sight appears very large, but which are only medium milkers; and it will usually be found that lateral indentations greatly diminish the surface of up-growing hair. Many errors are committed in estimating the value of such cows, from a want of attention to the real extent of the milk-mirror.

All the interruptions in the surface of the mirror indicate a diminution of the quantity of milk, with the exception, however, of small oval or elliptical plates which are found in the mirror, on the back part of the udders of the best cows, as in [Figs. 29], [30], [32], [34], [35], [36], and [40]. These ovals have a peculiar tint, which is occasioned by the downward direction of the hair which forms them. In the best cows these ovals exist with the lower mirrors very well developed, as in [Figs. 29], [30], and [32].

In fine, we should state that in order to determine the extent and significance of a mirror it is necessary to consider the state of the perineum as to fat, and of the fulness of the udder. In a fat cow, with an inflated udder, the mirror would appear larger than it really is; whilst in a lean cow, with a loose and wrinkled udder, it appears smaller. Fat will cover faults, a fact to be kept in mind in selecting a cow.

In bulls, [Fig. 51], the mirrors present the same peculiarities as in cows; but they are less varied in their form, and especially much less in size. This will easily be understood from the explanation of mirrors given on a [preceding page].

Fig. 38.

Fig. 39.

Fig. 40.

Fig. 41.

Fig. 42.

In calves the mirrors show the shapes they are afterwards to have, only they are more contracted, because the parts which they cover are but slightly developed. They are easily seen after birth; but the hair which then covers them is long, coarse, and stiff; and when this hair falls off, the calf’s mirror will resemble that of the cow, but be of less size.

With calves, however, it should be stated, in addition to what has already been said, that the milk-mirrors are more distinctly recognized on those from cows that are well kept, and that they will generally be fully developed at two years old. Some changes take place in the course of years, but the outlines of the mirror appear prominent at the time of advanced pregnancy, or, in the case of cows giving milk, at the times when the udder is more distended with milk than at others.

The classification adopted by Magne appears still further to simplify the whole method, and to bring it within the easy reach and comprehension of every one who will examine the figures and the explanations connected with them. He divides cows, according to the quantity they give, into four classes: First, the very good; second, the good; third, the medium; and fourth, the bad.

In the first class he places cows both parts of whose milk-mirror, the mammary and the perinean, are large, continuous, uniform, covering at least a great part of the perineum, the udder, the inner surface of the thighs, and extending more or less out upon the legs, as in [Figs. 29] to [33], with no interruptions, or, if any, small ones, oval in form, and situated on the posterior face of the udder, [Figs. 29], [30], and [32].

Fig. 43.

Fig. 44.

Fig. 45.

Fig. 46.

Fig. 47.

Such mirrors are found on most very good cows, but may also be found on cows which can scarcely be called good, and which should be ranked in the next class. But cows, whether having very well-developed mirrors or not, may be reckoned as very good, and as giving as much milk as is to be expected from their size, feed, and the hygienic circumstances in which they are kept, if they present the following characteristics:

Veins of the perineum large, as if swollen, and visible on the exterior, as in [Figs. 29]-[32], or which can be easily made to appear by pressing upon the base of the perineum; veins of the udder large and knotted, milk-veins large, often double, equal on both sides, and forming zig-zags under the belly.

To the signs furnished by the veins and by the mirror may be added also the following marks: A uniform, very large and yielding udder, shrinking much in milking, and covered with soft skin and fine hair; good constitution, full chest, regular appetite, and great propensity to drink. Cows rather inclining to be poor than fat. Soft, yielding skin, short, fine hair, small head, fine horns, bright, sparkling eye, mild expression, feminine look, with a fine neck.

Cows of this first class are very rare. They give, even when small in size, from ten to fourteen quarts of milk a day, and the largest sized from eighteen to twenty-six quarts a day, and even more. Just after calving, if arrived at maturity and fed with good, wholesome, moist food in sufficient quantity and quality, adapted to promote the secretion of milk, they can give about a pint of milk for every ten ounces of hay, or its equivalent, which they eat.

They continue in milk for a long period. The best never go dry, and may be milked even up to the time of calving, giving from eight to twelve quarts of milk a day. The Dutch cow, [Fig. 54], was giving daily twenty-two quarts of milk, a year after calving. But even the best cows often fall short of the quantity of milk they are able to give, from being fed on food that is too dry, or not sufficiently varied, or not rich enough in nutritive qualities, or deficient in quantity.

Fig. 48.

Fig. 49.

Fig. 50.

Fig. 51.

Fig. 52.

Fig. 53.

Fig. 48.

Fig. 49.

Fig. 50.

Fig. 51.

Fig. 52.

Fig. 53.

The second class is that of good cows; and to this belong the best commonly found in the market and among the cow-feeders of cities.

They have the mammary part of the milk-mirror well developed, but the perinean part contracted or wholly wanting, as in [Figs. 34] and [37]; or both parts of the mirror are moderately developed, or slightly indented, as [Figs. 35] and [36]. [Figs. 38], [39], [40], and [41], belong also to this class, in the lower part; but they denote cows which, as the upper mirrors, S S S, indicate, dry up sooner when again in calf.

These marks, though often seen on many good cows, should be considered as certain only when the veins of the perineum form, under the skin, a kind of network, which, without being very apparent, may be felt by a pressure on them; when the milk-veins on the belly are well developed, though less knotted and less prominent than in cows of the first class; in fine, when the udder is well developed, and presents veins which are sufficiently numerous, though not very large.

It is necessary, then, as in the preceding class, to have a mistrust of cows in which the mirror is not accompanied by large veins. This remark applies especially to cows which have had several calves, and are in full milk. They are medium or bad, let the milk-mirror be what it may, if the veins of the belly are not large, and those of the udder apparent.

The general characteristics which depend on form and constitution combine less than in cows of the preceding class the marks of good health and excellent constitution with those of a gentle and feminine look.

Fig. 54. A Good Milch Cow.

Small cows of this class give from seven to ten or eleven quarts of milk a day, and the largest from thirteen to seventeen quarts. They can be made to give three fourths of a pint of milk, just after calving, for every ten ounces of hay consumed, if well cared for, and fed in a manner favorable to the secretion of milk.

They hold out long in milk when they have no upper mirrors or tufts. At seven or eight months in calf, they may give from five to eight quarts a day.

The third class consists of middling cows. When the milk-mirror really presents only the lower or mammary part slightly developed or indented, and the perinean part contracted, narrow, and irregular, as in [Figs. 42] to [47], the cows are middling. The udder is slightly developed or hard, and shrinks very little after milking. The veins of the perineum are not apparent, and those which run along the lower sides of the abdomen are small, straight, and sometimes unequal. In this case the mirror is not symmetrical, and the cow gives more milk on the side where the vein is largest.

These cows often have large heads, and a thick and hard skin. Being ordinarily in good condition, and even fat, they are beautiful to look at, and seem to be well formed. Many of them are nervous and restive, and not easily approached.

Cows of this class give, according to size, from three or four to ten quarts of milk. They very rarely give, even in the most favorable circumstances, half a pint for every ten ounces of hay which they consume.

The milk diminishes rapidly, and dries up wholly the fourth or fifth month in calf.

The fourth class is composed of bad cows. As they are ordinarily in good condition, these cows are often the most beautiful of the herd and in the markets. They have fleshy thighs, thick and hard skin, a large and coarse neck and head, and horns large at the base.

The udder is hard, small, and fleshy, with a skin covered with long, rough hair. No veins are to be seen either on the perineum or the udder, while those of the belly are very slightly developed, and the mirrors are ordinarily small, as in [Figs. 48], [49], and [50].

With these characteristics, cows give only a few quarts of milk a day, and dry up a short time after calving. Some such can scarcely nourish their calves, even when they are well cared for and well fed.

Sickly habits, chronic affections of the digestive organs, the chest, the womb, and the lacteal system, sometimes greatly affect the milk secretions, and cause cows troubled with them to fall from the first or second to the third, and sometimes to the fourth class.

The above classification is very similar to that of Pabst, a German farmer of large experience and observation of stock, who, with a view to simplify the method of Guénon, and render it of greater practical value to the farmer, made five divisions or classes, consisting of, 1st, Very good or extraordinary; 2d, Good or good middling; 3d, Middling and little below middling; 4th, Small; and, 5th, Very bad milkers.

These classifications, adopted by Magne, Pabst, and other good breeders and judges of cows, appear to me to be far more simple and satisfactory than the more extended and complicated classification of Guénon himself. Without pretending to be able to judge with any accuracy of the quantity, the quality, or the duration, which any particular size or form of the mirror will indicate, they give to Guénon the full credit of his important discovery of the escutcheon, or milk-mirror, as a new and very valuable element in forming our judgment of the milking qualities of a cow; and simply assert, with respect to the duration or continuance of the flow of milk, that the mirror that indicates the greatest quantity will also indicate the longest duration. The mirror forms, in other words, an important additional mark or point for distinguishing good milkers; and it is safe to lay it down as a rule that, in the selection of milch cows, as well as in the choice of young animals as breeders, we should, by all means, examine and consider the milk-mirror, but not limit or confine ourselves exclusively to it, and that other and long-known marks should be equally regarded.

But there are cases where a knowledge and careful examination of the form and size of the mirror becomes of the greatest importance. It is well known that certain signs or marks of great milkers are developed only as the capacities of the animal herself are fully and completely developed by age. The milk-veins, for instance, are never so large and prominent in heifers and young cows as in old ones, and the same may be said of the udder, and the veins of the udder and perineum; all of which it is of great importance to observe in the selection of milch cows. Those signs, then, which in cows arrived at maturity are almost sufficient in themselves to warrant a conclusion as to their merits as milkers, are, to a great extent, wanting in younger animals, and altogether in calves, of which there is often doubt whether they shall be raised; and here a knowledge of the form of the mirror is of immense advantage, since it gives, at the outset, and before any expense is incurred, a somewhat reliable means of judging of the future milking capacities of the animal or, if a male, of the probability of his transmitting milking qualities to his offspring.

It will be seen, from an examination of the points of a good milch cow, that, though the same marks which indicate the greatest milking qualities may not indicate any great aptitude to fatten, yet that the signs which indicate good fattening qualities are included among the signs favorable to the production of milk, such as soundness of constitution, indicated by good organs of digestion and respiration, fineness and mellowness of the skin and hair, quietness of disposition, which inclines the animal to rest and lie down in chewing the cud, and other marks which are relied on by graziers in selecting animals to fatten.

In buying dairy stock the farmer generally finds it for his interest to select young heifers. They give the promise of longer usefulness. But it is often the case that older cows are selected with the design of using them for the dairy for a limited period, and then feeding them for the butcher. In either case, it is advisable, as a rule, to choose animals in low or medium condition. The farmer cannot ordinarily afford to buy fat; it is more properly his business to make it, and to have it to sell. Good and well-marked cows in poor condition will rapidly gain in flesh and products when removed to better pastures and higher keeping, and they cost less in the original purchase.

It is unnecessary to say that regard should be had to the quality of the pasturage and keeping which a cow has previously had, as compared with that to which she is to be subjected. The size of the animal should also be considered with reference to the fertility of the pastures into which she is to be put. Small or medium-sized animals accommodate themselves to ordinary pastures far better than large ones. Where a very large cow will do well, two small ones will usually do better, while the large animal might fail entirely where two small ones would do well. It is better to have the whole herd, so far as may be, uniform in size; for, if they vary greatly, some may get more than they need, and others will not have enough. This however, cannot always be brought about.

Fig. 55. A Good Dairy Cow.

---

CHAPTER IV.
FEEDING AND MANAGEMENT OF DAIRY COWS.

No branch of dairy farming can compare in importance with the management of cows. The highest success will depend very much upon it, whatever breed be selected, and whatever amount of care and attention be given to the points of the animals; for experience will show that very little milk comes out of the bag that is not first put into the throat. It is poor economy, therefore, to attempt to keep too many cows for the amount of feed we have; for it will generally be found that one good cow well bred and well fed will yield as much as two ordinary cows kept in the ordinary way, while a saving is effected both in labor and room required, and in the risks on the capital invested. If the larger number on poorer feed is urged for the sake of the manure, which is the only ground on which it can be put, it is sufficient to remark that it is a very expensive way of making manure. It is not too much to say that a proper regard to profit and economy would require many an American farmer to sell off nearly half his cows, and to feed the whole of his hay and roots hitherto used into the remainder.

A certain German farmer was visited, one day, by some Swiss from over the border, who desired to buy of him all the milk of his cows for the purpose of making cheese. Not being able to agree upon the terms, he finally proposed to let them take the entire charge of his cows, and agreed to furnish food amply sufficient, the Swiss assuming the whole care of feeding it out, and paying a fixed price by measure for all the milk. “I found myself, at once,” says he, “under the necessity of selling almost half my cows, because the Swiss required nearly double the quantity of fodder which the cows had previously had, and I was well satisfied that all the produce I could raise on my farm would be far from sufficient to feed in that way the number of cows I had kept. I was in despair at finding them using such a quantity of the best quality of feed, though it was according to the strict letter of the contract, especially as I knew that I had given my cows rather more than the quantity of food recommended by men in whom I had perfect confidence. Thus, while Thaër names twenty-three pounds of hay, or its equivalent, as food sufficient for a good-sized cow, I gave mine full twenty-seven pounds. But, if the change effected in the management of my cows was great, the result was still more striking. The quantity of milk kept increasing, and it reached the highest point when the cows attained the condition of the fat kine of Pharaoh’s dream. The quantity of milk became double, triple, and even quadruple, what it had been before; so that, if I should compare the product with that previously obtained, a hundred pounds of hay produced three times more milk than it had produced with my old mode of feeding. Such results, of course, attracted my attention to this branch of my farming. It became a matter of pleasure; and my observations were followed up with great care, and during several years I devoted a large part of my time to it. I even went so far as to procure scales for weighing the food and the animals, in order to establish exact data on the most positive basis.”

The conclusions to which he arrived were, that an animal, to be fully fed and satisfied, requires a quantity of food in proportion to its live weight; that no feed could be complete that did not contain a sufficient amount of nutritive elements; hay, for example, being more nutritive than straw, and grains than roots. He found, too, that the food must possess a bulk sufficient to fill up to a certain degree the organs of digestion or the stomach; and that, to receive the full benefit of its food, the animal must be wholly satisfied, as, if the stomach is not sufficiently distended, the food cannot be properly digested, and of course many of the nutritive principles it contains would not be perfectly assimilated. An animal regularly fed eats till it is satisfied, and no more than is requisite. A part of the nutritive elements in hay and other forage plants is needed to keep an animal on its feet,—that is, to keep up its condition,—and if the nutrition of its food is not sufficient for this the weight decreases, and if it is more than sufficient the weight increases, or else this excess is consumed in the production of milk or in labor. About one sixtieth of their live weight in hay, or its equivalent, will keep horned cattle on their feet; but, in order to be completely nourished, they require about one thirtieth in dry substances, and four thirtieths in water, or other liquid contained in their food. The excess of nutritive food over and above what is required to sustain life will go in milch cows generally to the production of milk, or to the growth of the fœtus, but not in all cows to an equal extent; the tendency to the secretion of milk being far more developed in some than in others.

With regard to the consumption of food in proportion to the live weight of the animal, however far it may apply as a general principle, it should, I think, be taken with some qualifications. The proportion is probably not uniform as applied to all breeds indiscriminately, though it may be more so as applied to animals of the same breed. Bakewell’s idea was that the quantity of food required depended much on the shape of the barrel; and it is well known that an animal of a close, compact, well-rounded barrel will consume less than one of an opposite make.

The variations in the yield of milch cows are caused more by the variations in the nutritive elements of their food than by a change of the form in which it is given. “A cow, kept through the winter on mere straw,” says a practical writer on this subject, “will cease to give milk; and, when fed in spring on green forage, will give a fair quantity of milk. But she owes the cessation and restoration of the secretion to respectively the diminution and the increase of her nourishment, and not at all to the change of form, or of outward substance, in which the nourishment is administered. Let cows receive through winter nearly as large a proportion of nutritive matter as is contained in the clover, lucerne, and fresh grasses, which they eat in summer, and, no matter in what precise substance or mixture that matter may be contained, they will yield a winter’s produce of milk quite as rich in caseine and butyraceous ingredients as the summer’s produce, and far more ample in quantity than almost any dairyman with old-fashioned notions would imagine to be possible. The great practical error on this subject consists not in giving wrong kinds of food, but in not so proportioning and preparing it as to render an average ration of it equally rich in the elements of nutrition, and especially in nitrogenous elements, as an average ration of the green and succulent food of summer.”

We keep too much stock for the quantity of good and nutritious food which we have for it; and the consequence is cows are, in nine cases out of ten, poorly wintered, and come out in the spring weakened, if not, indeed, positively diseased, and a long time is required to bring them into a condition to yield a generous quantity of milk.

It is a hard struggle for a cow reduced in flesh and in blood to fill up the wasted system with the food which would otherwise have gone to the secretion of milk; but, if she is well fed, well housed, well littered, and well supplied with pure, fresh water, and with roots, or other moist food, and properly treated to the luxury of a frequent carding, and constant kindness, she comes out ready to commence the manufacture of milk under favorable circumstances.

Keep the cows constantly in good condition, ought, therefore, to be the motto of every dairy farmer, posted up over the barn-door, and over the stalls, and over the milk-room, and repeated to the boys whenever there is danger of forgetting it. It is the great secret of success, and the difference between success and failure turns upon it. Cows in milk require more food in proportion to their size and weight than either oxen or young cattle.

In order to keep cows in milk well and economically, regularity is next in importance to a full supply of wholesome and nutritious food. The healthy animal stomach is a very nice chronometer, and it is of the utmost importance to observe regular hours in feeding, cleaning, and milking. This is a point, also, in which very many farmers are at fault—feeding whenever it happens to be convenient. The cattle are thus kept in a restless condition, constantly expecting food when the keeper enters the barn, while, if regular hours are strictly adhered to, they know exactly when they are to be fed, and they rest quietly till the time arrives. Go into a well-regulated dairy establishment an hour before the time of feeding, and scarcely an animal will rise to its feet; while, if it happens to be the hour of feeding, the whole herd will be likely to rise and seize their food with an avidity and relish not to be mistaken.

With respect to the exact routine to be pursued, no rule could be prescribed which would apply to all cases; and each individual must be governed much by circumstances, both in respect to the particular kinds of feed at different seasons of the year, and the system of feeding. I have found in my own practice, and in the practice of the most successful dairymen, that, in order to encourage the largest secretion of milk in stalled cows, one of the best courses is, to feed in the morning, either at the time of milking—which I prefer—or immediately after, with cut feed, consisting of hay, oats, millet, or corn-stalks, mixed with shorts, and Indian, linseed, or cotton-seed meal, thoroughly moistened with water. If in winter, hot or warm water is far better than cold. If given at milking-time, the cows will generally give down the milk more readily. The stalls and mangers ought always to be well cleaned out first.

Roots and long hay may be given during the day; and at the evening milking, or directly after, another generous meal of cut feed, well moistened and mixed, as in the morning. No very concentrated food, like grains alone or oil-cakes, should, it seems to me, be fed early in the morning on an empty stomach, though it is sanctioned by the practice in the London milk-dairies. The processes of digestion go on best when the stomach is sufficiently distended; and for this purpose the bulk of food is almost as important as the nutritive qualities. The flavor of some roots, as cabbages and turnips, is more apt to be imparted to the flesh and milk when fed on an empty stomach than otherwise. After the cows have been milked, and have finished their cut feed, they are carded and curried down, in well-managed dairies, and then either watered in the stall, which in very cold or stormy weather is far preferable, or turned out to water in the yard. When they are out, if they are let out at all, the stables are put in order; and, after tying them up, they are fed with long hay, and left to themselves till the time of next feeding. This may consist of roots, such as cabbages, beets, carrots, or turnips, sliced, or of potatoes, a peck, or, if the cows are very large, a half-bushel each, and cut feed again at the evening milking, as in the morning, after which water in the stall, if possible.

The less cows are exposed to the cold of winter, the better. They eat less, thrive better, and give more milk, when kept housed all the time, than when exposed to the cold. Caird mentions a case where a herd of cows, which had been usually supplied from troughs and pipes in the stalls, were, on account of an obstruction in the pipes, obliged to be turned out twice a day to be watered in the yard. The quantity of milk instantly decreased, and in three days the falling off became very considerable. After the pipes were mended, and the cows again watered as before, in their stalls, the flow of milk returned. This, however, will be governed much by the weather; for in very mild, warm days it may be judicious not only to let them out, but to allow them to remain out for a short time, to exercise.

Any one can arrange the hour for the several processes named above, to suit himself; but, when once fixed, let it be rigidly and regularly followed. If the regular and full feeding be neglected for even a day, the yield of milk will immediately decline, and it will be very difficult to restore it. It may safely be asserted, as the result of many trials and long practice, that a larger flow of milk follows a complete system of regularity in this respect than from a higher feeding where this system is not adhered to.

One prime object which the dairyman should keep constantly in view is, to maintain the animal in a sound and healthy condition. Without this, no profit can be expected from a milch cow for any considerable length of time; and, with a view to this, there should be an occasional change of food. But, in making changes, great care is required to supply an equal amount of nourishment, or the cow falls off in flesh, and eventually in milk. We should therefore bear in mind that the food consumed goes not alone to the secretion of milk, but also to the growth and maintenance of the bony structure, the flesh, the blood, the fat, the skin, and the hair, and in exhalations from the body. These parts of the body consist of different organic constituents. Some are rich in nitrogen, as the fibrin of the blood, albumen, &c.; others destitute of it, as fat; some abound in inorganic salts, phosphate of lime, salts of potash, &c. To explain how the constant waste of these substances may be supplied, Dr. Voelcker observes that the albumen, gluten, caseine, and other nitrogenized principles of food, supply the animal with materials required for the formation of muscle and cartilage; they are, therefore, called flesh-forming principles.

“Fats, or oily matters of the food,” says he, “are used to lay on fat, or for the purpose of sustaining respiration.

“Starch, sugar, gum, and a few other non-nitrogenized substances, consisting of carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen, supply the carbon given off in respiration, or they are used for the production of fat.

“Phosphates of lime and magnesia in food principally furnish the animal with the materials of which the bony skeleton of its body consists.

“Saline substances—chlorides of sodium and potassium, sulphate and phosphate of potash and soda, and some other mineral matters occurring in food—supply the blood, juice of flesh, and various animal juices, with the necessary mineral constituents.

“The healthy state of an animal can thus only be preserved by a mixed food; that is, food which contains all the proximate principles just noticed. Starch or sugar alone cannot sustain the animal body, because neither of them furnishes the materials to build up the fleshy parts of the animal. When fed on substances in which an insufficient quantity of phosphates occurs, the animal will become weak, because it does not find any bone-producing principles in its food. Due attention, therefore, ought to be paid by the feeder to the selection of food which contains all the kinds of matter required, nitrogenized as well as non-nitrogenized, and mineral substances; and these should be mixed together in the proportion which experience points out as best for the different kinds of animals, or the particular purpose for which they are kept.”

“On the nutrition of cows for dairy purposes,” Dr. Voelcker still further observes that “milk may be regarded as a material for the manufacture of butter or of cheese; and, according to the purpose for which the milk is intended to be employed, whether for the manufacture of butter or the production of cheese, the cow should be differently fed.

“Butter contains carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, and no nitrogen. Cheese, on the contrary, is rich in nitrogen. Food which contains much fatty matter, or substances which in the animal system are readily converted into fat, will tend to increase the proportion of cream in milk. On the other hand, the proportion of caseine or cheesy matter in milk is increased by the use of highly nitrogenized food. Those, therefore, who desire much cream, or who produce milk for the manufacture of butter, select food likely to increase the proportion of butter in the milk. On the contrary, where the principal object is the production of milk rich in curd,—that is, where cheese is the object of the farmer,—clover, peas, and bean-meal, and other plants which abound in legumine,—a nitrogenized organic compound, almost identical in properties and composition with caseine, or the substance which forms the curd of milk,—will be selected.” And so the quality, as well as the quantity, of butter in the milk, depends on the kind of food consumed, and on the general health of the animal. Cows fed on turnips in the stall always produce butter inferior to that of cows living upon the fresh and aromatic grasses of the pastures.

Succulent food in which water abounds—the green grass of irrigated meadows, green clover, brewers’ refuse, distillers’ refuse, etc.—increases the quantity, rather than the quality, of the milk; and by feeding these substances the milk-dairyman studies his own interest, and makes thin milk, without diluting it with water, though, in the opinion of some, this may be no more legitimate than watering the milk.

But, though the yield of milk may be increased by succulent or watery food, it should be given so as not to interfere with the health of the cow.

Food rich in starch, gum, or sugar, which are the respiratory elements, an excess of which goes to the production of fatty matters, increases the butter in milk. Quietness promotes the secretion of fat in animals and increases the butter. Cheese will be increased by food rich in albumen, such as the leguminous plants.

The most natural, and of course the healthiest food for milch cows in summer, is the green grass of the pastures; and when those fail from drought, or over-stocking, the complement of nourishment may be made up with green clover, green oats, barley, millet, or corn-fodder, and cabbage-leaves, or other succulent vegetables; and if these are wanting, their place may be partly supplied with shorts, Indian-meal, linseed or cotton-seed meal. Green grass is more nutritious than hay, which always loses more or less of its nutritive qualities in curing; the amount of the loss depending chiefly on the mode of curing, and the length of exposure to sun and rain. But, apart from this, grass is more easily and completely digested than hay, though the digestion of hay may be greatly aided by cutting and moistening, or steaming; and by this means it is rendered more readily available, and hence far better adapted to promote a large secretion of milk—a fact too often overlooked by many even intelligent farmers.

That green grass is better adapted than most other kinds of food to promote a large flow of milk, may be seen from the following table, from which it will appear that greater attention should be given to the proper constituents of food for milch cows. Two cows were taken in the experiment.

Food of two cows.		Milk in five days.		Butter in five days.		Nitrogen in food in five days.
1.	Grass,	114	lbs.	3.50	lbs.	2.32	lbs.
2.	Barley and hay,	107		3.43		3.89
3.	Malt and hay,	102		3.20		3.34
4.	Barley, molasses, and hay,	106		3.44		3.82
5.	Barley, linseed, and hay,	108		3.48		4.14
6.	Beans and hay,	108		3.72		5.27

Here grass produced the largest flow of milk, but of a quality less rich than bean-meal and hay, which produced the richest quality; one hundred and eight pounds making more butter than one hundred and fourteen pounds of grass-made milk.

In autumn, the best feed will be the grasses of the pastures, so far as they are available, green-corn fodder, cabbage, carrot and turnip leaves, and an addition of meal or shorts. Towards the middle of autumn, the cows fed in the pastures will require to be housed regularly nights, especially in the more northern latitudes, and put, in part at least, upon hay. But every farmer knows that it is not judicious to feed out the best part of his hay when his cattle are first put into the barn, and that he should not feed so well in the early part of winter that he cannot feed better as it advances.

At the same time, it should always be borne in mind that the change from grass to a poor quality of hay or straw, for cows in milk, should not be too sudden. A poor quality of dry hay is far less palatable in the early part of winter, after the cows are taken from grass, than at a later period; and, if it is resorted to with milch cows, will inevitably lead to a falling off in the milk, which no good feed can afterwards wholly restore.

It is desirable, therefore, to know what can be used instead of his best English or upland meadow hay, and yet not suffer any greater loss in the flow of milk, or condition, than is absolutely necessary. In some sections of New England, the best quality of swale hay will be used; and the composition of that is as variable as possible, depending on the varieties of grasses of which it was made, and the manner of curing. But, in other sections, many will find it necessary to use straw, and other substitutes; and it may be desirable to know how much is required to form an equivalent in nutrition to good meadow or English hay. The following brief table of nutritive equivalents will be convenient for reference:

		Nutritive equivalent.	Percentage of Nitrogen.
			Dried.	Undried.
1.	Meadow hay,	100	1.34	1.15
2.	Red Clover-hay,	75	1.70	1.54
3.	Rye-straw,	479	0.30	0.24
4.	Oat-straw,	383	0.36	0.30
5.	Wheat-straw,	426	0.36	0.27
6.	Barley-straw,	460	0.30	0.25
7.	Pea-straw,	64	1.45	1.79

The following is the composition of these several substances, in which their relative value will more distinctly appear:

Water.	Woody fibre.	Starch, Gum, Sugar.	Gluten, Albumen, etc.	Fatty matter.	Saline matter.
14	30	40	7.1	2 to 5	5 to 10
14	25	40	9.3	3 to 5	9
12 to 15	45	38	1.3		4
12	45	35	1.3	0.8	6
12 to 15	50	30	1.3	2 to 3	5
12 to 15	50	30	1.3		5
10 to 15	25	45	12.3	1.5	4 to 6

From these tables it will be seen that, taking good English or meadow hay as the standard of comparison, and calling that one, 4.79 times the weight of rye-straw, or 3.83 times the weight of oat-straw, contains the same amount or nutritive matter; that is, it would take 4.79 times as much rye-straw to produce the same result as good meadow hay.

The more elaborate nutritive equivalents of Boussingault will be found to be very valuable and suggestive, and the following table is given in this connection for the sake of convenient reference.

NUTRITIVE EQUIVALENTS. (Practical and Theoretical.)

ARTICLES OF FOOD.	THEORETICAL VALUES.									Practical values, as obtained by experiments in feeding, according to
	Boussingault.				Fresenius.
	Water in 100 parts.	Nitrogen in 100 parts of dried substance.	Nitrogen in 100 parts of undried substance.	Nutritive equivalent.	Relative proportion of nitrogenized to non- nitrogenized substances.			Nutritive equivalent.		Block.		Petri.	Meyer.	Thaër.	Pabst.	Schwertz.	Schweit- zer.
English Hay,	11.0	1.34	1.15	100	-			100		100		100	100	100	100	100	100
Lucerne,	16.6	1.66	1.38	83	-			-		-		90	-	90	100	100	-
Red Clover-hay,	10.1	1.70	1.54	75	1	to	6.08	77	.9	100		90	-	90	100	100	-
Red Clover (green),	76.0	-	.64	311	-			-		430		-	-	450	425	-	-
Rye-straw,	18.7	.30	.24	479	1	to	24.40	527	7⁄12	200		500	150	666	350	-	267
Oat-straw,	21.0	.36	.30	383	1	to	12.50	445	5⁄12	200		200	150	190	200	400	200
Carrot-leaves (tops),	70.9	2.94	.85	135	-			-		-		-	-	-	-	-	-
Swedish Turnips,	91.0	1.83	.17	676	-			-		-		300	-	300	250	200	-
Mangold Wurzel,	-	-	-	-	1	to	7.26	391	1⁄3	366		400	250	460	250	333	366	2⁄3
White Silician Beet,	85.6	1.43	.18	669	-			-		-		-	-	-	-	-	-
Carrots,	87.6	2.40	.30	382	1	to	7.84	542	.1	366		250	225	300	250	270	300
Potatoes,	75.9	1.50	.36	319	1	to	9.00	330	5⁄12	216		200	150	200	200	200	200
Potatoes kept in pits,	76.8	1.18	.30	383	-			-		400		-	-	-	-	-	-
Beans,	7.9	5.50	5.11	23	1	to	2.8	34	5⁄12	30		54	50	73	40	-	30
Peas,	8.6	4.20	3.84	27	1	to	2.14	34	1⁄3	30		54	48	66	40	Boussin- gault	30
Indian Corn,	18.0	2.00	1.64	70	1	to	6.55	-		-		52	-	-	-	59	-
Buckwheat,	12.5	2.40	2.10	55	1	to	6.05	93	5⁄12	-		64	-	-	-	-	-
Barley,	13.2	2.02	1.76	65	1	to	4.25	-		33		61	53	76	50	-	35
Oats,	12.4	2.22	1.92	60	1	to	4.08	58	11⁄12	39	1⁄2	71	-	86	60	-	37	1⁄2
Rye,	11.5	2.27	2.00	58	1	to	4.42	58	1⁄16	33		55	51	71	50	-	33	1⁄2
Wheat,	10.5	2.33	2.09	55	1	to	2.42	38	5⁄6	27		52	46	64	40	-	30
Oil-cake (Linseed),	13.4	6.00	5.20	22	-			-		42		108	-	-	-	-	43

ARTICLES OF FOOD.	THEORETICAL VALUES.
	Boussingault.				Fresenius.
	Water in 100 parts.	Nitrogen in 100 parts of dried substance.	Nitrogen in 100 parts of undried substance.	Nutritive equivalent.	Relative proportion of nitrogenized to non- nitrogenized substances.			Nutritive equivalent.
English Hay,	11.0	1.34	1.15	100	-			100
Lucerne,	16.6	1.66	1.38	83	-			-
Red Clover-hay,	10.1	1.70	1.54	75	1	to	6.08	77	.9
Red Clover (green),	76.0	-	.64	311	-			-
Rye-straw,	18.7	.30	.24	479	1	to	24.40	527	7⁄12
Oat-straw,	21.0	.36	.30	383	1	to	12.50	445	5⁄12
Carrot-leaves (tops),	70.9	2.94	.85	135	-			-
Swedish Turnips,	91.0	1.83	.17	676	-			-
Mangold Wurzel,	-	-	-	-	1	to	7.26	391	1⁄3
White Silician Beet,	85.6	1.43	.18	669	-			-
Carrots,	87.6	2.40	.30	382	1	to	7.84	542	.1
Potatoes,	75.9	1.50	.36	319	1	to	9.00	330	5⁄12
Potatoes kept in pits,	76.8	1.18	.30	383	-			-
Beans,	7.9	5.50	5.11	23	1	to	2.8	34	5⁄12
Peas,	8.6	4.20	3.84	27	1	to	2.14	34	1⁄3
Indian Corn,	18.0	2.00	1.64	70	1	to	6.55	-
Buckwheat,	12.5	2.40	2.10	55	1	to	6.05	93	5⁄12
Barley,	13.2	2.02	1.76	65	1	to	4.25	-
Oats,	12.4	2.22	1.92	60	1	to	4.08	58	11⁄12
Rye,	11.5	2.27	2.00	58	1	to	4.42	58	1⁄16
Wheat,	10.5	2.33	2.09	55	1	to	2.42	38	5⁄6
Oil-cake (Linseed),	13.4	6.00	5.20	22	-			-

ARTICLES OF FOOD.	Practical values, as obtained by experiments in feeding, according to
	Block.		Petri.	Meyer.	Thaër.	Pabst.	Schwertz.	Schweit- zer.
English Hay,	100		100	100	100	100	100	100
Lucerne,	-		90	-	90	100	100	-
Red Clover-hay,	100		90	-	90	100	100	-
Red Clover (green),	430		-	-	450	425	-	-
Rye-straw,	200		500	150	666	350	-	267
Oat-straw,	200		200	150	190	200	400	200
Carrot-leaves (tops),	-		-	-	-	-	-	-
Swedish Turnips,	-		300	-	300	250	200	-
Mangold Wurzel,	366		400	250	460	250	333	366	2⁄3
White Silician Beet,	-		-	-	-	-	-	-
Carrots,	366		250	225	300	250	270	300
Potatoes,	216		200	150	200	200	200	200
Potatoes kept in pits,	400		-	-	-	-	-	-
Beans,	30		54	50	73	40	-	30
Peas,	30		54	48	66	40	Boussin- gault	30
Indian Corn,	-		52	-	-	-	59	-
Buckwheat,	-		64	-	-	-	-	-
Barley,	33		61	53	76	50	-	35
Oats,	39	1⁄2	71	-	86	60	-	37	1⁄2
Rye,	33		55	51	71	50	-	33	1⁄2
Wheat,	27		52	46	64	40	-	30
Oil-cake (Linseed),	42		108	-	-	-	-	43

The reader will find no difficulty in making this table of practical value in deciding upon the proper course of feeding to be pursued.

In winter the best food for cows in milk will be good sweet meadow hay, a part of which should be cut and moistened with water, as all inferior hay or straw should be, with an addition of root-crops, such as turnips, carrots, parsnips, potatoes, mangold wurzel, with shorts, oil-cake, Indian-meal, or bean-meal.

It is the opinion of most successful dairymen that the feeding of moist food cannot be too highly recommended for cows in milk, especially to those who desire to obtain the largest quantity. Hay cut and thoroughly moistened becomes more succulent and nutritive, and partakes more of the nature of green grass.

As a substitute for the oil-cake, hitherto known as an exceedingly valuable article for feeding stock, there is probably nothing better than cotton-seed meal, now to be had in large quantities in the market. This is an article whose economic value has been but recently made known, but which, from practical trials already made, has proved eminently successful as food for milch cows. An average specimen of this was submitted for analysis to Professor Johnson, who reported that its composition is not inferior to that of the best flax-seed cake, and that in some respects its agricultural value surpasses that of any other kind of oil-cake, as is shown in the following table, containing in column first the analysis of cotton-seed meal made by himself; in column second, some of the results obtained by Dr. C. T. Jackson on cake prepared by himself from hulled cotton-seed; in column third, an analysis of cotton-seed cake, made by Dr. Anderson, of Edinburgh; in column fourth, the average composition of eight samples of American linseed-cake; and in column fifth, an analysis of meadow hay, obtained by Dr. Wolff in Saxony, given as a means of comparison.

	I.	II.				III.	IV.	V.
Water,	6.82					11.19	9.23	16.94
Oil,	16.47				-	9.08	12.96	-
Albuminous bodies,	44.41				48.82	25.16	28.28	10.69
Mucilaginous and Saccharine matters,	12.74			-		48.93	34.22	40.11
Fibre,	11.76						9.00	27.16
Ash,	7.80				8.96	5.64	6.21	5.04
	100.00					100.00	100.00	100.00
Nitrogen,	7.05				7.75	3.95	4.47	-
Phosphoric acid in ash,	2.36				2.45	-	-	-
Sand,	.94				-	1.32	-	-

Johnson also remarks, in this connection, that the great value of linseed-cake, as an adjunct to hay for fat cattle and milch cows, has long been recognized; and is undeniably traceable in the main to three ingredients of the seeds of the oil-yielding plants. The value of food depends upon the quantity of matters it contains which may be appropriated by the animal which consumes the food. Now, it is proved that the fat of animals is derivable from the starch, gum, and sugar, and more directly and easily from the oil of the food. These four substances are, then, the fat-formers. The muscles, nerves, and tendons of animals, the fibrine of their blood, and the curd of their milk, are almost identical in composition, and strongly similar in many of their properties with matters found in all vegetables, but chiefly in such as form the most concentrated food. These blood (and muscle) formers are characterized by containing about fifteen and a half per cent. of nitrogen; and hence are called nitrogenous substances. They are also often designated as the albuminous bodies.

The bony framework of the animal owes its solidity to phosphate of lime, and this substance must be furnished by the food. A perfect food must supply the animal with these three classes of bodies, and in proper proportions. The addition of a small quantity of a food rich in oil and albuminous substances to the ordinary kinds of feed, which contain a large quantity of vegetable fibre or woody matter, more or less indigestible, but nevertheless indispensable to the herbivorous animals, their digestive organs being adapted to a bulky food, has been found highly advantageous in practice. Neither hay alone nor concentrated food alone gives the best results. A certain combination of the two presents the most advantages.

A Bavarian farmer has recently announced that heifers fed, for three months before calving, with a little linseed-cake, in addition to their other fodder, acquire a larger development of the milk-vessels, and yield more milk afterwards, than similar animals fed as usual. Cotton-seed cake must have an equally good effect.

Some of those who have used cotton-seed cake have found difficulty in inducing cattle to eat it. By giving it at first in small doses, mixed with other palatable food, they soon learn to eat it with relish.

On comparing the analyses II. and I. with the average composition of linseed-cake IV., it will be seen that the cotton-seed cake is much richer in oil and albuminous matters than the linseed-cake. A correspondingly less quantity will therefore be required. Three pounds of this cotton-seed cake are equivalent to four of linseed-cake of average quality.

During the winter season, as already remarked, a frequent change of food is especially necessary, both as contributing to the general health of animals, and as a means of stimulating the digestive organs, and thus increasing the secretion of milk. A mixture used as cut feed, and well moistened, is now especially beneficial, since concentrated food, which would otherwise be given in small quantities, may be united with larger quantities of coarser and less nutritive food, and the complete assimilation of the whole be better secured. On this subject Dr. Voelcker truly observes that the most nutritious kinds of food produce little or no effect when they are not digested by the stomach, or if the digested food is not absorbed by the lymphatic vessels, and not assimilated by the various parts of the body. Now, the normal functions of the digestive organs not only depend on the composition of the food, but also on its volume. The volume or bulk of the food contributes to the healthy activity of the digestive organs, by exercising a stimulating effect on the nerves which govern them. Thus the whole organization of ruminating animals necessitates the supply of bulky food, to keep the animal in good condition.

Feed sweet and nutritious food, therefore, regularly, frequently, and in small quantities, and change it often, and the best results may be confidently expected. If the cows are not in milk, but are to come in in the spring, the difference in feeding should be rather in the quantity than the quality, if the highest yield is to be expected from them the coming season.

The most common feeding is hay alone, and oftentimes very poor hay, at that. The main point is to keep the animal in a healthy and thriving condition, and not to suffer her to fail in flesh; and with this object some change and variety of food is highly important. And here it may be remarked that cows in calf should not, as a general rule, be milked the last month or six weeks before calving, and many prefer to have them run dry as many as eight or ten weeks. The yield of milk is better the coming season, and holds out better, than if they are milked up to the time of calving.

There are exceptions, however, and it is often very difficult to dry off a cow sufficiently to make it judicious to cease milking much, if any, before the time of calving. Some even prefer to milk quite up to this time; but the weight of authority among the best practical farmers is so decidedly against it, that there can be no question of its bad economy. Towards the close of winter, a herd of cows will begin to come in, or approach their time of calving. Care should then be taken not to feed too rich or stimulating food for the last week or two before this event, as it is often attended with ill consequences. A plenty of hay, a few potatoes or shorts, and pure water, will be sufficient.

As the time of calving approaches, the cow should be removed from the rest of the herd, to a pen with a level floor, by herself. Nothing is needed, usually, but to supply her regularly with food and drink, and leave her quietly to herself. In most cases the parturition will be natural and easy, and the less the cow is disturbed or meddled with, the better. She will do better without help than with; but she should be watched, in order to see that no difficulty occurs which may require aid and attention. In cases of difficult parturition the aid of a skilful veterinary surgeon may be required. For those who may desire to make themselves familiar with the details of such cases so far as to be able to act for themselves, Skellett’s “Practical Treatise on the Parturition of the Cow, or the Extraction of the Calf,” an elaborate work, published in London in 1844, will be an important guide.

In spring the best feeding for dairy cows will be much the same as that for winter; the roots in store over winter, such as carrots, mangold wurzel, turnips, and parsnips, furnishing very valuable aid in increasing the quantity and improving the quality of milk. Towards the close of this season, and before the grass of the pastures is sufficiently grown to make it judicious to turn out the cows, the best dairymen provide a supply of green fodder in the shape of winter rye, which, if cut while it is tender and succulent, and before it is half grown, will be greatly relished. Unless cut young, however, its stalk soon becomes hard and unpalatable.

Having stated briefly the general principles of feeding cows for the dairy, it is proper to give the statements of successful practical dairymen, both as corroborating what has already been said, and as showing the difference in practice in feeding and managing with reference to the specific objects of dairy farming. And first, a farmer of Massachusetts, supplying milk for the Boston market, and feeding for that object, says: “For thirty cows, cut with a machine thirty bushels for one feed; one third common English hay, one third salt hay, and one third rye or barley straw; add thirty quarts of wheat bran or shorts, and ten quarts of oat and corn meal moistened with water. One bushel of this mixture is given to each cow in the morning, and the same quantity at noon and in the evening. In addition to this, a peck of mangold wurzel is given to each cow per day. This mode of feeding has been found to produce nearly as much milk as the best grass feed in summer. When no wheat-bran or any kind of meal is given, the hay is fed without cutting.”

Another excellent farmer, of the western part of the same state, devoting his attention to the manufacture of cheese, and the successful competitor for the first prize of the state society for dairies, says of his feeding: “My pastures are upland, and yield sweet feed. I fed, in the month of June, all the whey from the milk made into cheese, without any meal. In September, my pastures being very much dried up, I fed all the whey, with one quart of meal to each cow, and also ten pounds of corn fodder to each cow per day.

“I commence feeding my cows in the spring, before calving, with three quarts of meal each per day, until the feed in the pasture is good.

“I consider the best mixture of grain, ground into meal, for milk, is equal quantities of rye, buckwheat, and oats. For the last ten years I have not made less than five hundred pounds of cheese and twenty pounds of butter to each cow; and one year I made six hundred and forty pounds of cheese and twenty pounds of butter to each cow.

“A cow will give more milk on good fresh grass than any other feed. When the grass begins to fail, I make up the deficiency by extra feed of meal and corn fodder. I feed all my whey to my cows. I let them run dry four months, and during this time I give them no extra feed, always keeping salt before them.”

Another, with one of the best butter dairies in the same state, explains his mode of management of cows in the stall as follows: “In the management of my stock the utmost gentleness is observed, and exact regularity in the hours of feeding while confined to the stable, and of milking throughout the year.

“The stock is fed regularly three times a day.

“In the morning, as soon as the milking is over, each cow (having been previously fed, and her bag cleaned by washing, if necessary) is thoroughly cleaned and groomed, if the expression may be used, with a curry-comb, from head to foot, and, when cleaned, turned out to drink. The stable is now cleaned out, the mangers swept, and the floors sprinkled with plaster; and as the cows return, which they do as soon as inclined, they are tied up and left undisturbed until the next hour of feeding, which is at noon.

“The cattle at this time are again turned out to drink, and, after being tied up on their return again, fed. Of course the stable is at this time again thoroughly cleansed. And so again at night the same course is pursued. At this time a good bedding is spread for each cow, and, after all are in, they are fed.

“At six o’clock the milking commences, and at its termination, after removing from the floor whatever manure may have been dropped, the stable is closed for the night. If carrots are fed, which is the only root allowed to my cows in milk, they are given at the time of the evening milking.

“Whatever material is taken for bedding (as corn-stalks, husks, &c.) is passed through a cutting-machine, and composes the noon feed, such portions as are not consumed by the cows being used for bedding. The additional labor of cutting up is amply compensated by the reduced amount of labor in working (loading) and ploughing under the manure.

“While I consider it highly desirable that the cows, during the period they are stabled, should be kept warm and dry, I regard it as indispensable that they should be perfectly clean; and, although the stock is stabled the whole time, care is taken that there is a sufficient degree of ventilation.”

In Herkimer county, New York, one of the best dairy districts in the country, a dairy farmer who kept twenty-five cows for the manufacture of cheese, making in one year nearly seven hundred pounds per cow, states his mode of feeding as follows: “When the ground is settled, and grass is grown so that cows can get their fill without too much toil, they are allowed to graze an hour, only, the first day; the second day a little longer, and so on, till they get accustomed to the change of feed before they are allowed to have full range of pasture. Shift of pasture is frequently made to keep feed fresh and a good bite. About one acre per cow affords plenty of feed till the first of August. If enough land was turned to pasture to feed the cows through the season, it would get a start of them about this time, and be hard and dry the balance of the season. To avoid turning on my meadows in the fall, I take one acre to every ten cows, plough and prepare it the fore part of June for sowing; I commence sowing corn broadcast, about half an acre at a time (for twenty-five cows), so that it may grow eighty or ninety days before it is cut and fed. I have found, by experiment, that it then contains the most saccharine juice, and will produce the most milk. If the ground is strong, I sow two bushels per acre; more if the ground is not manured.

“The common yield is from fifteen to twenty tons (of green feed) per acre. About the first of August, when heat and flies are too oppressive for cows to feed quietly in the day-time, I commence feeding them with what corn they will eat in the morning, daily, which is cut up with a grass-scythe, and drawn on a sled or wagon to the milk-barn and fed to them in the stalls, which is one hour’s work for a man at each feeding. When thus plentifully fed, my cows have their knitting-work on hand for the day, which they can do up by lying quietly under artificial shades, erected in such places as need manuring most, and are most airy, by setting posts and putting poles and bushes on top, the sides being left open. These shades may be made and removed annually, to enrich other portions of soil, if desired, at the small expense of one dollar for each ten cows. At evening, my cows are fed whey only, because they can feed more quietly, with less rambling, and will give more milk by feeding most when the dew is on the grass.

“The capacity of cows for giving milk is varied much by habit. In fall, after the season of feeding is past, I feed four quarts of wheat bran or shorts made into slop with whey, or a peck of roots to each cow, till milking season closes (about the first of December). When confined in stables and fed hay and milked, they are fed each one pail full of thin slop at morning before foddering, and also at evening, to render their food more succulent, and they will not drink so much cold water when let out in the middle of the day. In cold weather cows are kept well attended in warm stables. No foddering is done on the ground. Thus a supply of milk is kept up, and the cows get in good flesh, while their blood and bags are left in a healthy condition when dried off.

“This flesh they hold till milk season in spring, without other feed than good hay. They will not get fleshy bags, but come into milk at once. About the first of April they are carded daily, till they are turned to grass. Wheat-bran in milk or whey, slops, or roots, are daily fed, as they are found best adapted to the nature of different cows, and most likely to establish a regular flow of milk till grass comes.”

All practical dairymen concur in saying that a warm and well-ventilated barn is indispensable to the promotion of the highest yield of milk in winter; and most agree that cows in milk should not be turned out even to drink in cold weather, all exposure to cold tending to lessen the yield of milk.

In the London dairies, where, of course, the cows are fed so as to produce the largest flow of milk, the treatment is as follows: The cows are kept at night in stalls. About three A. M. each has half a bushel of grains. When milking is finished, each receives a bushel of turnips (or mangolds), and shortly afterwards one tenth of a truss of hay of the best quality. This feeding occurs before eight A. M., when the animals are turned into the yard. Four hours after, they are again tied up in their stalls, and have another feed of grains. When the afternoon milking is over (about three P. M.), they are fed with a bushel of turnips, and after the lapse of an hour, hay is given them as before. This mode of feeding usually continues throughout the root season, or from November to March. During the remaining months they are fed with grains, tares, and cabbages, and a proportion of rowen or second-cut hay. They are supplied regularly until they are turned out to grass, when they pass the whole of the night in the field. The yield is about six hundred and fifty gallons a year for each cow.

Mr. Harley, whose admirable dairy establishment has been already alluded to, as erected for the purpose of supplying the city of Glasgow with a good quality of milk, and which contributed more than anything else to improve the quality of milk furnished to all the cities of Great Britain, adopted the following system of feeding with the greatest profit: In the early part of summer, young grass and green barley, the first cutting especially, mixed with a large proportion of old hay or straw, and a good quantity of salt to prevent swelling, were used. As summer advanced less hay and straw were given, and as the grass approached ripeness they were discontinued altogether, but young and wet clover was never given without an admixture of dry provender. When grass became scarce, young turnips and turnip-leaves were steamed with hay, and formed a good substitute. As grass decreased the turnips were increased, and at length became a complete substitute. As the season advanced a large proportion of distillers’ grains and wash was given with other food, but these were found to be apt to make the cattle grain-sick; and if this feeding were long continued, the health of the cows became affected. Boiled linseed and short-cut wheat-straw mixed with the grains were found to prevent the cows from turning sick. As spring approached, Swedish turnips, when cheap, were substituted for yellow turnips. These two roots, steamed with hay and other mixtures, afforded soft food till grass was again in season. When any of the cows were surfeited, the food was withheld till the appetite returned, when a small quantity was given, and increased gradually to the full allowance.

But the most elaborate and valuable experiments in the feeding and management of milch cows are those recently made by Mr. T. Horsfall, of England, and published in the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society. His practice, though adapted, perhaps, more especially to his own section, is nevertheless of such general application and importance as to be worthy of attention. By his course of treatment he found that he could produce as much and as rich butter in winter as in summer.

His first object was to afford a full supply of the elements of food adapted to the maintenance and also to the produce of the animal; and this could not be effected by the ordinary food and methods of feeding, since it is impossible to induce a cow to consume a quantity of hay requisite to supply the waste of the system, and keep up, at the same time, a full yield of the best quality of milk. He used, to some extent, cabbages, kohl rabi, mangolds, shorts, and other substances, rich in the constituents of cheese and butter. “My food for milch cows,” says he, “after having undergone various modifications, has for two seasons consisted of rape-cake five pounds and bran two pounds, for each cow, mixed with a sufficient quantity of bean-straw, oat-straw, and shells of oats, in equal proportions, to supply them three times a day with as much as they will eat. The whole of the materials are moistened and blended together, and, after being well steamed, are given to the animals in a warm state. The attendant is allowed one pound to one and a half pounds per cow, according to circumstances, of bean-meal, which he is charged to give to each cow in proportion to the yield of milk; those in full milk getting two pounds each per day, others but little. It is dry, and mixed with the steamed food on its being dealt out separately. When this is eaten up, green food is given, consisting of cabbages from October to December, kohl rabi till February, and mangold till grass time. With a view to nicety of flavor, I limit the supply of green food to thirty or thirty-five pounds per day for each. After each feed, four pounds of meadow hay, or twelve pounds per day, is given to each cow. They are allowed water twice a day to the extent they will drink.”

Bean-straw uncooked being found to be hard and unpalatable, it was steamed to make it soft and pulpy, when it possessed an agreeable odor, and imparted its flavor to the whole mess. It was cut for this purpose just before ripening, but after the bean was fully grown, and in this state was found to possess nearly double the amount of albuminous matter, so valuable to milch cows, of good meadow or upland hay. Bean or shorts is also vastly improved by steaming or soaking with hot water, when its nutriment is more readily assimilated. It contains about fourteen per cent. of albumen, and is rich in phosphoric acid. Rape-cake was found to be exceedingly valuable. Linseed and cotton-seed cake may probably be substituted for it in this country. Mr. Horsfall is accustomed to turn his cows in May into a rich pasture, housing them at night, and giving them a mess of the steamed mixture and some hay morning and night; and from June to October they have cut grass in the stall, besides what they get in the pasture, and two feeds of the steamed mixture a day. After the beginning of October the cows are kept housed. With such management, his cows generally yield from twelve to sixteen quarts of milk (wine measure) a day, for about eight months after calving, when they fall off in milk, but gain in flesh, up to calving-time. In this course of treatment the manure is far better than the average, and his pastures are constantly improved. The average amount of butter from every sixteen quarts of milk is twenty-five ounces, a proportion far larger than the average. His investigations are very full and complete.—See [Appendix].

How widely does this course of practice differ from that of most farmers! The object with many seems to be to see with how little food they can keep the cow alive. Now, it appears to me that the milch cow should be regarded as an instrument of transformation. With so much hay, so much grain, so many roots, how can the most milk, or butter, or cheese, be made? The conduct of a manufacturer who owned good machinery, and an abundance of raw material, and had the labor at hand, would be considered as very absurd, if he hesitated to supply the material, and keep the machinery at work at least so long as he could run it with profit.

Stimulate the appetite, then, and induce the cow to eat, by a frequent change of diet, not merely enough to supply the constant waste of her system, but enough and to spare, of a food adapted to the production of milk of the quality desired.