horses, and though the latter were often sick and out of condition, the mules never were. One from his stock, 45 years old, was sold for the same price paid for a lot of young mules, being at that mature age perfectly able to perform his full share of labor.
For the caravans that pass over the almost inaccessible ranges which form the continuation of the Rocky Mountains, and the extensive arid plains that lie between and west of them, on the route from Santa Fé to California, mules are the only beasts of burden used in these exhausting and perilous adventures. Their value may be estimated from the comparative prices of mules and horses; for while a good horse may be bought for $10 to $20, a good mule is worth $50 to $75.
Dr. Lyman, who recently passed through those regions, informs us that their caravan left Santa Fé with about 150 mules, 15 or 20 horses, all beasts of burden, and two choice blood-horses, which were led and treated with peculiar care. On the route, all the working-horses died from exhaustion and suffering; the two bloods that had been so carefully attended, but just survived; yet of the whole number of mules but 8 or 10 gave out. A mule 36 years of age was as strong, enduring, and performed as hard labor, as any one in the caravan. When thirst compelled them to resort for successive days to the saline waters, which are the only ones furnished by those sterile plains, the horses were at once severely, and not unfrequently fatally affected; while the mules, though suffering greatly from the change, yet seldom were so much injured as to require any remission of their labor.
The mules sent to the Mexican possessions from our western states, Missouri, Tennessee, and Kentucky, are considered of much more value than such as are bred from the native (usually wild) mares. The difference probably arises, in part, from the Mexicans using jacks so inferior to most of the stock animals used by the citizens of those states.
Mare mules are estimated in those regions at one-third more than horse mules. The reason assigned for this is, that after a day's journey of excessive fatigue, there is a larger quantity of blood secreted in the bladder, which the female, owing to her larger passage, voids at once, and without much apparent suffering, while the male does not get rid of it, frequently, till after an hour of considerable pain. The effect of this difference is seen in the loss of flesh and strength in the male to an extent far beyond that of the female.
The method of reducing refractory mules in the northern Mex
ican possessions, is for the person to grasp them firmly by the ears, while another whips them severely on the fore-legs and belly.
Estimated annual saving to the United States from the employment of mules in the place of horses.—To sum up the advantages of working mules over horses, we shall have as advantages: 1. They are more easily, surely, and cheaply raised. 2. They are maintained, after commencing work, for much less than the cost of keeping horses. 3. They are not subject to many of the diseases of the horse, and to others only in a mitigated degree, and even these are easily cured in the mule. 4. They attain a greater age, and their average working years are probably twice that of the horse.
In 1840, there were reported to be 4,335,669 horses and mules in the Union, no discrimination having been made between them. Suppose the total number at the present time is 4,650,000, and that of these 650,000 are mules. If we deduct one-fourth, supposed to be required for the purposes of breed, fancy-horses, &c., we shall have 3,000,000 horses, whose places may be equally well supplied by the same number of mules. We have seen that Mr. Hood, of Maryland, estimates the expense of a working horse at $44 per annum, (not an over estimate for the Atlantic states,) while that of the mule is $22. The difference is $22, which it is proper to reduce to meet the much lower rate of keeping at the West. If we put the difference at $10, we shall find the saving in the keep, shoeing, farriery, &c., by substituting mules for the 3,000,000 horses that can be dispensed with, will be $30,000,000 per annum. But this is not all.
The working age of the horse will not exceed an average of eight years, while that of the mule is probably over sixteen. To the difference of keep, then, must be added the annual waste of the capital invested in the animal. A mule is more cheaply raised to working age than a horse, but allowing them to cost equally, we shall have the horse exhausting one-eighth of his capital annually for his decay, when the mule is using up but one-sixteenth; and if we allow $48 as the first cost of both animals, we shall find the horse wasting $6 annually for this item, while the mule deteriorates but $3, making an additional item of $9,000,000. This will give an aggregate of $39,000,000, as the annual saving to the United States by substituting good mules for three-fourths of the horses now used in this country. When will our farmers have the good sense to make this change? It may be fairly answered, when