Please see the [Transcriber’s Notes] at the end of this text.

The cover image has been created for this e-text, and is in the public domain.

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 L. FLINT,
SECRETARY OF THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE;
AUTHOR OF “A TREATISE ON GRASSES AND FORAGE PLANTS,” ETC.

LIBERALLY ILLUSTRATED.

BOSTON:
PHILLIPS, SAMPSON AND COMPANY,
13 WINTER STREET.
1859.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1858, by
CHARLES L. FLINT,
In the Clerk’s Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts.

Stereotyped by
HOBART A ROBBINS,
New England Type and Stereotype Foundery,
BOSTON.

PRINTED BY R. M. EDWARDS.

TO
THE MASS. STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE,
THE
MASS. SOCIETY FOR THE PROMOTION OF AGRICULTURE,
AND THE VARIOUS
AGRICULTURAL SOCIETIES OF THE UNITED STATES,
WHOSE EFFORTS HAVE CONTRIBUTED SO LARGELY TO IMPROVE THE
DAIRY STOCK OF OUR COUNTRY
This Treatise,
DESIGNED TO ADVANCE THAT HIGHLY IMPORTANT INTEREST,
IS RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED,
BY
THE AUTHOR.

CONTENTS.

PREFACE.

This work is designed to embody the most recent information on the subject of dairy farming. My aim has been to make a practically useful book. With this view, I have treated of the several breeds of stock, the diseases to which they are subject, the established principles of breeding, the feeding and management of milch cows, the raising of calves intended for the dairy, and the culture of grasses and plants to be used as fodder.

For the chapter on the diseases of stock, I am largely indebted to Dr. C. M. Wood, Professor of the Theory and Practice of Veterinary Medicine, and to Dr. Geo. H. Dadd, Professor of Anatomy and Physiology, both of the Boston Veterinary Institute. If this chapter contributes anything to promote a more humane and judicious treatment of cattle when suffering from disease, I shall feel amply repaid for the labor bestowed upon the whole work.

The chapter on the Dutch dairy, which I have translated from the German, will be found to be of great practical value, as suggesting much that is applicable to our American dairies. This chapter has never before, to my knowledge, appeared in English.

The full and complete explanation of Guénon’s method of judging and selecting milch cows,—a method originally regarded as theoretical, but now generally admitted to be very useful in practice,—I have translated from the last edition of the treatise of M. Magne, a very sensible French writer, who has done good service to the agricultural public by the clearness and simplicity with which he has freed that system from its complicated details.

The work will be found to contain an account of the most enlightened practice in this country, in the statements those actually engaged in dairy farming; the details of the dairy husbandry of Holland, where this branch of industry is made a specialty to greater extent, and is consequently carried to a higher degree of perfection, than in any other part of the world; and the most recent and productive modes of management in English dairy farming, embracing a large amount of practical and scientific information, not hitherto presented to the American public in an available form.

Nothing need be said of the usefulness of a treatise on the dairy. The number of milch cows in the country, forming so large a part of our material wealth, and serving as a basis for the future increase and improvement of every class of neat stock, on which the prosperity of our agriculture mainly depends; the intrinsic value of milk as an article of internal commerce, and as a most healthy and nutritious food; the vast quantity of it made into butter and cheese, and used in every family; the endless details of the management, feeding, and treatment, of dairy stock, and the care and attention requisite to obtain from this branch of farming the highest profit, all concur to make the want of such a treatise, adapted to our climate and circumstances, felt not only by practical farmers, but by a large class of consumers, who can appreciate every improvement which may be made in preparing the products of the dairy for their use.

The writer has had some years of practical experience in the care of a cheese and butter dairy, to which has been added a wide range of observation in some of the best dairy districts of the country; and it is hoped that the work now submitted to the public will meet that degree of favor usually accorded to an earnest effort to do something to advance the cause of agriculture.

DAIRY FARMING

CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTORY.—THE VARIOUS RACES OF PURE-BRED CATTLE IN THE UNITED STATES.

The milking qualities of our domestic cows are, to some extent, artificial, the result of care and breeding. In the natural or wild state, the cow yields only enough to nourish her offspring for a few weeks, and then goes dry for several months, or during the greater part of the year. There is, therefore, a constant tendency to revert to that condition, which is prevented only by judicious treatment, designed to develop and increase the milking qualities so valuable to the human race. If this judicious treatment is continued through several generations of the same family or race of animals, the qualities which it is calculated to develop become more or less fixed, and capable of transmission. Instead of being exceptional, or peculiar to an individual, they become the permanent characteristics of a breed. Hence the origin of a great variety of breeds or races, the characteristics of each being due to local circumstances such as climate, soil, and the special objects of the breeder, which may be the production of milk, butter and cheese, or the raising of beef or working cattle.

A knowledge of the history of different breeds, and especially of the dairy breeds, is of manifest importance. Though very excellent milkers will sometimes be found in all of them, and of a great variety of forms, the most desirable dairy qualities will generally be found to have become fixed and permanent characteristics of some to a greater extent than of others; but it does not follow that a race whose milking qualities have not been developed is of less value for other purposes, and for qualities which have been brought out with greater care. A brief sketch of the principal breeds of American cattle, as well as of the grades or the common stock of the country, will aid the farmer, perhaps, in making an intelligent selection with reference to the special object of pursuit, whether it be the dairy, the production of beef, or the raising of cattle for work.

In a subsequent chapter on the selections of milch cows, the standard of perfection will be discussed in detail, and the characteristics of each of the races will naturally be measured by that. In this connection, and as preliminary to the following sketches, it may be stated that, whatever breed may be selected, a full supply of food and proper shelter are absolutely essential to the maintenance of any milking stock, the food of which goes to supply not only the ordinary waste of the system common to all animals, but also the milk secretions, which are greater in some than in others. A large animal on a poor pasture has to travel much further to fill itself than a small one. A small or medium-sized cow would return more milk in proportion to the food consumed, under such circumstances, than a large one.

In selecting any breed, therefore, regard should be had to the circumstances of the farmer, and the object to be pursued. The cow most profitable for the milk-dairy may be very unprofitable in the butter and cheese dairy, as well as for the production of beef; while for either of the latter objects the cow which gave the largest quantity of milk might prove very unprofitable. It is desirable to secure a union and harmony of all good qualities, so far as possible; and the farmer wants a cow that will milk well for some years, and then, when dry, fatten readily, and sell to the butcher for the highest price. These qualities, though often supposed to be incompatible, will be found to be united in some breeds to a greater extent than in others; while some peculiarities of form have been found, by observation, to be better adapted to the production of milk and beef than others. This will appear in the following pages.

Fig. 1. Ayrshire Cow, imported and owned by Dr. Geo. B. Loring, Salem, Mass.

The Ayrshires

are justly celebrated throughout Great Britain and this country for their excellent dairy qualities. Though the most recent in their origin, they are pretty distinct from the other Scotch and English races. In color, the pure Ayrshires are generally red and white, spotted or mottled, not roan like many of the short-horns, but often presenting a bright contrast of colors. They are sometimes, though rarely, nearly or quite all red, and sometimes black and white; but the favorite color is red and white brightly contrasted, and by some, strawberry-color is preferred. The head is small, fine, and clean; the face long, and narrow at the muzzle, with a sprightly yet generally mild expression; eye small, smart, and lively; the horns short, fine, and slightly twisted upwards, set wide apart at the roots; the neck thin; body enlarging from fore to hind quarters; the back straight and narrow, but broad across the loin; joints rather loose and open; ribs rather flat; hind quarters rather thin; bone fine; tail long, fine and bushy at the end; hair generally thin and soft; udder light color and capacious, extending well forward under the belly; teats of the cow of medium size, generally set regularly and wide apart; milk-veins prominent and well developed. The carcass of the pure-bred Ayrshire is light, particularly the fore quarters, which is considered by good judges as an index of great milking qualities; but the pelvis is capacious and wide over the hips.

On the whole, the Ayrshire is good-looking, but wants some of the symmetry and aptitude to fatten which characterize the short-horn, which is supposed to have contributed to build up this valuable breed on the basis of the original stock of the county of Ayr; a county extending along the eastern shore of the Frith of Clyde, in the south-western part of Scotland, and divided into three districts, known as Carrick, Cunningham, and Kyle: the first famous as the lordship of Robert Bruce, the last for the production of this, one of the most remarkable dairy breeds of cows in the world. The original stock of this county, which undoubtedly formed the basis of the present Ayrshire breed, are described by Aiton, in his Treatise on the Dairy Breed of Cows, as of a diminutive size, ill fed, ill shaped, and yielding but a scanty return in milk. They were mostly of a black color, with large stripes of white along the chine and ridge of their backs, about the flanks, and on their faces. Their horns were high and crooked, having deep ringlets at the root,—the plainest proof that the cattle were but scantily fed; the chine of their backs stood up high and narrow; their sides were lank, short, and thin; their hides thick, and adhering to their bones; their pile was coarse and open; and few of them yielded more than six or eight quarts of milk a day when in their best plight, or weighed when fat more than from twelve to sixteen or twenty stones avoirdupois, at eight pounds the stone, sinking offal.

“It was impossible,” he continues, “that these cattle, fed as they then were, could be of great weight, well shaped, or yield much milk. Their only food in winter and spring was oat-straw, and what they could pick up in the fields, to which they were turned out almost every day, with a mash of weak corn and chaff daily for a few days after calving; and their pasture in summer was of the very worst quality, and eaten so bare that the cattle were half starved, and had the aspect of starvelings. A wonderful change has since been made in the condition, aspect, and qualities, of the Ayrshire dairy stock. They are not now the meagre, unshapely animals they were about forty years ago; but have completely changed into something as different from what they were then as any two breeds in the island can be from each other. They are almost double the size, and yield about four times the quantity of milk that the Ayrshire cows then yielded. They were not of any specific breed, nor uniformity of shapes or color; neither was there any fixed standard by which they could be judged.”

Aiton wrote in 1815, and even then the Ayrshire cattle had been completely changed from what they were in 1770, and had, to a considerable extent, at least, settled down into a breed with fixed characteristics, distinguished especially for an abundant flow and a rich quality of milk. A large part of the improvement then manifested was due to better feeding and care, but much, no doubt, to judicious crossing. Strange as it may seem, considering the modern origin of this breed, “all that is certainly known is that a century ago there was no such breed as Cunningham or Ayrshire in Scotland. Did the Ayrshire cattle arise entirely from a careful selection of the best native breed? If they did, it is a circumstance unparalleled in the history of agriculture. The native breed may be ameliorated by careful selection; its value may be incalculably increased; some good qualities, some of its best qualities, may be for the first time developed; but yet there will be some resemblance to the original stock, and the more we examine the animal the more clearly we can trace out the characteristic points of the ancestor, although every one of them is improved.”

Aiton remembered well the time when some short-horn or Dutch cattle, as they were then called, were procured by some gentlemen in Scotland, and particularly by one John Dunlop, of Cunningham, who brought some Dutch cows—doubtless short-horns—to his byres soon after the year 1760. As they were then provided with the best of pasture, and the dairy was the chief object of the neighborhood, these cattle soon excited attention, and the small farmers began to raise up crosses from them. This was in Cunningham, one of the districts of Ayrshire, and Mr. Dunlop’s were, without doubt, among the first of the stranger breed that reached that region. About 1750, a little previous to the above date, the Earl of Marchmont bought of the Bishop of Durham several cows and a bull of the Teeswater breed, all of a brown color spotted with white, and kept them some time at his seat in Berwickshire. His lordship had extensive estates in Kyle, another district of Ayrshire, and thither his factor, Bruce Campbell, took some of the Teeswater breed and kept them for some time, and their progeny spread over various parts of Ayrshire. A bull, after serving many cows of the estates already mentioned, was sold to a Mr. Hamilton, in another quarter of Ayrshire, and raised a numerous offspring.

About the year 1767, also, John Orr sent from Glasgow to his estate in Ayrshire some fine milch cows, of a much larger size than any then in that region. One of them cost six pounds, which was more than twice the price of the best cow in that quarter. These cows were well fed, and of course yielded a large return of milk; and the farmers, for miles around, were eager to get their calves to raise.

About the same time, also, a few other noblemen and gentlemen, stimulated by example, bought cattle of the same appearance, in color brown spotted with white, all of them larger than the native cattle of the county, and when well fed yielding much larger quantities of milk, and their calves were all raised. Bulls of their breed and color were preferred to all others.

From the description given of these cattle, there is no doubt that they were the old Teeswater, or Dutch; the foundation, also, according to the best authorities, of the modern improved short-horns. With them and the crosses obtained from them the whole county gradually became stocked, and supplied the neighboring counties, by degrees, till at present the whole region, comprising the counties of Ayr, Renfrew, Lanark, Dumbarton, and Stirling, and more than a fourth part of the whole population of Scotland, a large proportion of which is engaged in manufactures and commercial or mechanical pursuits, furnishing a ready market for milk and butter, is almost exclusively stocked with Ayrshires.

The cross with larger cattle and the natives of Ayrshire produced, for many years, an ugly-looking beast, and the farmers were long in finding out that they had violated one of the plain principles of breeding in coupling a large and small breed so indiscriminately together, especially in the use of bulls proportionately larger than the cows to which they were put. They did not then understand that no crosses could be made in that way to increase the size of a race, without a corresponding increase in the feed; and many very ill-shaped animals were the consequence of ignorance of a natural law. They made large bones, but they were never strong and vigorous in proportion to their size. Trying to keep large animals on poor pasture produced the same effect. The results of first crosses were therefore very unsatisfactory; but gradually better feeding and a reduction in size came to their aid, while in the course of years more enlightened views of farming led to higher cultivation, and consequently to higher and better care and attention to stock. The effect of crosses with the larger Teeswater or short-horn was not so disastrous in Ayrshire as in some of the mountain breeds, whose feed was far less, while their exposure on high and short pastures was greater.

The climate of Ayrshire is moist and mild, and the soil rich, clayey, and well adapted to pasturage, but difficult to till. The cattle are naturally hardy and active, and capable of enduring severe winters, and of easily regaining condition with the return of spring and good feed. The pasture-land of the county is devoted to dairy stock,—chiefly for making butter and cheese, a small part only being used for fattening cows when too old to keep for the dairy. The breed has undergone very marked improvements since Aiton wrote, in 1815. The local demand for fresh dairy products has very naturally taxed the skill and judgment of the farmers and dairy-men to the utmost, through a long course of years; and thus the remarkable milking qualities of the Ayrshires have been developed to such a degree that they may be said to produce a larger quantity of rich milk and butter in proportion to the food consumed, or the cost of production, than any other of the pure-bred races. The owners of dairies in the county of Ayr and the neighborhood were generally small tenants, who took charge of their stock themselves, saving and breeding from the offspring of good milkers, and drying off and feeding such as were found to be unprofitable for milk, for the butcher; and thus the production of milk and butter has for many years been the leading object with the owners of this breed, and symmetry of form and perfection of points for any other object have been very much disregarded, or, if regarded at all, only from this one point of view—the production of the greatest quantity of rich milk.

The manner in which this result has been brought about may further be seen in a remark of Aiton, who says that the Ayrshire farmers prefer their dairy bulls according to the feminine aspect of their heads and necks, and wish them not round behind, but broad at the hook-bones and hips, and full in the flanks. This was more than forty years ago, and under such circumstances, and with such care in the selection of bulls and cows with reference to one specific object, it is not surprising that we find a breed now wholly unsurpassed when the quantity and quality of their produce is considered with reference to their proportional size and the food they consume. The Ayrshire cow has been known to produce over ten imperial gallons of good milk a day.

Fig. 2. Ayrshire Bull “Albert,”
Imported and owned by the Mass. Soc. for Promoting Agriculture.

A cow-feeder in Glasgow, selling fresh milk, is said to have realized two hundred and fifty dollars in seven months from one good cow; and it is stated, on high authority, that a dollar a day for six months of the year is no uncommon income from good cows under similar circumstances, and that seventy-five cents a day is below the average. But this implies high and judicious feeding, of course: the average yield, on ordinary feed, would be considerably less.

Youatt estimates the daily yield of an Ayrshire cow, for the first two or three months after calving, at five gallons a day, on an average; for the next three months, at three gallons; and for the next four months, at one gallon and a half. This would be 850 gallons as the annual average of a cow; but allowing for some unproductive cows, he estimates the average of a dairy at 600 gallons per annum for each cow. Three gallons and a half of the Ayrshire cow’s milk will yield one and a half pounds of butter. He therefore reckons 257 pounds of butter, or 514 pounds of cheese, at the rate of 24 pounds to 28 gallons of milk, as the yield of every cow, at a fair and perhaps rather low average, in an Ayrshire dairy, during the year. Aiton sets the yield much higher, saying that “thousands of the best Ayrshire dairy-cows, when in prime condition and well fed, produce 1000 gallons of milk per annum; that in general three and three quarters to four gallons of their milk will yield a pound and a half of butter; and that 27¹⁄₂ gallons of their milk will make 21 pounds of full-milk cheese.” Mr. Rankin puts it lower—at about 650 to 700 gallons to each cow; on his own farm of inferior soil, his dairy produced an average of 550 gallons only.

One of the four cows originally imported into this country by John P. Cushing, Esq., of Massachusetts, gave in one year 3864 quarts, beer measure, or about 966 gallons, at ten pounds to the gallon, being an average of over ten and a half beer quarts a day for the whole year. It is asserted, on good authority, that the first Ayrshire cow imported by the Massachusetts Society for the Promotion of Agriculture, in 1837, yielded sixteen pounds of butter a week, for several weeks in succession, on grass feed only. These yields are not so large as those stated by Aiton; but it should, perhaps, be recollected that our climate is less favorable to the production of milk than that of England and Scotland, and that no cow imported after arriving at maturity could be expected to yield as much, under the same circumstances, as one bred on the spot where the trial is made, and perfectly acclimated.

In a series of experiments on the Earl of Chesterfield’s dairy farm, at Bradley Ball, interesting as giving positive data on which to form a judgment as to the yield, it was found that, in the height of the season, the Holderness cows gave 7 gallons 1 quart per diem; the long-horns and Alderneys, 4 gallons 3 quarts; the Devons, 4 gallons 1 quart; and that, when made into butter the above quantities gave, respectively, 38¹⁄₂ ounces, 28 ounces, and 25 ounces.

The Ayrshire, a cow far smaller than the Holderness, at 5 gallons of milk and 34 ounces of butter per day, gives a fair average as to yield of milk, and an enormous production of butter, giving within 4¹⁄₂ ounces as much from her 5 gallons as the Holderness from her 7 gallons 1 quart; her rate being nearly 7 ounces to the gallon, while that of the Holderness is considerably under 6 ounces.

The evidence of a large and practical dairyman is certainly of the highest value; and in this connection it may be stated that Mr. Harley, the author of the Harleian Dairy System, who established the celebrated Willowbank Dairy, in Glasgow, and who kept, at times, from two hundred and sixty to three hundred cows, always using the utmost care in selection, says that he had cows, by way of experiment, from different parts of the united kingdom. He purchased ten at one Edinburgh market, of the large short-horned breed, at twenty pounds each, but these did not give more milk, nor better in quality, than Ayrshire cows that were bought at the same period for thirteen pounds a head; and, on comparison, it was found that the latter were much cheaper kept, and that they improved much more in beef and fat in proportion to their size, than the high-priced cows. A decided preference was therefore given to the improved Ayrshire breed, from seven to ten years old, and from eight to twenty pounds a head. Prime young cows were too high-priced for stall feeding; old cows were generally the most profitable in the long run, especially if they were not previously in good keeping. The cows were generally bought when near calving, which prevented the barbarous practice called hafting, or allowing the milk to remain upon the cow for a considerable time before she is brought to the market. This base and cruel custom is always pernicious to the cow, and in consequence of it she seldom recovers her milk for the season. The middling and large sizes of cows were preferred, such as weighed from thirty-five to fifty stone, or from five hundred to eight hundred pounds.

According to Mr. Harley, the most approved shape and marks of a good dairy cow are as follows: Head small, long, and narrow towards the muzzle; horns small, clear, bent, and placed at considerable distance from each other; eyes not large, but brisk and lively; neck slender and long, tapering towards the head, with a little loose skin below; shoulders and fore quarters light and thin; hind quarters large and broad; back straight, and joints slack and open; carcass deep in the rib; tail small and long, reaching to the heels; legs small and short, with firm joints; udder square, but a little oblong, stretching forward, thin-skinned and capacious, but not low hung; teats or paps small, pointing outwards, and at a considerable distance from each other; milk-veins capacious and prominent; skin loose, thin, and soft like a glove; hair short, soft, and woolly; general figure, when in flesh, handsome and well proportioned.

If this description of the Ayrshire cow be correct, it will be seen that her head and neck are remarkably clean and fine, the latter swelling gradually towards the shoulders, both parts being unincumbered with superfluous flesh. The same general form extends backwards, the forequarters being light, the shoulders thin, and the carcass swelling out towards the hind quarters, so that standing in front of her it has the form of a blunted wedge. Such a structure indicates very fully developed digestive organs, which exert a powerful influence on the exercise of all the functions of the body, and especially on the secretion of the milky glands, accompanied with milk-veins and udder partaking of the same character as the stomach and viscera, being large and capacious, while the external skin and interior walls of the milk-glands are thin and elastic, and all parts arranged in a manner especially calculated for the production of milk.

A cow with these marks will generally be of a quiet and docile temper, which greatly enhances her value. A cow that is of a quiet and contented disposition feeds at ease, is milked with ease, and yields more than one of an opposite temperament; while after she is past her usefulness as a milker she will easily take on fat, and make fine beef and a good quantity of tallow, because she feeds freely, and when dry the food which went to make milk is converted into fat and flesh. But there is no breed of cows with which gentleness of treatment is so indispensable as with the Ayrshire, on account of her naturally nervous temperament. If she receives other than kind and gentle treatment, she will often resent it with angry looks and gestures, and withhold her milk; and if such treatment is long continued, will dry up; but she willingly and easily yields it to the hand that fondles her, and all her looks and movements towards her friends are quiet and mild.

As already remarked, the Ayrshires in their native country are generally bred for the dairy, and no other object; and the cows have obtained a just and world-wide reputation for this quality. The oxen are, however, very fitly as working cattle, though they cannot be said to excel other breeds in this respect. The Ayrshire steer may be fed and turned at three years old, but for feeding purposes the Ayrshires are greatly improved by a cross with the short-horns, provided regard is had to the size of the animals. It is the opinion of good breeders that a high-bred short-horn bull and a large-sized Ayrshire cow will produce a calf which will come to maturity earlier, and attain greater weight, and sell for more money, than a pure-bred Ayrshire. This cross, with feeding from the start, may be sold fat at two or three years old, the improvement being especially seen in the earlier maturity and the size. Even Youatt, who maintains that the fattening properties of the Ayrshires have been somewhat exaggerated, admits that they will fatten kindly and profitably, and that their meat will be good; while he also asserts that they unite, perhaps, to a greater degree than any other breed, the supposed incompatible qualities of yielding a great deal of milk and beef.

In the cross with the short-horn, the form becomes ordinarily more symmetrical, while there is, perhaps, little risk of lessening the milking qualities of the offspring, if sufficient regard is paid to the selection of the individual animals to breed from. It is thought by some that in the breeding of animals it is the male which gives the external form, or the bony and muscular system of the young, while the female imparts the respiratory organs, the circulation of the blood, the mucous membranes, the organs of secretion, &c.

If this principle is true, it follows that the milking qualities come chiefly from the mother, and that the bull can not materially alter the conditions which determine the transmission of these qualities, especially when they are as strongly marked as they are in the Ayrshire or the Jersey races. Others, however, maintain that it is more important to the perfection of their dairy to make a good choice of bulls than of heifers, because the property of giving much milk is more surely transmitted by the male than the female. Others still maintain that both parents are represented in the offspring, but that it is impossible to say beforehand what parts of the derivative system are to be ascribed to the one parent and what to the other, and that there is a blending and interfusion of the qualities of both which prevent the body of their progeny being mapped out into distinct regions, or divided into separate sets of organs, of which we can say, “This is from the father, that from the mother.”

Till this question is settled, it is safe, in breeding for the dairy, to adhere to the rule of selecting only animals whose progenitors on both sides have been distinguished for their milking qualities. But where the history of either is unknown, a resort to a well-known breed, remarkable for its dairy qualities, is of no small importance; since, though the immediate ancestors of a male may not be known, if he belongs to a dairy breed, it is fair to presume that his progenitors were milkers. A study and comparison of the size and form of the milk mirror, and other points, indicated by Guénon, on a subsequent page, are worthy of careful consideration in selecting animals to breed from for the dairy, not only among pure-bred animals, but especially in crossing. In the scale of points adopted in England and this country as the standard of perfection for an Ayrshire cow, the udder, on which Guénon placed so much reliance, is valued at twelve times as much as that of the Devon, “because,” as the judges affirm, “the Ayrshires have been bred almost exclusively with reference to their milking properties.”

We must conclude, then, that “for purely dairy purposes the Ayrshire cow deserves the first place. In consequence of her small, symmetrical, and compact body, combined with a well-formed chest and a capacious stomach, there is little waste, comparatively speaking, through the respiratory system; while, at the same time, there is very complete assimilation of the food, and thus she converts a large proportion of her food into milk. So remarkable is this fact, that all dairy farmers who have any experience on the point agree in stating that an Ayrshire cow generally gives a larger return of milk for the food consumed than a cow of any other breed. The absolute quantity may not be so great, but it is obtained at a less cost; and this is the point upon which the question of profit depends.”

I have dwelt thus at length upon this race for the reason that it is preeminently a dairy breed, surpassing all other pure breeds in the production of rich milk and butter on soils of medium fertility, and admirably adapted, in my opinion, to raise the character of our stock to a higher standard of excellence. The best milkers I have ever known, in the course of my own observations, were grade Ayrshires, larger in size than the pure bloods, but still sufficiently high grades to give certain signs of their origin. I have owned several such, which were all good cows. This grade would seem to possess the advantage of combining, to some extent, the two qualities of milking and adaptation to beef; and this is no small recommendation of the stock to farmers situated as American farmers are, who wish for milk for some years and then to turn over to the butcher.

The Jersey

cattle have now become widely known in this country. Many of them have been imported from an island of the same name in the British Channel, near the coast of France, and they may now be considered, I think, as fully acclimated. They were first introduced over thirty years ago, from the channel islands Alderney, Guernsey, and Jersey.

Fig. 3. Jersey Cow.[1]

[1] See [page 30].

The opinions of practical men differ widely as to the comparative merits of this race, and its adaptation to our climate and to the wants of our farmers. The most common decision, prevailing among many even of the best judges of stock, appears to be, that, however desirable the cows may be on the lawn or in a gentleman’s park, they are wholly unsuited to the general wants of the practical farmer. This may or may not be the case. If the farmer keeps a dairy farm and sells only milk, the quantity and not the quality of which is his chief care, he can satisfy himself better with some other breed. If otherwise situated,—if he devotes his time to the making of butter for the supply of customers who are willing to pay for a good article,—he may very properly consider whether a few Jerseys, or an infusion of Jersey blood, may not be desirable. Haxton calls the Jersey cow the cheese and butter dairyman’s friend when her milk is diluted with that of ten or a dozen ordinary cows, and his enemy if he should attempt to make either cheese or butter solely from her produce, as, from the excessive richness of the milk, neither will keep long; and, finally, an ornament to the rich man’s lawn, yet in aspect altogether devoid of those rounded outlines which constitute the criterion of animal beauty.

The Jersey race is supposed to have been derived originally from Normandy, in the northern part of France. The cows have been long celebrated for the production of very rich milk and cream, but till within a quarter of a century they were comparatively coarse, ugly, and ill-shaped. Improvements have been very marked, but the form of the animal is still far from satisfying the eye. The head of the pure Jersey is fine and tapering, the cheek small, the throat clean, the muzzle fine and encircled with a light stripe, the nostril high and open; the horns smooth, crumpled, not very thick at the base, tapering, and tipped with black; ears small and thin, deep orange color inside; eyes full and placid; neck straight and fine; chest broad and deep; barrel hooped, broad and deep, well ribbed up; back straight from the withers to the hip, and from the top of the hip to the setting on of the tail; tail fine, at right angles with the back, and hanging down to the hocks; skin thin, light color and mellow, covered with fine soft hair; fore legs short, straight and fine below the knee, arm swelling and full above; hind quarters long and well filled; hind legs short and straight below the hocks, with bones rather fine, squarely placed, and not too close together; hoofs small; udder full in size, in line with the belly, extending well up behind; teats of medium size, squarely placed and wide apart, and milk-veins very prominent. The color is generally cream, dun, or yellow, with more or less white, and the fine head and neck give the cows and heifers a fawn-like appearance, and make them objects of attraction in the park; but the hind quarters are often too narrow to look well, particularly to those who judge animals from the amount of fat they carry. We should bear in mind, however, that a good race of animals is not always the most beautiful, as that term is commonly understood. Beauty in stock has no fixed standard. In the estimation of some, it results mainly from fine forms, small bones, and close, compact frames; while others consider that structure the most perfect, and therefore the most beautiful, which is best adapted to the use to which it is destined. According to the latter, beauty is relative. It is not the same in an animal designed for beef and in one designed fer the dairy or for work. The beauty of a milch cow is the result of her good qualities. Large milkers are very rarely cows that please the eye of any but a skilful judge. They are generally poor, because their food goes mainly to the production of milk, and because they are selected with less regard to form than to good milking qualities. We meet with good milkers of all forms, from the round, close-built Devon to the coarsest-boned scrub; but, with all their varieties of form and structure, good cows will usually possess certain points of similarity and well-known marks by which they are known to the eyes of the judge.

It is asserted by Colonel Le Couteur, of the island of Jersey, that, contrary to the general opinion here, the Jersey cow, when old and no longer wanted as a milker, will, when dry and fed, fatten rapidly, and produce a good quantity and excellent quality of butcher’s meat. An old cow, he says, was put up to fatten in October, 1850, weighing 1125 pounds, and when killed, the 6th of January, 1851, she weighed 1330 pounds; having gained 205 pounds in ninety-eight days, on twenty pounds of hay, a little wheat-straw, and thirty pounds of roots, consisting of carrots, Swedes, and marigold wurzel, a day. The prevailing opinion as to the beauty of the Jersey is based on the general appearance of the cow in milk, no experiments in feeding exclusively for beef having been made, to my knowledge, and no opportunity to form a correct judgment from actual observation having been furnished; and it must be confessed that the general appearance would amply justify the hasty conclusion.

Fig. 4. Jersey Bull.

The bulls are usually very different in character and disposition from the cows, and are much inclined to become restive and cross at the age of two or three years, unless their treatment is uniformly gentle and firm. The accompanying [figure] very accurately represents one of the best animals of the race in the vicinity of Boston, which has been pronounced by good judges a model of a bull for a dairy breed.

The beautiful Jersey cow “Flirt,” figured on [page 26], received the first prize at the Fair of the Massachusetts State Board of Agriculture in 1857, which brought together the largest and finest collection of Jersey cattle ever made in this country. She is well-shaped, and a very superior dairy cow. Her dam, Flora, was very remarkable for the richness of her milk and the quantity of her butter, having made no less than five hundred and eleven pounds in one year, without extra feeding.

From what has been said it is evident that the Jersey is to be regarded as a dairy breed, and that almost exclusively. It is evident, too, that it would not be sought for large dairies kept for the supply of milk to cities; for, though the quality would gratify the customer, the quantity would not satisfy the owner. The place of the Jersey cow is rather in private establishments, where the supply of cream and butter is a sufficient object, or, in limited numbers, to add richness to the milk of large butter dairies. Even one or two good Jersey cows with a herd of fifteen or twenty, will make a great difference in the quality of the milk and butter of the whole establishment; and they would probably be profitable for this, if for no other object.

Other breeds are somewhat noted in Great Britain for their excellent dairy qualities, and among them might be named the Yorkshire and the Kerry; but they have never been introduced into this country to any extent; or, if they ever were, no traces of them as a distinct breed can now be found here.

Fig. 5. Short-horn Cow

The Short-horns.

—No breed of horned cattle has commanded more universal admiration during the last half-century than the improved Short-horns, whose origin can be traced back for nearly a hundred years. According to the best authorities, the stock which formed the basis of improvement existed equally in Yorkshire, Lincolnshire, Northumberland, and counties adjoining; and the preëminence was accorded to Durham, which gave its name to the race, from the more correct principles of breeding which seem to have prevailed there.

There is a dispute among the most eminent breeders as to how far it owes its origin to early importations from Holland, whence many superior animals were brought for the purpose of improving the old long-horned breed. A large race of cattle had existed for many years on the western shores of the continent of Europe. At a very early date, as early as 1633, they were imported from Denmark into New England in considerable numbers, and thus laid the foundation of a valuable stock in this country. They extended along the coast, it is said, through Holland to France. The dairy formed a prominent branch of farming at a very early date in Holland, and experience led to the greatest care in the choice and breeding of dairy stock. From these cattle many selections were made to cross over to the counties of York and Durham. The prevailing color of the large Dutch cattle was black and white, beautifully contrasted.

The cattle produced by these crosses a century ago were known under the name of “Dutch.” The cows selected for crossing with the early imported Dutch bulls were generally long-horned, large-boned, coarse animals, a fair type of which was found in the old “Holderness” breed of Yorkshire,—slow feeders, strong in the shoulder, defective in the fore quarter, and not very profitable for the butcher, their meat being “coarse to the palate and uninviting to the eye.” Their milking qualities were good, surpassing, probably, those of the improved short-horns. Whatever may be the truth with regard to these crosses, and however far they proved effective in creating or laying the foundation of the modern improved short-horns, the results of the efforts made in Yorkshire and some of the adjoining counties were never so satisfactory to the best judges as those of the breeders along the Tees, who selected animals with greater reference to fineness of bone and symmetry of form, and the animals they bred soon took the lead, and excited great emulation in improvement.

The famous bull “Hubback,” bred by Mr. Turner, of Hurworth, and subsequently owned by Mr. Colling, laid the foundation of the celebrity of the short-horns, and it is the pride of short-horn breeders to trace back to him. He was calved in 1777, and his descendants, Foljambe, Bolingbroke, Favorite, and Comet, permanently fixed the characteristics of the breed. Comet was so highly esteemed among breeders, that he sold at one thousand guineas, or over five thousand dollars. Hubback is thought by some to have been a pure short-horn, and by others a grade or mixture.

Many breeders had labored long previous to the brothers Charles and Robert Colling, especially on the old Teeswater short-horns; yet a large share of the credit of improving and establishing the reputation of the improved short-horns is generally accorded to the Collings. Certain it is that the spirit and discrimination with which they selected and bred soon became known, and a general interest was awakened in the breed at the time of the sale of Charles Colling’s herd, October 11, 1810. It was then that Mr. Bates, of Kirkleavington, purchased the celebrated heifer Duchess I., whose family sold, in 1850, after his decease, at an average of one hundred and sixteen pounds five shillings per head, including young calves. Many representatives of the Duchess family, which laid the foundation of Mr. Bates’ success as a breeder, have been brought to this country. They may, perhaps, be regarded as an exception to the modern improved short-horns, their milking qualities being generally very superior.

The sale referred to, and those of R. Colling’s herd, in 1818, and that of Lord Spencer, in 1846, as well as that of the Kirkleavington herd, in 1850, and especially that of the herd of Lord Ducie, two years later, are marked eras in the history of improved short-horns; and through these sales, and the universal enthusiasm awakened by them, the short-horns have become more widely spread ever Great Britain, and more generally fashionable, than any other breed. They have also been largely introduced into France by the government, for the improvement of the various French breeds by crossing, and into nearly every quarter of the civilized world.

Fig. 6. Short-horn Bull “Double Duke,” (1451¹⁄₂ Am. H. Book,)
Owned by Harvest Club, Springfield.

Importations have been frequent and extensive into the United States within the last few years, and this famous breed is now pretty generally diffused over the country.

The use of the early-imported short-horn bulls and native cows led to the formation of many families of grades, some of them bred back to the sire, and others crossed high up, which have attained a very considerable local reputation in many sections. As instances of this, may be mentioned the Creampot stock, obtained by Col. Jaques from a short-horn bull, Cœlebs, and a superior native cow. A family of fine milkers still exists in Massachusetts, known by the name of the “Sukey breed,” supposed to have been derived from “Denton,” a very superior animal imported by Mr. Williams, of Northboro’, some forty years ago. Many of the best milkers of that section can be traced back to him. The Patton stock, originally imported into Maryland and Virginia, in 1783, and thence to Kentucky, may be classed in the same category. A part of these were at first known as the “milk breed,” and others as the “beef breed:” the first short-horns, at that time good milkers, and the latter long-horns, of large size and coarse in the bone. In Kentucky they were all known as the Patton stock.

The high-bred short-horn is easily prepared for a show, and, as fat will cover faults, the temptation is often too great to be resisted; and hence it is common to see the finest animals rendered unfit for breeding purposes by over-feeding. The race is susceptible of breeding for the production of milk, as several families show, and great milkers have often been known among pure-bred animals; but it is more common to find it bred mainly for the butcher, and kept accordingly. It is, however, a well-known fact that the dairies of London are stocked chiefly with short-horns and Yorkshires, or high grades between them, which, after being milked as long as profitable, feed equal, or nearly so, to pure-bred short-horns.

It has been said, by very high authority, that “the short-horns improve every breed they cross with.”

The desirable characteristics of the short-horn bull may be summed up, according to the judgment of the best breeders, as follows: He should have a short but fine head, very broad across the eyes, tapering to the nose, with a nostril full and prominent; the nose itself should be of a rich flesh-color; eyes bright and mild; ears somewhat large and thin; horns slightly curved and rather flat, well set on a long, broad, muscular neck; chest wide, deep, and projecting; shoulders fine, oblique, well formed into the chine; fore legs short, with upper arm large and powerful; barrel round, deep, well ribbed home; hips wide and level; back straight from the withers to the setting on of the tail, but short from hip to chine; skin soft and velvety to the touch; moderately thick hair, plentiful, soft, and mossy. The cow has the same points in the main, but her head is finer, longer, and more tapering, neck thinner and lighter, and shoulders more narrow across the chine.

The astonishing precocity of the short-horns, their remarkable aptitude to fatten, the perfection of their forms, and the fineness of their bony structure, give them an advantage over most other races when the object of breeding is for the shambles. No animal of any other breed can so rapidly transform the stock of any section around him as the improved short-horn bull.

But it does not follow that the high-bred short-horns are unexceptionable even for beef. The very exaggeration, so to speak, of the qualities which make them so valuable for the improvement of other and less perfect races, may become a fault when wanted for the table. The very rapidity with which they increase in size is thought by some to prevent their meat from ripening up sufficiently before being hurried off to the butcher. The disproportion of the fatty to the muscular flesh, found in this to a greater extent than in races coming slower to maturity, makes the meat of the thorough-bred short-horn, in the estimation of some, both less agreeable to the taste and less profitable to the consumer, since the nitrogenous compounds, true sources of nutriment, are found in less quantity than in the meat of animals not so highly bred.

But the improved short-horn is justly unrivalled for symmetry of form and beauty. I have never seen a picture or an engraving of an animal which gave an adequate idea of the beauty of many specimens of this race, especially of the best bred in Kentucky and Ohio, where many excellent breeders, favored by a climate and pastures eminently adapted to bring the short-horn to perfection, have not only imported extensively from the best herds in England, but have themselves attained a degree of knowledge and skill equalled only by that of the most celebrated breeders in the native country of this improved race.

In sections where the climate is moist and the food abundant and rich, some families of the short-horns may be valuable for the dairy; but they are most frequently bred exclusively for beef in this country, and in sections where they have attained the highest perfection of form and beauty so little is thought of their milking qualities that they are often not milked at all, the calf being allowed to run with the dam.

Fig. 7. Imported Dutch Cow.

The Dutch

is a short-horned race of cattle, which, in the opinion of many, as I have already remarked, contributed largely, about a century ago, to build up the Durham or Teeswater stock. It has been bred with special reference to dairy qualities, and is eminently adapted to supply the wants of the dairy farmer.

Fig. 8. Imported Dutch Bull.

The cow, [Fig. 7], was bred in North Holland, and imported by Winthrop W. Chenery, Esq., of Watertown, in 1857. The bull, [Fig. 8], was also imported by Mr. Chenery at the same time, from near the Beemster, in the northerly part of Purmerend. Both animals are truthfully delineated, and give a correct idea of the points of the North Dutch cattle. For a more detailed description of this celebrated dairy race, see [pages 51] and [301].

Fig. 9. Hereford Cow.

Herefords.

—The Hereford cattle derive their name from a county in the western part of England. Their general characteristics are a white face, sometimes mottled; white throat, the white generally extending back on the neck, and sometimes, though rarely, still further along on the back. The color of the rest of the body is red, generally dark, but sometimes light. Eighty years ago the best Hereford cattle were mottled or roan all over; and some of the best herds, down to a comparatively recent period, were either all mottled, or had the mottled or speckled face. The expression of the face is mild and lively; the forehead open, broad, and large; the eyes bright and full of vivacity; the horns glossy, slender, and spreading; the head small, though larger and not quite so clean as that of the Devons; the lower jaw fine; neck long and slender; chest deep; breast-bone large, prominent, and very muscular; the shoulder-blade light; shoulder full and soft; brisket and loins large; hips well developed, and on a level with the chine; hind quarters long and well filled in; buttocks on a level with the back, neither falling off nor raised above the hind quarters; tail slender, well set on; hair fine and soft; body round and full; carcass deep and well formed, or cylindrical; bone small; thigh short and well made; legs short and straight, and slender below the knee; as handlers very excellent, especially mellow to the touch on the back, the shoulder, and along the sides, the skin being soft, flexible, of medium thickness, rolling on the neck and the hips; hair bright; face almost bare, which is characteristic of pure-bred Herefords. They belong to the middle-horned division of the cattle of Great Britain, to which they are indigenous. They have been improved within the last century by careful selections, the first step to this end having been taken by Benjamin Tomkins, of Herefordshire, who began about 1766, with two cows possessing a remarkable tendency to take on fat. One of these was gray, and the other dark red, with a mottled or spotted face.

Taking these as a foundation, Mr. Tomkins went on to build up a large herd, from which he sold to other breeders, from time to time, till at his decease, in 1819, the whole herd was disposed of at auction—fifty-two animals, including twenty-two steers and two heifers, varying in age from calves to two-year-olds, bringing an aggregate of four thousand six hundred and seventy-three pounds, fourteen shillings, or four hundred and forty-five dollars, thirty-seven and a half cents, a head. A bull was sold to Lord Talbot for five hundred and eighty-eight pounds, while several cows brought from a thousand to twelve hundred dollars a head.

Hereford oxen are excellent animals, less active but stronger than the Devons, and very free and docile. The demand for Herefords for beef prevents their being much used for work in their native county, and the farmers there generally use horses instead of oxen. A recent writer in the Farmer’s Magazine makes the following remarks on this head: “It is allowed on all hands, I believe, that the properties in which Herefords stand preëminent among the middle-sized breeds are in the production of oxen and their superiority of flesh. On these points there is little chance of their being excelled. It should, however, be borne in mind that the best oxen are not produced from the largest cows; nor is a superior quality of flesh, such as is considered very soft to the touch, with thin skin. It is the union of these two qualities which often characterizes the short-horns; but the Hereford breeders should endeavor to maintain a higher standard of excellence,—that for which the best of the breed have always been esteemed,—a moderately thick, mellow hide, with a well-apportioned combination of softness with elasticity. A sufficiency of hair is also desirable, and if accompanied with a disposition to curl moderately it is more in esteem: but that which has a harsh and wiry feel is objectionable.”

Fig. 10. Hereford Bull.

In point of symmetry and beauty of form, the well-bred Herefords may be classed with the improved short-horns, though they arrive somewhat slower at maturity, and never attain such weight. Like the improved short-horns, they are chiefly bred for beef, and their beef is of the best quality in the English markets, commanding the highest price of any, except, perhaps, the West Highlanders.

In an experiment carefully tried in 1828, for the purpose of arriving at the comparative economy of the short-horns and Herefords, the latter gained less by nearly one fourth than the former, which had consumed more food. The six animals, three of each breed, were sold after being fed, in Smithfield market, the Herefords bringing less by only about five dollars than the short-horns, while the cost of food consumed by the latter was greater, and the original purchase greater than that of the former.

The short-horn produces more beef at the same age than the Hereford, but consumes more food in proportion. “In all the fairs of England,” says Hillyard, “except those of Herefordshire and the adjoining counties, short-horn heifers are more sought after and sell at higher prices than the Hereford; but it is not so with fat cattle, for, with the exception of Lincolnshire and some of the northern counties, they much prefer the Herefords. Then at Smithfield, where the quality of the beef passes its final judgment, the pound of Hereford beef pays better than the pound of short-horn beef. Short-horn beeves produce at the same age a greater weight, it is true, but they also consume more food. I can easily conceive why, in the magnificent pastures of Lincolnshire, and some of the northern counties of England, they may prefer the short-horns; and that is, that they may keep a less number on a given quantity of land, and only the short-horn could, under these conditions, produce a greater weight of beef per acre. It is very difficult to decide which of the two races in England (the two best in the world) is the most profitable for stock-raisers and for the community.” There are, even in Lincolnshire, many good feeders who prefer the Herefords to the short-horns. One of these, when visited the past season, had thirty head of cattle feeding for the butcher, and only one short-horn. When asked the reason of this, he replied, “I am a farmer myself, and have to pay high rent, and I must feed the cattle that pay me best. Perhaps you think it would be more in fashion to cover my fields with short-horns; but I must look to the net profit, and I get much better with the Herefords. The short-horns are too full of fat and make too little tallow, and they consequently sell too low in the Smithfield market. Our Herefords are better, and they sell better.”

The Herefords are far less generally spread over England than the improved short-horns. They have seldom been bred for milk, as some families of the short-horns have; and it is not very unusual to find pure-bred cows incapable of supplying milk sufficient to nourish their calves. This system was pursued especially by Mr. Price, a skilful Hereford breeder, who sacrified everything to form, disregarding milking properties, breeding often from near relations, and thus fixing the fault incident to his system more or less permanently in the descendants of his stock.

The Herefords have been brought to this country, to some extent, and several fine herds exist in different sections; the earliest importations being those of Henry Clay, of Kentucky, in 1817. The figures of the two animals of this breed presented in this connection represent a bull and cow bred at the State Farm, in Massachusetts, and are good specimens of the breed.

The want of care and attention to the udder, soon after calving, especially if the cow be on luxuriant grass, often injures her milking properties exceedingly. The practice in the county of Hereford has generally been to let the calves suckle from four to six months, and bull-calves often run eight months with the cow. But their dairy qualities are perhaps as good as those of any cattle whose fattening properties have been so carefully developed; and, though it is probable that they could be bred for milk by proper care and attention, yet, as this change would be at the sacrifice of other qualities equally valuable, it would evidently be wiser to resort to other stock for the dairy.

Fig 11. Devon Cow.
Owned by William Buckminster Esq., Framingham Mass.

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.