Chapter III: Part 3

+---------------------+---------+----------------------------------+
| | | Digestible. |
| | +----------+------------+----------+
| | Total | | | Total |
| | Dry | Nitro- | Non-Nitro- | Nitro- |
| | Sub- | genous | genous | genous |
| | stance. | Sub- | Substance | and Non- |
| | | stance. |(as Starch).| Nitro- |
| | | | | genous |
| | | | |Substance.|
+---------------------+---------+----------+------------+----------+
| | lb. | lb. | lb. | lb. |
| 3.1 lb. Cotton cake | 2.76 | 1.07 | 1.50 | 2.57 |
| 2.7 lb. Bran | 2.33 | 0.33 | 1.09 | 1.42 |
| 2.8 lb. Hay-chaff | 2.34 | 0.15 | 1.18 | 1.33 |
| 5.6 lb. Oat-straw- | | | | |
| chaff | 4.64 | 0.08 | 2.21 | 2.29 |
|62.8 lb. Mangel | 7.85 | 1.01 | 5.73 | 6.74 |
| +---------+----------+------------+----------+
| Total | 19.92 | 2.64* | 11.71* | 14.35 |
| Required for sus- | | | | |
| tenance | | 0.57 | 7.40 | 7.97 |
| +---------+----------+------------+----------+
| Available for milk | | 2.07 | 4.31 | 6.38 |
| In 23.3 lb. milk | | 0.85 | 3.02 | 3.87 |
| +---------+----------+------------+----------+
| Excess in food | | 1.22 | 1.29 | 2.51 |
+---------------------+---------+----------+------------+----------+
| _Per 1000 lb. Live-Weight._ |
+---------------------+---------+----------+------------+----------+
| Wolff | lb. | lb. | lb. | lb. |
| | 24 | 2.5 | 12.5** | 15.4 |
+---------------------+---------+----------+------------+----------+
* Albuminoid ratio, 1-4.4.
** Exclusive of 0.4 fat; albuminoid ratio, 1-5.4.

Attention may next be directed to the amounts of food, and of certain of its constituents, consumed for the production of a given amount of milk. This point is illustrated in Table VI., which shows the constituents consumed per 1000 lb. live-weight per day in the case of the Rothamsted herd of 30 cows in the spring of 1884. On the left hand are shown the actual amounts of the different foods consumed per 1000 lb. live-weight per day; and in the respective columns are recorded--first the amounts of total dry substance which the foods contained, and then the amounts of digestible nitrogenous, digestible non-nitrogenous (reckoned as starch), and digestible total organic substance which the different foods would supply; these being calculated according to Lawes and Gilbert's own estimates of the percentage composition of the foods, and to Wolff's estimates of the proportion of the several constituents which would be digestible.

The first column shows that the amount of total dry substance of food actually consumed by the herd, per 1000 lb. live-weight per day, was scarcely 20 lb. whilst Wolff's[3] estimated requirement, as stated at the foot of the table, is 24 lb. But his ration would doubtless consist to a greater extent of hay and straw-chaff, containing a larger proportion of indigestible and effete woody fibre. The figures show, indeed that the Rothamsted ration supplied, though nearly the same, even a somewhat less amount of total digestible constituents than Wolff's.

Of digestible nitrogen substance the food supplied 2.64 lb. per day, whilst the amount estimated to be required for sustenance merely is 0.57 lb.; leaving, therefore, 2.07 lb. available for milk production. The 23.3 lb. of milk yielded per 1000 lb. live-weight per day would, however, contain only 0.85 lb.; and there would thus remain an apparent excess of 1.22 lb. of digestible nitrogenous substance in the food supplied. But against the amount of 2.64 lb. actually consumed, Wolff's estimate of the amount required for sustenance and for milk-production is 2.5 lb., or but little less than the amount actually consumed at Rothamsted. On the assumption that the expenditure of nitrogenous substance in the production of milk is only in the formation of the nitrogenous substances of the milk, there would appear to have been a considerable excess given in the food. But Wolff's estimate assumes no excess of supply, and that the whole is utilized; the fact being that he supposes the butter-fat of the milk to have been derived largely, if not wholly, from the albuminoids of the food.

It has been shown that although it is possible that some of the fat of a fattening animal may be produced from the albuminoids of the food, certainly the greater part of it, if not the whole, is derived from the carbohydrates. But the physiological conditions of the production of milk are so different from those for the production of fattening increase, that it is not admissible to judge of the sources of the fat of the one from what may be established in regard to the other. It has been assumed, however, by those who maintain that the fat of the fattening animal is formed from albuminoids, that the fat of milk must be formed in the same way. Disallowing the legitimacy of such a deduction, there do, nevertheless, seem to be reasons for supposing that the fat of milk may, at any rate in large proportion, be derived from albuminoids.

Thus, as compared with fattening increase, which may in a sense be said to be little more than an accumulation of reserve material from excess of food, milk is a special product, of a special gland, for a special normal exigency of the animal. Further, whilst common experience shows that the herbivorous animal becomes the more fat the more, within certain limits, its food is rich in carbohydrates, it points to the conclusion that both the yield of milk and its richness in butter are more connected with a liberal supply of the nitrogenous constituents in the food. Obviously, so far as this is the case, it may be only that thereby more active change in the system, and therefore greater activity of the special function, is maintained. The evidence at command is, at any rate, not inconsistent with the supposition that a good deal of the fat of milk may have its source in the breaking up of albuminoids, but direct evidence on the point is still wanting; and supposing such breaking up to take place in the gland, the question arises--What becomes of the by-products? Assuming, however, that such change does take place, the amount of nitrogenous substance supplied to the Rothamsted cows would be less in excess of the direct requirement for milk-production than the figures in the table would indicate, if, indeed, in excess at all.

The figures in the column of Table VI. relating to the estimated amount of digestible non-nitrogenous substance reckoned as starch show that the quantity actually consumed was 11.71 lb., whilst the amount estimated by Wolff to be required was 12.5 lb., besides 0.4 lb. of fat. The figures further show that, deducting 7.4 lb. for sustenance from the quantity actually consumed, there would remain 4.31 lb. available for milk-production, whilst only about 3.02 lb. would be required supposing that both the fat of the milk and the sugar had been derived from the carbohydrates of the food; and, according to this calculation, there would still be an excess in the daily food of 1.29 lb. It is to be borne in mind, however, that estimates of the requirement for mere sustenance are mainly founded on the results of experiments in which the animals are allowed only such a limited amount of food as will maintain them without either loss or gain when at rest. But physiological considerations point to the conclusion that the expenditure, independently of loss or gain, will be the greater the more liberal the ration, and hence it is probable that the real excess, if any, over that required for sustenance and milk-production would be less than that indicated in the table, which is calculated on the assumption of a fixed requirement for sustenance for a given live-weight of the animal. Supposing that there really was any material excess of either the nitrogenous or the non-nitrogenous constituents supplied over the requirement for sustenance and milk-production, the question arises--Whether, or to what extent, it conduced to increase in live-weight of the animals, or whether it was in part, or wholly, voided, and so wasted.

Table VII.--Percentage Composition of Milk each Month of the Year;
also Average Yield of Milk, and of Constituents, per Head per Day each
Month, according to Rothamsted Dairy Records.

+-----------+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| |Average Composition of Milk each| Rothamsted Diary. |
| | Month, 1884. +----------+----------------------+
| | (Dr Vieth--14,235 analyses.) | | Estimated Quantity |
| | | Average | of Constituents in |
| +--------+-------+------+--------+ Yield | Milk per Head per |
| | | | | | of Milk | Day each Month. |
| |Specific|Butter-|Solids| Total | per Head +-------+------+-------+
| |Gravity.| Fat. | not | Solids.| per Day, |Butter-|Solids| Total |
| | | | Fat. | | 6 Years. | Fat. | not |Solids.|
| | | | | | | | Fat. | |
+-----------+--------+-------+------+--------+----------+-------+------+-------+
| | | % | % | % | lb | lb | lb | lb |
| January | 1.0325 | 3.55 | 9.34 | 12.89 | 20.31* | 0.72 | 1.90 | 2.62 |
| February | 1.0325 | 3.53 | 9.24 | 12.77 | 22.81 | 0.80 | 2.11 | 2.91 |
| March | 1.0323 | 3.50 | 9.22 | 12.72 | 24.19 | 0.85 | 2.23 | 3.08 |
| April | 1.0323 | 3.43 | 9.22 | 12.65 | 26.50 | 0.91 | 2.44 | 3.35 |
| May | 1.0324 | 3.34 | 9.30 | 12.64 | 31.31 | 1.05 | 2.91 | 3.96 |
| June | 1.0323 | 3.31 | 9.19 | 12.50 | 30.81 | 1.02 | 2.83 | 3.85 |
| July. | 1.0319 | 3.47 | 9.13 | 12.60 | 28.00 | 0.97 | 2.56 | 3.53 |
| August | 1.0318 | 3.87 | 9.08 | 12.95 | 25.00 | 0.97 | 2.27 | 3.24 |
| September | 1.0321 | 4.11 | 9.17 | 13.28 | 22.94 | 0.94 | 2.11 | 3.05 |
| October | 1.0324 | 4.26 | 9.27 | 13.53 | 21.00 | 0.89 | 1.95 | 2.84 |
| November | 1.0324 | 4.36 | 9.29 | 13.65 | 19.19 | 0.84 | 1.78 | 2.62 |
| December | 1.0326 | 4.10 | 9.29 | 13.39 | 19.31 | 0.79 | 1.79 | 2.58 |
| +--------+-------+------+--------+----------+-------+------+-------+
| Mean | 1.0323 | 3.74 | 9.22 | 12.96 | 24.28 | 0.90 | 2.24 | 3.14 |
+-----------+--------+-------+------+--------+----------+-------+------+-------+
* Average over five years only, as the records did not commence until
February 1884.

As regards the influence of the period of the year, with its characteristic changes of food, on the quantity and composition of the milk, the first column of the second division of Table VII. shows the average yield of milk per head per day of the Rothamsted herd, averaging about 42 cows, almost exclusively Shorthorns, in each month of the year, over six years, 1884 to 1889 inclusive; and the succeeding columns show that amounts of butter-fat, of solids not fat, and of total solids in the average yield per head per day in each month of the year, calculated, not according to direct analytical determinations made at Rothamsted, but according to the results of more than 14,000 analyses made, under the superintendence of Dr Vieth, in the laboratory of the Aylesbury Dairy Company in 1884;[4] the samples analysed representing the milk from a great many different farms in each month.

It should be stated that the Rothamsted cows had cake throughout the year; at first 4 lb. per head per day, but afterwards graduated according to the yield of milk, on the basis of 4 lb. for a yield of 28 lb. of milk, the result being that then the amount given averaged more per head per day during the grazing period, but less earlier and later in the year. Bran, hay and straw-chaff, and roots (generally mangel), were also given when the animals were not turned out to grass. The general plan was, therefore, to give cake alone in addition when the cows were turned out to grass, but some other dry food, and roots, when entirely in the shed during the winter and early spring months.

Referring to the column showing the average yield of milk per head per day each month over the six years, it will be seen that during the six months January, February, September, October, November and December the average yield was sometimes below 20 lb. and on the average only about 21 lb. of milk per head per day; whilst over the other six months it averaged 27.63 lb., and over May and June more than 31 lb. per head per day. That is to say, the quantity of milk yielded was considerably greater during the grazing period than when the animals had more dry food, and roots instead of grass.

Next, referring to the particulars of composition, according to Dr Vieth's results, which may well be considered as typical for the different periods of the year, it is seen that the specific gravity of the milk was only average, or lower than average, during the grazing period, but rather higher in the earlier and later months of the year. The percentage of total solids was rather lower than the average at the beginning of the year, lowest during the chief grazing months, but considerably higher in the later months of the year, when the animals were kept in the shed and received more dry food. The percentage of butter-fat follows very closely that of the total solids, being the lowest during the best grazing months, but considerably higher than the average during the last four or five months of the year, when more dry food was given. The percentage of solids not fat was considerably the lowest during the later months of the grazing period, but average, or higher than average, during the earlier and later months of the year. It may be observed that, according to the average percentages given in the table, a gallon of milk will contain more of both total solids and of butter-fat in the later months of the year; that is, when there is less grass and more dry food given.

Turning to the last three columns of the table, it is seen that although, as has been shown, the percentage of the several constituents in the milk is lower during the grazing months, the actual amounts contained in the quantity of milk yielded per head are distinctly greater during those months. Thus, the amount of butter-fat yielded _per head per day_ is above the average of the year from April to September inclusive; the amounts of solids not fat are over average from April to August inclusive; and the amounts of total solids yielded are average, or over average, from April to August inclusive.

From the foregoing results it is evident that the quantity of milk yielded per head is very much the greater during the grazing months of the year, but that the percentage composition of the milk is lower during that period of higher yield, and considerably higher during the months of more exclusively dry-food feeding. Nevertheless, owing to the much greater quantity of milk yielded during the grazing months, the actual quantity of constituents yielded per Cow is greater during those months than during the months of higher percentage composition but lower yield of milk per head. It may be added that a careful consideration of the number of newly-calved cows brought into the herd each month shows that the results as above stated were perfectly distinct, independently of any influence of the period of lactation of the different individuals of the herd.

The few results which have been brought forward in relation to _milk-production_ are admittedly quite insufficient adequately to illustrate the influence of variation in the quantity and composition of the food on the quantity and composition of the milk yielded. Indeed, owing to the intrinsic difficulties of experimenting on such a subject, involving so many elements of variation, any results obtained have to be interpreted with much care and reservation. Nevertheless, it may be taken as clearly indicated that, within certain limits, high feeding, and especially high nitrogenous feeding, does increase both the yield and the richness of the milk.[5] But it is evident that when high feeding is pushed beyond a comparatively limited range, the tendency is to increase the weight of the animal--that is, to favour the development of the individual, rather than to enhance the activity of the functions connected with the reproductive system. This is, of course, a disadvantage when the object is to maintain the milk-yielding condition of the animal; but when a cow is to be fattened off it will be otherwise.

It has been stated that, early in the period of six years in which the Rothamsted results that have been quoted were obtained, the amount of oil-cake given was graduated according to the yield of milk of each individual cow; as it seemed unreasonable that an animal yielding, say, only 4 quarts per day, should receive, beside the home foods, as much cake as one yielding several times the quantity. The obvious inference is, that any excess of food beyond that required for sustenance and milk-production would tend to increase the weight of the animal, which, according to the circumstances, may or may not be desirable.

It may be observed that direct experiments at Rothamsted confirm the view, arrived at by common experience, that roots, and especially mangel, have a favourable effect on the flow of milk. Further, the Rothamsted experiments have shown that a higher percentage of butter-fat, of other solids, and of total solids, was obtained with mangel than with silage as the succulent food. The yield of milk was, however, in a much greater degree increased by grazing than by any other change in the food; and at Rothamsted the influence of roots comes next in order to that of grass, though far behind it, in this respect. But with grazing, as has been shown, the percentage composition of the milk is considerably reduced; though, owing to the greatly increased quantity yielded, the amount of soil-constituents removed in the milk when cows are grazing may nevertheless be greater per head per day than under any other conditions. Lastly, it has been clearly illustrated how very much greater is the demand upon the food, especially for nitrogenous and for mineral constituents, in the production of milk than in that of fattening increase.

MANURIAL VALUE OF FOOD CONSUMED IN THE PRODUCTION OF MILK

In any attempt to estimate the average value of the manure derived from the consumption of food for the production of milk, the difficulty arising from the very wide variation in the amount of milk yielded by different cows, or by the same cow at different periods of her lactation, is increased by the inadequate character of information concerning the difference in the amount of the food actually consumed by the animal coincidently with the production of such different amounts of milk. But although information is lacking for correlating, with numerical accuracy, the great difference in milk-yield of individual cows with the coincident differences in consumption to produce it, it may be considered as satisfactorily established that more food is consumed by a herd of cows to produce a fair yield of milk, of say 10 or 12 quarts per head per day, than by an equal live-weight of oxen fed to produce fattening increase. In the cases supposed it may, for practical purposes, be assumed that the cows would consume about one-fourth more food than the oxen. Accordingly, in the Rothamsted estimates of the value of the manure obtained on the consumption of food for the production of milk, it is assumed that one-fourth more will be consumed by 1000 lb. live-weight of cows than by the same weight of oxen; but the estimates of the amounts of the constituents of the food removed in the milk, or remaining for manure, are nevertheless reckoned per ton of each kind of food consumed, as in the case of those relating to feeding for the production of fattening increase. It may be added that the calculations of the amounts of the constituents in the milk are based on the same average composition of milk as is adopted in the construction of Table V. Thus the nitrogen is taken at 0.579 (= 3.65 nitrogenous substance)%, the phosphoric acid at 0.2175%, and the potash at 0.1875% in the milk.

Table VIII. shows in detail the estimate of the amount of nitrogen in one ton of each food, and in the milk produced from its consumption, on the assumption of an average yield of 10 quarts per head per day; also the amount remaining for manure, the amount of ammonia corresponding to the nitrogen, and the value of the ammonia at 4d. per lb. Similar particulars are also given in relation to the phosphoric acid and the potash consumed in the food, removed in the milk, and remaining for manure, &c. This table will serve as a sufficient illustration of the mode of estimating the _total or original_ value of the manure, derived from the consumption of the different foods for the production of milk in the case supposed; that is, assuming an average yield of a herd of 10 quarts per head per day.

In Table IX. are given the results of similar detailed calculations of the _total or original_ manure-value (as in Table VIII. for 10 quarts), on the alternative assumptions of a yield of 6, 8, 12 or 14 quarts per head per day. For comparison there is also given, in the first column, the estimate of the _total or original_ manure-value when the foods are consumed for the production of fattening increase.

So much for the plan and results of the estimations of _total or original_ manure-value of the different foods, that is, deducting only the constituents removed in the milk, and reckoning the remainder at the prices at which they can be purchased in artificial manures. With a view to direct application to practice, however, it is necessary to estimate the _unexhausted manure-value_ of the different foods, or what may be called their _compensation-value_, after they have been used for a series of years by the outgoing tenant and he has realized a certain portion of the manure-value in his increased crops. In the calculations for this purpose the rule is to deduct one-half of the _original manure-value_ of the food used the last year, and one-third of the remainder each year to the eighth, in the case of all the more concentrated foods and of the roots--in fact, of all the foods in the list excepting the hays and the straws. For these, which contain larger amounts of indigestible matter, and the constituents of which will be more slowly available to crops, two-thirds of the _original manure-value_ is deducted for the last year, and only one-fifth from year to year to the eighth year back. The results of the estimates of _compensation-value_ so made are given for the five yields of 6, 8, 10, 12 and 14 quarts of milk per head per day respectively in Lawes and Gilbert's paper[6] on the valuation of the manures obtained by the consumption of foods for the production of milk, which may be consulted for fuller details. It must, however, be borne in mind that when cows are fed in sheds or yards the manure is generally liable to greater losses than is the case with fattening oxen. The manure of the cow contains much more water in proportion to solid matter than that of the ox. Water will, besides, frequently be used for washing, and it may be that a good deal of the manure is washed into drains and lost. In the event, therefore, of a claim for compensation, the management and disposal of the manure requires the attention of the valuer. Indeed, the varying circumstances that will arise in practice must be carefully considered. Bearing these in mind, the estimates may be accepted as at any rate the best approximation to the truth that existing knowledge provides; and they should be found sufficient for the requirements of practical use. Obviously they will be more directly applicable in the case of cows feeding entirely on the foods enumerated in the list, and not depending largely on grass; but, even when the animals are partially grass-fed, the value of the manure derived from the additional dry food or roots may be estimated according to the scale given.

TABLE VIII.--_Estimates of the Total or Original Manure-Value of
Cattle Foods after Consumption by Cows for the Production of Milk.
Valuation on the assumption of an average production by a herd of 10
quarts of milk per head per day._

+----+---------+---------------------------------------+-----------------------------+--------------------------+---------+
| | | Nitrogen. | Phosphoric Acid. | Potash. | |
| | +-------+------+------------------------+-------+------+--------------+------+-----+-------------+Total or |
| | | | | In Manure. | | | In Manure. | | | In Manure. |Original |
| | Descrip-| | In +------------------------+ | In +-------+------+ | In +-------+-----+ Manure- |
|Nos.| tion of | In | Milk | | Nitro-| Value | In | Milk | | Value| In | Milk| |Value| Value |
| | Food. | 1 Ton | from | Total | gen | of Am- | 1 Ton | from | Total | at | 1 Ton| from| Total | at | per Ton |
| | | of |1 Ton |remain-| equal | monia | of |1 Ton |remain-| 2 d. | of |1 Ton|remain-|1-1/2| of Food |
| | | Food.| of |ing for| Am- | at 4 d.| Food. | of |ing for| per | Food.| of |ing for| d. |consumed.|
| | | | Food.|Manure.| monia.| per | | Food.|Manure.| lb. | |Food.|Manure.| per | |
| | | | | | | lb. | | | | | | | | lb. | |
+----+---------+-------+------+-------+-------+--------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-----+-------+-----+---------+
| | | lb. | lb. | lb. | lb. |L s. d.| lb. | lb. | lb. | s. d.| lb. | lb. | lb. |s. d.| L s. d.|
| 1 |Linseed | 80.64 |25.04 | 55.60 | 67.52 |1 2 6 | 34.50 | 9.34 | 25.16 | 4 2 |30.69 | 8.02| 22.67 | 2 10| 1 9 6 |
| 2 |Linseed | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | cake |106.40 |20.86 | 85.54 |103.87 |1 14 7 | 44.80 | 7.79 | 37.01 | 6 2 |31.36 | 6.71| 24.65 | 3 1| 2 3 10 |
| 3 |Decort- | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | icated | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | cotton | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | cake |147.84 |19.27 |128.57 |156.13 |2 12 1 | 69.44 | 7.18 | 62.26 |10 5 |44.80 | 6.22| 38.58 | 4 10| 3 7 4 |
| 4 |Palm-nut | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | cake | 56.00 |17.86 | 38.14 | 46.31 |0 15 5 | 26.88 | 6.68 | 20.20 | 3 4 |11.20 | 5.73| 5.47 | 0 8| 0 19 5 |
| 5 |Undecor- | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | ticated | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | cotton | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | cake | 84.00 |15.66 | 68.34 | 82.99 |1 7 8 | 44.80 | 5.85 | 38.95 | 6 6 |44.80 | 5.07| 39.73 | 5 0| 1 19 2 |
| 6 |Cocoa- | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | nut cake| 76.16 |15.66 | 60.50 | 73.47 |1 4 6 | 31.36 | 5.85 | 25.51 | 4 3 |44.80 | 5.07| 39.73 | 5 0| 1 13 9 |
| 7 |Rape | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | cake |109.76 |12.50 | 97.26 |118.11 |1 19 4 | 56.00 | 4.69 | 51.31 | 8 7 |33.60 | 4.09| 29.51 | 3 8| 2 11 7 |
| | +-------+------+-------+-------+--------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-----+-------+-----+---------+
| 8 |Peas | 80.64 |17.86 | 62.78 | 76.24 |1 5 5 | 19.04 | 6.68 | 12.36 | 2 1 |21.50 | 5.73| 15.77 | 2 0| 1 9 6 |
| 9 |Beans | 89.60 |17.86 | 71.74 | 87.12 |1 9 0 | 24.64 | 6.68 | 17.96 | 3 0 |29.12 | 5.73| 23.39 | 2 11| 1 14 11 |
| 10 |Lentils | 94.08 |17.86 | 76.22 | 92.56 |1 10 10 | 16.80 | 6.68 | 10.12 | 1 8 |15.68 | 5.73| 9.95 | 1 3| 1 13 9 |
| 11 |Tares | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | (seed) | 94.08 |17.86 | 76.22 | 92.56 |1 10 10 | 17.92 | 6.68 | 11.24 | 1 10 |17.92 | 5.73| 12.19 | 1 6| 1 14 2 |
| 12 |Maize | 38.08 |17.38 | 20.70 | 25.14 |0 8 5 | 13.44 | 6.50 | 6.94 | 1 2 | 8.29 | 5.56| 2.73 | 0 4| 0 9 11 |
| 13 |Wheat | 40.32 |17.38 | 22.94 | 27.86 |0 9 3 | 19.04 | 6.50 | 12.54 | 2 1 |11.87 | 5.56| 6.31 | 0 9| 0 12 1 |
| 14 |Malt | 38.08 |17.86 | 20.22 | 24.55 |0 8 2 | 17.92 | 6.68 | 11.24 | 1 10 |11.20 | 5.73| 5.47 | 0 8| 0 10 8 |
| 15 |Barley | 36.96 |17.38 | 19.58 | 23.78 |0 7 11 | 16.80 | 6.50 | 10.30 | 1 9 |12.32 | 5.56| 6.76 | 0 10| 0 10 6 |
| 16 |Oats | 44.80 |16.68 | 28.12 | 34.15 |0 11 5 | 13.44 | 6.24 | 7.20 | 1 2 |11.20 | 5.40| 5.80 | 0 9| 0 13 4 |
| 17 |Rice meal| 42.56 |16.68 | 25.88 | 31.43 |0 10 6 |(13.44)| 6.24 | 7.20 | 1 2 |(8.29)| 5.40| 2.89 | 0 4| 0 12 0 |
| 18 |Locust | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | beans | 26.88 |13.90 | 12.98 | 15.76 |0 5 3 | .. | 5.19 | .. | .. | .. | 4.42| .. | .. | .. |
| | +-------+------+-------+-------+--------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-----+-------+-----+---------+
| 19 |Malt | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | coombs | 87.36 |15.66 | 71.70 | 87.07 |1 9 0 | 44.80 | 5.85 | 38.95 | 6 6 |44.80 | 5.07| 39.73 | 5 0| 2 0 6 |
| 20 |Fine | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | pollard | 54.88 |16.68 | 38.20 | 46.39 |0 15 6 | 64.96 | 6.24 | 58.72 | 9 9 |32.70 | 5.40| 27.30 | 3 5| 1 8 8 |
| 21 |Coarse | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | pollard | 56.00 |15.66 | 40.34 | 48.99 |0 16 4 | 78.40 | 5.85 | 72.55 |12 1 |33.60 | 5.07| 28.53 | 3 7| 1 12 0 |
| 22 |Bran | 56.00 |13.90 | 42.10 | 51.12 |0 17 0 | 80.64 | 5.19 | 75.45 |12 7 |32.48 | 4.42| 28.06 | 3 6| 1 13 1 |
| | +-------+------+-------+-------+--------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-----+-------+-----+---------+
| 23 |Clover | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | hay | 53.76 | 8.94 | 44.82 | 54.43 |0 18 2 | 12.77 | 3.35 | 9.42 | 1 7 |33.60 | 2.94| 30.66 | 3 10| 1 3 7 |
| 24 |Meadow | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | hay | 33.60 | 8.36 | 25.24 | 30.65 |0 10 3 | 8.96 | 3.10 | 5.86 | 1 0 |35.84 | 2.62| 33.22 | 4 2| 0 15 5 |
| | +-------+------+-------+-------+--------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-----+-------+-----+---------+
| 25 |Pea straw| 22.40 | 7.83 | 14.57 | 17.69 |0 5 11 | 7.84 | 2.91 | 4.93 | 0 10 |22.40 | 2.46| 19.94 | 2 6| 0 9 3 |
| 26 |Oat straw| 11.20 | 6.95 | 4.25 | 5.16 |0 1 9 | 5.38 | 2.60 | 2.78 | 0 6 |22.40 | 2.29| 20.11 | 2 6| 0 4 9 |
| 27 |Wheat | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | straw | 10.08 | 5.98 | 4.10 | 4.98 |0 1 8 | 5.38 | 2.23 | 3.15 | 0 6 |17.92 | 1.96| 15.96 | 2 0| 0 4 2 |
| 28 |Barley | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | straw | 8.96 | 5.46 | 3.50 | 4.25 |0 1 5 | 4.03 | 2.04 | 1.99 | 0 4 |22.40 | 1.80| 20.60 | 2 7| 0 4 4 |
| 29 |Bean | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | straw | 20.16 | 5.68 | 14.48 | 17.58 |0 5 10 | 6.72 | 2.14 | 4.58 | 0 9 |22.40 | 1.80| 20.60 | 2 7| 0 9 2 |
| | +-------+------+-------+-------+--------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-----+-------+-----+---------+
| 30 |Potatoes | 5.60 | 2.07 | 3.53 | 4.29 |0 1 5 | 3.36 | 0.78 | 2.58 | 0 5 |12.32 | 0.66| 11.66 | 1 5| 0 3 3 |
| 31 |Carrots | 4.48 | 1.46 | 3.02 | 3.67 |0 1 3 | 2.02 | 0.54 | 1.48 | 0 3 | 6.27 | 0.49| 5.78 | 0 9| 0 2 3 |
| 32 |Parsnips | 4.93 | 1.67 | 3.26 | 3.96 |0 1 4 | 4.26 | 0.63 | 3.63 | 0 7 | 8.06 | 0.49| 7.57 | 0 11| 0 2 10 |
| 33 |Mangel | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | wurzels | 4.93 | 1.32 | 3.61 | 4.38 |0 1 6 | 1.57 | 0.49 | 1.08 | 0 2 | 8.96 | 0.49| 8.47 | 1 1| 0 2 9 |
| 34 |Swedish | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | turnips | 5.60 | 1.14 | 4.46 | 5.42 |0 1 10 | 1.34 | 0.44 | 0.90 | 0 2 | 4.93 | 0.33| 4.60 | 0 7| 0 2 7 |
| 35 |Yellow | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | turnips | 4.48 | 0.93 | 3.55 | 4.31 |0 1 5 | (1.34)| 0.34 | 1.00 | 0 2 |(4.93)| 0.33| (4.60)| 0 7| 0 2 2 |
| 36 |White | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | turnips | 4.03 | 0.84 | 3.19 | 3.87 |0 1 3 | 1.12 | 0.31 | 0.81 | 0 2 | 6.72 | 0.33| 6.39 | 0 10| 0 2 3 |
+----+---------+-------+------+-------+-------+--------+-------+------+-------+------+------+-----+-------+-----+---------+

CHEESE AND CHEESE-MAKING

For generations, perhaps for centuries, the question has been discussed as to why there should be so large a proportion of bad and inferior cheese and so small a proportion of really good cheese made in farmhouses throughout the land. That the result is not wholly due to skill and care or to the absence of these qualities on the part of the dairymaid may now be taken for granted. Instances might be quoted in which the most painstaking of dairymaids, in the cleanest of dairies, have failed to produce cheese of even second-rate quality and character, and yet others in which excellent cheese has been made under commonplace conditions as to skill and equipment, and with not much regard to cleanliness in the dairy. The explanation of what was so long a mystery has been found in the domain of ferments. It is now known that whilst various micro-organisms, which in many dairies have free access to the milk, have ruined an incalculable quantity of cheese--and of butter also--neither cheese nor butter of first-rate quality can be made without the aid of lactic acid bacilli. As an illustrative case, mention may be made of that of two most painstaking dairymaids who had tried in vain to make good cheese from the freshest of milk in the cleanest of dairies in North Lancashire. Advice to resort to the use of the ferment was acted upon, and the result was a revelation and a transformation, excellent prize-winning cheese being made from that time forward. By the addition of a "starter," in the form of a small quantity of sour milk, whey or buttermilk, in an advanced stage of fermentation, the development of acidity in the main body of milk is accelerated. It has been ascertained that the starter is practically a culture of bacteria, which, if desired, may be obtained as a pure culture. Professor J. R. Campbell, as the result of experiments on pure cultures for Cheddar cheese-making, states[7] that (1) first-class Cheddar cheese can be made by using pure cultures of a lactic organism; (2) this organism abounds in all samples of sour milk and sour whey; (3) the use of a whey starter is attended with results equal in every respect to those obtained from a milk-starter. It is well within the power of any dairyman to prepare what is practically a pure culture of the same bacterium as is supplied from the laboratory. Moreover, the sour-whey starter used by some of the successful cheese-makers before the introduction of the American system is in effect a pure culture, from which it follows that these men had, by empirical methods, attained the same end as that to which bacteriological research subsequently led. Wherever a starter is necessary, the use of a culture practically pure is imperative, whether such culture be obtained from the laboratory or prepared by what may be called the "home-made starter." Pure cultures may be bought for a few shillings in the open market.

TABLE IX.--_Comparison of the Estimates of Total or Original
Manure-Value when Foods are consumed for the Production of Fattening
Increase, with those when the Food is consumed by Cows giving
different Yields of Milk._

+----+---------------+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| | | Total or Original Manure-Value per Ton of Food |
| | | consumed--that is, only deducting the Constituents |
| | | in Fattening Increase or in Milk. |
| | Description +---------+-------------------------------------------------+
|Nos.| of Food. | For the | For the Production of Milk, supposing |
| | | Produc- | the Yield per Head per Day to be as under-- |
| | | tion of | |
| | |Fattening+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| | |Increase | 6 qts. | 8 qts. | 10 qts. | 12 qts. | 14 qts. |
+----+---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| | | L s. d.| L s. d.| L s. d.| L s. d.| L s. d.| L s. d.|
| 1 | Linseed | 1 19 2 | 1 14 7 | 1 12 0 | 1 9 6 | 1 7 1 | 1 4 5 |
| 2 | Linseed cake | 2 11 11 | 2 8 1 | 2 6 0 | 2 3 10 | 2 1 9 | 1 19 8 |
| 3 | Decorticated | | | | | | |
| | cotton cake | 3 14 9 | 3 11 2 | 3 9 2 | 3 7 4 | 3 5 4 | 3 3 4 |
| 4 | Palm-nut cake | 1 6 4 | 1 3 2 | 1 1 4 | 0 19 5 | 0 17 9 | 0 15 11 |
| 5 | Undecorticated| | | | | | |
| | cotton cake | 2 5 3 | 2 2 4 | 2 0 8 | 1 19 2 | 1 17 6 | 1 15 11 |
| 6 | Cocoa-nut cake| 1 19 10 | 1 16 11 | 1 15 3 | 1 13 9 | 1 12 3 | 1 10 6 |
| 7 | Rape cake | 2 16 5 | 1 14 2 | 2 12 11 | 2 11 7 | 2 10 4 | 2 9 1 |
| 8 | Peas | 1 16 5 | 1 13 1 | 1 11 2 | 1 9 6 | 1 7 8 | 1 5 9 |
| 9 | Beans | 2 1 11 | 1 18 7 | 1 16 10 | 1 14 11 | 1 13 1 | 1 11 4 |
| 10 | Lentils | 2 0 8 | 1 17 5 | 1 15 7 | 1 13 9 | 1 12 2 | 1 10 1 |
| 11 | Tares (seed) | 2 1 1 | 1 17 11 | 1 16 0 | 1 14 2 | 1 12 6 | 1 10 7 |
| 12 | Maize | 0 16 7 | 0 13 4 | 0 11 7 | 0 9 11 | 0 8 1 | 0 6 5 |
| 13 | Wheat | 0 18 11 | 0 15 8 | 0 13 11 | 0 12 1 | 0 10 5 | 0 8 8 |
| 14 | Malt | 0 17 7 | 0 14 5 | 0 12 7 | 0 10 8 | 0 9 0 | 0 7 1 |
| 15 | Barley | 0 17 2 | 0 14 0 | 0 12 3 | 0 10 6 | 0 8 8 | 0 6 11 |
| 16 | Oats | 0 19 9 | 0 16 8 | 0 15 0 | 0 13 4 | 0 11 7 | 0 9 10 |
| 17 | Rice meal |(0 18 6)| 0 15 5 | 0 13 9 | 0 12 0 | 0 10 5 | 0 8 7 |
| 18 | Locust beans | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |
| 19 | Malt coombs | 2 6 7 | 2 3 9 | 2 2 0 | 2 0 6 | 1 18 11 | 1 17 4 |
| 20 | Fine pollard | 1 15 2 | 1 12 0 | 1 10 5 | 1 8 8 | 1 6 11 | 1 5 3 |
| 21 | Coarse pollard| 1 18 1 | 1 15 2 | 1 13 6 | 1 12 0 | 1 10 5 | 1 8 9 |
| 22 | Bran | 1 18 6 | 1 15 11 | 1 14 6 | 1 13 1 | 1 11 8 | 1 10 3 |
| 23 | Clover hay | 1 7 0 | 1 5 5 | 1 4 5 | 1 3 7 | 1 2 8 | 1 1 8 |
| 24 | Meadow hay | 0 18 7 | 0 17 0 | 0 16 3 | 0 15 5 | 0 14 5 | 0 13 7 |
| 25 | Pea straw | 0 12 2 | 0 10 9 | 0 10 0 | 0 9 3 | 0 8 5 | 0 7 8 |
| 26 | Oat straw | 0 7 5 | 0 6 2 | 0 5 5 | 0 4 9 | 0 4 0 | 0 3 3 |
| 27 | Wheat straw | 0 6 6 | 0 5 5 | 0 4 10 | 0 4 2 | 0 3 6 | 0 3 0 |
| 28 | Barley straw | 0 6 5 | 0 5 6 | 0 4 10 | 0 4 4 | 0 3 9 | 0 3 2 |
| 29 | Bean straw | 0 11 5 | 0 10 4 | 0 9 9 | 0 9 2 | 0 8 7 | 0 8 0 |
| 30 | Potatoes | 0 4 1 | 0 3 9 | 0 3 6 | 0 3 3 | 0 3 1 | 0 2 11 |
| 31 | Carrots | 0 2 9 | 0 2 6 | 0 2 4 | 0 2 3 | 0 2 1 | 0 1 11 |
| 32 | Parsnips | 0 3 6 | 0 3 3 | 0 3 1 | 0 2 10 | 0 2 8 | 0 2 7 |
| 33 | Mangel wurzels| 0 3 2 | 0 3 0 | 0 2 10 | 0 2 9 | 0 2 7 | 0 2 5 |
| 34 | Swedish | | | | | | |
| | turnips | 0 2 11 | 0 2 9 | 0 2 8 | 0 2 7 | 0 2 5 | 0 2 3 |
| 35 | Yellow turnips|(0 2 6)| 0 2 4 | 0 2 3 | 0 2 2 | 0 2 1 | 0 2 0 |
| 36 | White turnips | 0 2 7 | 0 2 5 | 0 2 4 | 0 2 3 | 0 2 2 | 0 2 0 |
+----+---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

The factory-made cheese of Canada, the United States and Australasia, which is so largely imported into the United Kingdom, is all of the Cheddar type. The factory system has made no headway in the original home of the Cheddar cheese in the west of England. The system was thus described in the _Journal_ of the British Dairy Farmers' Association in 1889 by Mr R. J. Drummond:--

"In the year 1885 I was engaged as cheese instructor by the Ayrshire
Dairy Association, to teach the Canadian system of Cheddar
cheese-making. I commenced operations under many difficulties, being a
total stranger to both the people and the country, and with this, the
quantities of milk were very much less than I had been in the habit of
handling. Instead of having the milk from 500 to 1000 cows, we had to
operate with the milk from 25 to not over 60 cows.

"The system of cheese-making commonly practised in the county of Ayr
at that time was what is commonly known as the Joseph Harding or
English Cheddar system, which differs from the Canadian system in many
details, and in one particular is essentially different, namely, the
manner in which the necessary acidity in the milk is produced. In the
old method a certain quantity of sour whey was added to the milk each
day before adding the rennet, and I have no doubt in my own mind that
this whey was often added when the milk was already acid enough, and
the consequence was a spoiled cheese.

"Another objection to this system of adding sour whey was, should the
stuff be out of condition one day, the same trouble was inoculated
with the milk from day to day, and the result was sure to be great
unevenness in the quality of the cheese. The utensils commonly in use
were very different to anything I had ever seen before; instead of the
oblong cheese vat with double casings, as is used by the best makers
at the present time, a tub, sometimes of tin and sometimes of wood,
from 4 to 7 ft. in diameter by about 30 in. deep, was universally in
use. Instead of being able to heat the milk with warm water or steam,
as is commonly done now, a large can of a capacity of from 20 to 30
gallons was filled with cold milk and placed in a common hot-water
boiler, and heated sufficiently to bring the whole body of the milk in
the tub to the desired temperature for adding the rennet. I found that
many mistakes were made in the quantity of rennet used, as scarcely
any two makers used the same quantity to a given quantity of milk.
Instead of having a graduated measure for measuring the rennet, a
common tea-cup was used for this purpose, and I have found in some
dairies as low as 3 oz. of rennet was used to 100 gallons of milk,
where in others as high as 6(1/2) oz. was used to the same quantity.
This of itself would cause a difference in the quality of the cheese.

"Coagulation and breaking completed, the second heating was effected
by dipping the whey from the curd into the can already mentioned, and
heated to a temperature of 140 deg. F., and returned to the curd, and
thus the process was carried on till the desired temperature was
reached. This mode of heating I considered very laborious and at the
same time very unsatisfactory, as it is impossible to distribute the
heat as evenly through the curd in this way as by heating either with
hot water or steam. The other general features of the method do not
differ from our own very materially, with the exception that in the
old method the curd was allowed to mature in the bottom of the tub,
where at the same stage we remove the curd from the vat to what we
call a curd-cooler, made with a sparred bottom, so as to allow the
whey to separate from the curd during the maturing or ripening
process. In regard to the quality of cheese on the one method compared
with the other, I think that there was some cheese just as fine made
in the old way as anything we can possibly make in the new, with one
exception, and that is, that the cheese made according to the old
method will not toast--instead of the casein melting down with the
butter-fat, the two become separated, which is very much objected to
by the consumer--and, with this, want of uniformity through the whole
dairy. This is a very short and imperfect description of how the
cheese was made at the time I came into Ayrshire; and I will now give
a short description of the system that has been taught by myself for
the past four years, and has been the means of bringing this county so
prominently to the front as one of the best cheese-making counties in
Britain.

"Our duty in this system of cheese-making begins the night before, in
having the milk properly set and cooled according to the temperature
of the atmosphere, so as to arrive at a given heat the next morning.
Our object in this is to secure, at the time we wish to begin work in
the morning, that degree of acidity or ripeness essential to the
success of the whole operation. We cannot give any definite guide to
makers how, or in what quantities, to set their milk, as the whole
thing depends on the good judgment of the operator. If he finds that
his milk works best at a temperature of 68 deg. F. in the morning, his
study the night before should tend toward such a result, and he will
soon learn by experience how best to manage the milk in his own
individual dairy. I have found in some dairies that the milk worked
quite fast enough at a temperature of 64 deg. in the morning, where in
others the milk set in the same way would be very much out of
condition by being too sweet, causing hours of delay before matured
enough to add the rennet. Great care should be taken at this point,
making sure that the milk is properly matured before the rennet is
added, as impatience at this stage often causes hours of delay in the
making of a cheese. I advise taking about six hours from the time the
rennet is added till the curd is ready for salting, which means a
six-hours' process; if much longer than this, I have found by
experience that it is impossible to obtain the best results. The cream
should always be removed from the night's milk in the morning and
heated to a temperature of about 84 deg. before returning it to the
vat. To do this properly and with safety, the cream should be heated
by adding about two-thirds of warm milk as it comes from the cow to
one-third of cream, and passed through the ordinary milk-strainers. If
colouring matter is used, it should be added fifteen to twenty minutes
before the rennet, so as to become thoroughly mingled with the milk
before coagulation takes place.