Chapter II: Preface (2)

“The result of this first test seems conclusive, but they
acquire new force from those of a second trial in which the
method was subjected to another test through M. Guenon and his
brother. Your committee, availing themselves of the presence
of the latter, caused the same cows to be examined by the
two brothers, but separately, so that after a cow had been
inspected, and her qualities as indicated by the signs in
question had been pronounced upon by one of the brothers, he
was made to withdraw; then the other brother, who had been
kept aloof, was called up, and desired to state the qualities
of the same animal. This mode of proceeding could not fail
to give rise to difference, to contradiction even, between
the judgments of the two brothers, unless their method was a
positive and sure one. Well, gentlemen, we must say it, this
last test was absolutely decisive. Not only did the judgment
of the two brothers accord perfectly together, but they were
in perfect accordance also with all that was said by the
proprietors in regard to the qualities, good or bad, of every
animal subject to this examination.”

On the 26th of May, 1837, a similar test was made by the agricultural society of Aurillac, whose committee, in their report, use the following language:

“Each cow was examined separately by M. Guenon, who wrote his
notes upon her, and delivered the paper closed to one of us.
Immediately after, another member of the committee questioned
the owner of the cow, or the person in charge of her, in regard
to her daily yield of milk, its quality, and the time during
which she continued to give milk after being got with calf.
The answers were taken down in writing, and then compared with
the notes written by M. Guenon. They were generally found to
accord, and proved to the satisfaction of your committee and of
every one present, all of whom attended with lively interest
to these proceedings, that M. Guenon possesses great sagacity
in judging of cattle, and that his method rests upon a sure
foundation.”

The Bordeaux committee added: “To the proprietors and to the lookers-on, all this was very surprising for the examinations were as quickly made as the results were certain. As to ourselves to whom the method was no longer a secret, it was with renewed interest and astonishment that we viewed the accuracy of the results. _This system we do not fear to say is infallible._ We only regretted the whole society was not present.”

The committee further reported that Mr. Guenon had, after more than twenty years observations and researches, discovered certain natural and positive signs that were proof against all error, while the writers and professors who have particularly occupied themselves with the bovine race, can only indicate some vague signs for judging of the fitness of cows for secreting milk. That this method is valuable, whether it tells the yield of milk only, or indicates the improvement of breeds, which are liable to deterioration from mismanagement in crossing, and that it is applicable not to full-grown animals alone, but also to calves at as early an age as three months. Thus it affords a sure means of forming a judgment of full-grown animals, about which we might be misled on account of their form and their parentage, and secures the improvement of herds by enabling us to dispose of those calves which will not repay the cost of rearing them. We shall thus no longer rear calves at great expense for two or three years that should have been consigned to the butcher, nor sell calves that would pay best to rear. If this system is pursued, only cows and bulls of best quality will be kept, and in very few years how great will be the improvement of our herds, and largely increased the cheapest and best of all foods, milk, and the production of butter and cheese.

The committee of the Agricultural Society of Bordeaux, therefore, decreed Mr. Guenon a gold medal, made him a member of the society, ordered fifty copies of his work, and distributed one thousand copies of their full report among all the agricultural societies of France.

The next public test Mr. Guenon submitted his system to, was that by the Agricultural Society of Aurillac, and that society reported that Mr. Guenon examined the herd of their president, of one hundred cows, from which were selected designedly, the best, the moderately good, and the most indifferent of the establishment. Upon each, Mr. Guenon pronounced with precision, and his decisions corresponded almost invariably with the statements of the persons in charge. The only variations were very slight ones, in regard to the quantity given. But this herd was fed unusually high, and Guenon was totally unaccustomed to the usages of the country in feeding cattle, and this caused him to pronounce the yield a little less than it really was. A proof of his system, for he declares the yield will vary according to the feed and management, which all observant farmers know to be the case. Mr. Guenon examined some of the cows a second time, and also the calves, and those calves he assigned to the first orders the cowherds said were from their best cows, that gave a great deal of milk.

The notes of his reëxaminations corresponded exactly with his first statements. The committee therefore awarded Mr. Guenon a gold medal, made him a corresponding member, subscribed for twenty-five copies of his book for each of the sub-societies, and distributed their report through all the agricultural channels of France.

With these testimonials, the highest that could be procured in France, Mr. Guenon went on with the publication of his book, which had a wide circulation in every department of France. And he was finally granted a pension for life of three thousand francs a year by the French government, after the National Assembly’s committee on agriculture had given the system a thorough test. In the presence of fifty of the most eminent agriculturists, M. Guenon made his examinations, and judged correctly of all but one of the quantity, of all but one of the time, and of all of the quality; and the committee reported the results were altogether conclusive, and that his discovery had reached to the dignity of a science. They also declared the daily production of milk in France might be increased by several millions of pints daily, and that the abundance and quality of milk in the dams must contribute largely to the improvement of the progeny. They voted him the pension, and invited him to deliver lectures in the different veterinary, agricultural, and normal schools of the kingdom, and before the different agricultural societies, as “the speediest and best means of spreading the knowledge of this discovery,” and “to repair the time lost in ridicule, doubt, or indifference—the inevitable preface to all under-takings beneficial to humanity.”

In the foregoing account of Mr. Francis Guenon, it will be seen that, by his indomitable perseverance in perfecting his system or method, he raised himself from the ranks of a poor gardener’s boy to the position of a great benefactor, and was presented with various medals and decorations, and a large sum of money voted to him. Surely, such a brilliant position must have been won entirely by merit, for he had neither means nor influence to advance him into notice.

Of the Ovals.

The ovals on the udder are spoken of by Guenon, and our experience is that they are always indicative of a good yield; particularly, when they are uniform in size and position, and of fine, soft hair, descending on the udder. But there is another set of marks, which the Pennsylvania Guenon Commission have denominated thigh ovals, which are an invariable indication of a good cow, particularly when she is otherwise well-marked. Of these, Guenon does not speak. Eusebius H. Townsend and Chalkley Harvey were the first to call attention to them, and Charles L. Sharpless has written of them. Our own cow, which took the premium over all the Jersey cows, at the fall exhibition, in 1878, of the Chester County Agricultural Society, has them most extraordinarily developed. As she is a very thorough example of this marking, we have had the likeness made of her escutcheon, and request the reader’s attention to it.

Of the Bastards.

Guenon denominates those cows which give milk, much or little, so long as they are not got with calf; but, when impregnated, begin to fall off in their milk. The term he uses is _batard_, which means, in English, bastard, spurious, of a mixed breed, mongrel. We should have preferred to call them spurious cows, as the term bastard does not exactly express the meaning we apply to that word; but, as it has before been translated bastard, and is so known by many, we retain it.

The bastards are often the best looking cows; have finely developed escutcheons, and many give a great deal of milk, some poor quality and some rich; but, as soon as they are pregnant, they go dry very soon, or fall off rapidly in their milk, while others give very little milk at all. From their fine show, they deceive a great many, and Guenon cautions buyers, as the most skillful will make mistakes. He has, however, given a series of drawings, by which they can generally be discovered.

These bastards mostly conceive well, and the first time they are put to the bull, they vary in the quality of milk they give like other cows. The flow of milk is at its height during the first eight days after calving, though of bad quality. It then diminishes a little, and keeps on at about the same yield until she conceives again, when it diminishes again, more or less rapidly.

To discover a bastard, consult the engravings which are given to each class. To the first class, the Flanders, there are two kinds. The first, which is the most common, has on each edge of the vertical escutcheon, a feathery appearance, and where this is strongly marked by the down- and up-growing hairs meeting, and they interlock and stand out from the skin, and, besides, are harsh and wiry, and generally shiny, glistening, and looking of lighter color, _beware of them_. The harsher, coarser they are, the shorter time will the cow milk after getting with calf. The second kind of bastards among the Flanders will have an oval on the _vertical_ escutcheon, generally near the middle part, of about two to three inches in length, by one and a half to two inches wide, on which will be found coarse wiry hair, and the harsher it is, and the larger the oval is, the sooner the cow will cease to milk. It may often be discovered by the glistening appearance of the hair on it.

On all the other classes, the bastard marks consist of two oval patches of hair, one on each side of the vulva; and the larger they are, the more pointed in shape, and the coarser and more wiry the hair on them, the sooner the cow will cease to milk.

The importance of learning the bastard marks is very great, as the buyer can safely avoid them, and leave them to those less skilled. While he may buy the less showy looking cow for much less money, and get a better animal than the unskilled man will obtain even for the higher price.

All animals are more readily judged correctly, and the system can be learned more easily, in summer than in winter, both on old and young; for then the winter coat of hair is off, and the hair is shorter, and the escutcheon is more easily perceived. The skin, also, is more natural and soft, and the hair is usually not so harsh to the feel; and the cows are cleaner, and all marks or blemishes more quickly seen.

How to Apply the System Practically.

We will now proceed to apply the foregoing rules and hints practically. In doing so, we may repeat some that has been before said, but it will only impress it the stronger in the mind of the learner.

This classification embraced all the kinds of cows known to Guenon, each individual escutcheon corresponding with one of the orders of those classes. The _class_, the _order_ and the _size_ of an animal indicate her yield of milk, and this will always be found to correspond with her escutcheon. Every cow has an escutcheon which can be recognized, and according as it is free from blemish or imperfection, just in that degree does she approach perfection in her class.

Guenon, in the last edition of his work, has altered and simplified his classification somewhat, for he divided it into ten CLASSES, and six ORDERS to each class. He maintained his three grades of size. But our experience shows that the cows in this country do not vary so much in size as they probably do in France, for there they have the little Brittany cow, which is very small but good, and, of course, they have also cows as large as our Durhams or the Holsteins. Only this, bear in mind, that cows, as a general rule, all other things being equal, will vary in their yield somewhat according to their size; and in judging cows apply that rule, for it is part of Guenon’s system, and they will vary in the quality according to the breed. Well, then, for practical purposes, we need only study sixty _escutcheons_, that is ten different shapes called _Classes_, and six grades to each of those shapes, more or less perfect, which are called _Orders_. To these must be added ten more for a _Bastard_ to each class. And it is really necessary to study perfectly only the first four orders of each class and the _Bastard_ marks, as it is not worth while to purchase or pay much attention to any cows lower in the scale than the fourth order of any class. And to simplify it still more, you will notice the thigh escutcheons of the first orders have all nearly the same shovel shape, so that by remembering this you need only study the vertical portions to readily place the animals in their proper class.

The Escutcheon.

The escutcheon was so-called, we presume, from its similarity to the shape of a shield or escutcheon, and on a first-class cow it will be very like it, and somewhat like a round-pointed shovel. On this escutcheon, the hair will generally be of a different color from that bordering it, most generally rather darker, always shorter, and more nearly resembling fur. This difference in color is produced by the UP-growing hair contrasting with the DOWN-growing surrounding it. The hair of the escutcheon should be short, soft, and fine; and the skin very soft, like a kid glove, thin, and oleaginous. And if the cow gives good rich milk, this skin will be of a rich, golden, or nankeen hue. Often where you handle a skin of this character the hands will feel oily, and soiled with rich dandruff.

The Shape of the Escutcheon.

The Escutcheon varies in shape, and Guenon named his ten classes from their shapes.

The first class, he called Flandrine or Flanders, because it is the best, and he named it from the best cows he knew, those from Flanders, or the Flemish breed, and they had more of this shaped escutcheon than any other breed; a quiet but sure proof of the truth of his system.

The second class he called Flandrine à gauche, because although it had the Flanders shape, it was on the _left_ flank, he called it therefore the Left Flanders.

The third class are the Lisière, or The Selvage, from its appearance to a selvage, or binding of a piece of cloth.

The fourth class are the Courbe-Ligne, or the Curveline, because their escutcheon is lozenge-shaped, formed by a curved line which sides to the right and left, and rises to about five or six centimeters from the vulva.

The fifth class he denominated Bicorne, or the Bicorn cow, because the upper part of this escutcheon forks in two horns.

The sixth class, Double-Lisière, or Double Selvage, has an entirely arbitrary name, and it is an odd freak of nature.

The seventh class is called Poitevine, or Demijohn, from a fancied resemblance to some kinds of demijohns.

The eighth class is Equerrine, or Square-Escutcheon, as it is square at the upward part.

The ninth class is the Limousine, as it was on a cow from that Province that Guenon first saw this shaped escutcheon.

The tenth class is called Carrésine, or Horizontal, because the upward part of the escutcheon is cut off squarely by a horizontal line.

To each of the above ten CLASSES, Guenon has placed six ORDERS, which are variations of the escutcheon, formed by a reduced size and by various imperfections. If the reader will remember always, that the first class is better than the second class, and the second class better than the third class, and so on down the scale, to the end of the classes, he will have gained the first step in acquiring the system. Then the next point to remember is similar, that is, that the first _order_ of every _class_ is better than the second order of that class, and so on down the scale of the orders, until the sixth. Then he must learn the different shapes; first, the characteristic shape of each class, as represented by the first order of that class, and connect with this, in his mind, the number of quarts a first-class cow, in good feed and condition, should give, as represented by that escutcheon, in her full flow of milk. Then he can next learn the variations in size and shape from this pattern escutcheon, and that will enable him to tell which order of her class to put her in, and that will then inform him what quantity of milk she will give, and how long she will give it when with calf. And we repeat here, it is necessary only to acquire the knowledge of the first three or four orders of each of the ten classes, as if the cow examined does not come within those orders, she is not worth examining further nor keeping longer, nor certainly worth purchasing. Then the learner must next acquire a knowledge of the distinguishing marks which point out a Bastard cow, for an account of which marks, see under that head.

Now all of this knowledge must, to put it into profit practically, be supplemented by the careful examination of the hair and the skin, of the escutcheon, and the udder: of the hair, whether it is short, fine, soft, and furry; of the skin, whether it is soft and close-grained like a kid glove, thin, oleaginous, and yellow or golden. For if the hair is harsh, and long, particularly on the back part of the udder, it will shorten the time of giving milk, and indicates a poorer quality. The more oily or greasy to the feeling the skin of the udder and the perineum is, the more it indicates good quality and richness of milk, for the oil or fat is there, showing it is in the nature of that animal to give butyraceous milk. So with the color of the skin, if it is golden it is indicative of rich milk, and the majority think it will make a finer colored butter. There is one point more in judging by the escutcheon, and that is its size and position, and the general rule is, the higher up it is on the thighs, and the broader it is on the thighs, together with the higher and broader it is on the perineum, even up to the vulva, then the better it is. Then remember the escutcheon has two principal parts, called the thigh escutcheon and the vertical escutcheon; the thigh escutcheon extends over the udder and the thighs; and the vertical is over the perineum or that part of the posterior which extends from the udder up to the tail and above the vulva.

If the thigh escutcheon is high and broad, therefore very large, and extends far outward on to the thighs, it indicates a large flow of milk. If the vertical or upper part is broad and smooth, it indicates a prolonged flow of milk.

If the thigh or lower portion of the escutcheon is narrow, the flow will be proportionally small. If the vertical or upper part is narrow and irregular, it is unfavorable to a prolonged flow.

Chalkley Harvey says further of these marks: “Imperfections, that is blemishes of form, occur in considerable variety on both large and small escutcheons. They are all certain evidence of a diminished value of the cow as a milker. A small and imperfect escutcheon on a good cow, is something I have never yet seen. Any want of symmetry in the form of an escutcheon is an imperfection. The two sides should be alike. A small but perfect escutcheon may be better than a larger one that is imperfect. A very good one is both large and perfect.

“Thus far we have considered the escutcheon in reference to its form and size alone, and may now say, that the quantity of milk depends on these, but its quality is indicated by other signs, which we find to a great extent in the same place. It is too well known to require any assertion, that some cows give a large quantity of very poor milk, and others an equally large quantity of rich milk. It is equally well known that some cows give but little milk, though they yield a good quantity of butter; and I repeat, that the signs indicative of these differences of quality are found in the escutcheon, and they are easily recognized. If the skin in the escutcheon is soft and oily, and particularly if it is of a rich yellow color, (though this is more easily seen by examining the end of the tail,) suggestive of “gilt edged” butter, that cow will give good milk. In such cases we will find her hair soft and short. There may be some long hairs, too, but the undergrowth will be as mentioned, and often has almost the quality of fur. But if, on the other hand, the skin is white and dry, and the hair thin and harsh, the cow gives poor milk. If her escutcheon is large and symmetrical, she may give a large quantity of poor milk. The form and size of the escutcheon indicate _quantity_, the skin and hair indicate _quality_. These signs are true also as applied to bulls, being in such cases a proper guide in the selection of animals to breed milkers from. My own experience and observation, which has been considerable in the matter, convinces me that cows inherit their milking qualities more from their sires than from their dams; and it is probable that many who have been disappointed in heifers raised from some favorite milkers, will be disposed to agree with me. If this be true, then the Guenon method has an application that must prove valuable to those who breed cows for dairy purposes. Another interesting fact is, that we can discover all the signs on a calf, and are thereby enabled to select with much certainty those that are fit for the dairy, and to reject those that would be only a disappointment, if raised for that purpose. Of course, a very small cow, with ever so good an escutcheon, cannot be expected to give a very large quantity of milk, and might be inferior in that respect to one having a less perfect one, where the animal is of greater size. But in such cases, the small cow would give much more in proportion to the cost of keeping. In all cases, therefore, the size should be taken into account.

“There is a sign that may be mentioned here, (though it does not properly belong to the Guenon system,) which is a very certain evidence that a cow will give a large quantity of milk, though it expresses nothing in relation to quality. It is the large size of the vein running forward from the udder, on the belly, and just under the skin. This is called the milk vein, and when it is very large and crooked, and enters the abdomen through a hole that will allow the entrance of a man’s finger, it is, I repeat, a sign that the cow will yield a large quantity of milk.

“The time that a cow will continue to milk after she is with calf, varies in different cases—some ceasing almost as soon as pregnant, and others milking up to calving. Generally the best milkers milk the longest. Hence it follows, that a good escutcheon usually indicates continued flow as well as large quantity. Those escutcheons that are not large at the base, but that run up to the vulva symmetrical all the way, and pretty wide, indicate a yield of milk up to the time of calving.”

Our Mode of Judging Stock.

The beauty of the Guenon system is, that _it is an aid to all other modes of selecting stock_, and therefore, it gives a decided advantage to the person who understands it over the one who does not. For instance, let two buyers go into a herd, and let them be equal judges of stock, one of them will be very apt to buy a bastard, while the other one would very positively leave her alone, simply because the latter has a knowledge of the best and surest mode of all modes of judging stock. And this knowledge does not prevent him from using his half a dozen other modes of deciding its merits, but aids them. So, too, in selecting a bull for a propagator, the believer in Guenon will select one with a good escutcheon and a fine skin, while the other will decide almost entirely by the form. And so with calves, the one who selects calves by the Guenon marks will be pretty sure to have a dairy of productive cows, while the other will have to dispose of some unprofitable ones. The one makes money, because he is working intelligently with every light of science, while the other is only _guessing_ pretty well.

We first look at a cow from the front, and see that she widens as she gets back to her hips, or is wedge-shaped. Next we look at her side, and we again see that she rises on her back and descends on the belly as she goes back to the tail, or in other words she is wedge-shaped, too, from this point of view. These two looks at her have enabled us to see that she has a feminine appearance; that her head is small and neat in proportion to her body, with a waxy small horn, a mild but large eye, a broad muzzle, and that it is well set on her neck; that she has a good chest, and large deep paunch, with large full ribs, fuller below and joined to a rather high back bone; that is to say she has not the breadth of back we look for in a beef animal. If the chine is double, it indicates a cow above the average; if the chine is single, sometimes we can lay our three fingers in three depressions in it at about the middle of it, showing that she is a loose rangy cow, and fitted for her work. Now we will look at her udder and see that it runs forward as level as possible to the belly, and that it is large, with four good-sized, well-shaped teats slightly strutting from each quarter. Now we gently approach her, and pat her to gain her confidence, and get a chance to feel her hide, her milk veins, and examine her escutcheon. If we find her skin is thin, soft, and greasy, with short fine hair, with rather a furry nature, and showing the skin yellow under it; that her udder and her perineum have soft thin skin, with very short furry hair; that her milk veins are large, zig-zag, and knotty, entering the body with good-sized holes, and particularly if this vein is double, extending and ramifying over the udder well back in prominent veins, and if the veins extend over the perineum, we may then, with great confidence, look for a large well-shaped and formed escutcheon, marked first class, order first, by an oval on each side of the back of the udder, and perhaps two thigh ovals or dips where the vertical escutcheon rises from the broad or thigh escutcheon; and just to finish and find all points corroborating, we will look on the vertical escutcheon for some spots of oily lemon colored dandruff, and at the end of her neat, lightly made tail to find some large yellow pieces of dandruff. We don’t like to see it dry and brown; and as we step back from her, we just give a parting look to see that her hips are rather large, bony, somewhat drooping, that her capacious udder has room to project between her legs.

Then, we feel sure that a loose, open made cow, rather pointed, or sharp and well-defined, and the contrary of what we would look for in a flesh or beef producing animal; with a skin mellow and yellow, covered with soft, fine hair, and the nearer it comes to the quality and color of a first class Guernsey or Jersey cow, breeds which have for hundreds of years been bred for butter making, then we repeat we know she must be a good, rich milker and butter maker; for we never saw a thick, hard skin cow, with coarse, long hair, that was a good butter maker, or fit for anything but giving poor milk, _if_ a strong milker.

Our preference is for a medium sized cow, one that will dress five hundred and fifty or six hundred pounds; and, as far as our observation goes, a Jersey sire, with an Ayrshire dam, is the best cross for a milk and butter cow, and the most profitable for the amount of food consumed; though a Jersey or Guernsey sire to the milking stock of Durhams, or a Holstein, or a large yielding native cow, will produce a better cow for butter than the mother was.

To get thorough practice in valuing the escutcheon, take this book in hand, and go into your dairy-yard; compare the escutcheon of each cow with her picture in this book; see what it calls for time and quantity, and then thoroughly test your cow; don’t guess at it, as most farmers do; and make your own comparisons. Remember the size and class of the escutcheon will give you _the quantity and time_; the skin and hair will give you _the quality_; and always remembering the size of the cow, and of what breed she is, for they must qualify your opinion somewhat.

Opinions of the System.

A writer in the _Country Gentleman_ of July 17, 1879, S. Hoxie, of Whitestown, New York, so thoroughly expresses our experience and convictions, that we are led to quote it:

“The writer has been acquainted with ‘the escutcheon theory’ ever since about 1850. During this time he has been a practical dairyman in central New York. At first he approached the study of the escutcheon as a doubter. It seemed to him an absolute absurdity to claim a connection between the growing of the hair and the production of milk, two functions so entirely different.

“At first he examined the herd of cows which he helped milk every night and morning, and was surprised to meet with so many proofs of the truth of the theory. He then observed it upon other herds, and finally extended his observations to various breeds under various circumstances. He was at last compelled to come to the final conclusion that the theory, in the main, was true, but that other points and conditions of the animal must be understood in order invariably to reach a correct judgment:

“1. The breed modifies the quantity and quality of milk production. This is so manifestly true that it needs no argument. A particular order and class of escutcheon indicates a different quantity and a different quality of milk on a Jersey than it indicates on an Ayrshire cow.

“2. The condition of care and feed to which different families of the same breed have been accustomed during long periods modify milk production, and must be taken into consideration. For instance, certain families of Short-Horns have been cared for and fed through several generations with the sole view of beef production; other families have been trained to milk production. Escutcheons upon the former indicate far less quantity of milk than upon the latter. Thus some families with very fine escutcheons give very little milk. The escutcheons in such cases no doubt indicate an original capacity that a few generations of proper treatment might awaken and develop.

“3. The capacity and health of the digestive organs modifies the quantity, and we also think the quality, of milk production. Cows with large, healthy digestive organs will eat and properly digest more food, and give good return at the pail, than one with opposite conditions of the digestive organs. The former may sometimes give the larger quantity of milk, though, indeed, possessed of the poorer escutcheon.

“4. The activity of the nervous system materially affects milk production. This is often seen when the animal is unduly excited. The quiet dispositioned cow that attends to feeding, and is not disturbed by any excitement in the herd or in the surrounding fields, may have the poorer escutcheon, yet give larger quantities of milk than the extremely excitable cow, with the better escutcheon.

“Other conditions will suggest themselves to the observing and reflecting man, that materially affect the quantity and quality of milk production.

“These modifying conditions do not disturb the true theory of the escutcheon. _Other things being equal, the escutcheon is indicative of the quantity and quality of milk._ Many are misled in estimating the value of the escutcheon, because they have not the patience or the capacity to observe the varying conditions. The escutcheon is of immense practical value. It is easily seen the conditions of flesh do not change it, and animals of all ages, above three months, may be examined by it, and their milking qualities determined with a good degree of accuracy. Other things being equal, the animal with the better escutcheon will invariably make the butter maker. During nearly thirty years of observation, the writer never observed a first class cow that had a poor escutcheon. The escutcheon must be of great value to those who are breeding, and endeavouring to improve thorough-bred cattle of the various milking breeds. It offers a test that may be applied before milking age, and it may be applied to males as well as females. _Though the pedigree is ever so long, and though it contains many good ancestors, the animal should be rejected from the breeding herd, unless it has a good escutcheon._”

“One of the Farmers,” a regular correspondent of the _American Agriculturist_, writes in the number for November, 1878:

“THE VALUE OF THE GUENON MILK MIRROR.—Taken with a good udder and milk-veins, good digestive functions, and capacity for food, good health and thrift, the Guenon milk mirror is a valuable indication of both the quantity and duration of the flow of milk. This seems to be demonstrated by the experience of thousands who have given the subject careful study, and I have never yet met the man who ridiculed it, and called it “folly,” who was able intelligently even to outline the prominent types. The number of calves which do well or ill as milkers, very nearly as indicated by their milk mirrors, is so large, that one of the principal practical uses to which a knowledge of the Guenon system can be applied is in selecting calves to raise, and, of course, to those who buy cows, it comes equally well in use.”

THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF BREEDERS OF DUTCH FRIESIAN CATTLE, composed of some of the most practical and intelligent farmers of the dairy region of central New York, have adopted a new set of rules for entry into registry in their Herd Book, wisely making the performance at the pail one of the necessary requirements. Thus, for a period of not more than twelve months from date of calving, the cow under 2½ years of age must give 6,000 lbs. of milk; over 2½, and under 3½, 7,000 lbs; over 3½, and under 4½, 8,000 lbs; over 4½, 9,000 lbs; also, rule 8: No animal shall be admitted to registry unless of the “milk form,” or of the “combined milk and beef form,” of medium or of large size, without coarseness, and if a female, having a well developed escutcheon, not below the 4th order of the 1st class, the 3d orders of the 2d, 3d 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th classes, the 2d order of the 9th class, or the 1st order of the 10th class of the Pennsylvania Commission. With such a record, and with such marks, no one need take the trouble to see the stock, but may safely order it, knowing exactly what they are to receive.

George E. Waring, junior, says:

“If the escutcheon teaches anything it teaches _the duration
of the flow of milk_. This is its great value in connection
with the Jerseys—a race of small, rich, and _persistent_
milkers. It does indicate quantity, it is true, but not Dutch
quantity, nor Ayrshire quantity; only _Jersey_ quantity, which
is quite another affair. It indicates, in at least equal
degree, the continuance of the flow of milk. Indeed, this is
the great value of Guenon’s discovery. It is easy to judge of
the _present_ flow of milk in the case of any given cow, but,
so far as I know, there is nothing but the escutcheon to tell
us how long she will continue to milk after getting with calf.
If she has a _first class_ escutcheon, I think we are safe in
believing that she will hold out well in her milking. If she
has a very defective escutcheon, we may depend on her to fall
away very rapidly when a few months gone, and to shut down
entirely three or four months before calving.”

From an exhaustive and admirable treatise on the Ayrshire breed, by John D. W. French, of North Andover, Mass., we make the following extracts from his remarks on the Guenon system:

“Pabst, a German farmer of large experience, with a view
to simplify the method of Guenon, and render it of greater
practical value, made five divisions, or classes:—

1. Very good, or extraordinary.
2. Good, or good middling.
3. Middling, and little below middling.
4. Small.
5. Very bad milkers.

“Magne, the French writer, made a still further simplification,
by making four classes instead of five:—

1. The very good.
2. The good.
3. The medium.
4. The bad.

“In the first class he places cows, both parts of whose
milk-mirror, the mammary and the perinean, are large,
continuous, uniform, covering at least a great part of the
perineum, the udder, the inner surface of the thighs, and
extending more or less out upon the legs with no interruptions,
or, if any, small ones, oval in form, and situated on the
posterior face of the udder. Cows of this class are very rare.
They give, even when small in size, from ten to fourteen quarts
per day, and the largest size from eighteen to twenty-six
quarts a day, and even more. They continue in milk for a long
period.

“The second class is that of good cows, and to this belong
the best commonly found in the market. They have the mammary
part of the milk-mirror well developed, but the perinean part
contracted or wholly wanting. Small cows of this class give
from seven to ten or eleven quarts a day, and the largest from
thirteen to seventeen quarts.

“The third class consists of middling cows. When the
milk-mirror really presents only the lower or mammary part
slightly developed or indented, and the perinean part
contracted, narrow, and irregular, the cows are middling. Cows
of this class, according to size, give from three or four to
ten quarts per day.

“The fourth class is composed of bad cows. No veins are to
be seen either on the perineum or the udder, while those of
the belly are very slightly developed, and the mirrors are
ordinarily small. These cows give only a few quarts of milk a
day, and dry up a short time after calving.

“Mr. C. L. Flint, in his work on ‘Milch Cows,’ says:—

“These classifications, adopted by Pabst, Magne, and
others, appear to be far more simple and satisfactory than
the more complicated classification of Guenon. Without
pretending to judge with accuracy of the quantity, the
quality, or the duration which a particular size or form
of the mirror will indicate, they give to Guenon the full
credit of his important discovery, as a new and valuable
element in forming our judgment of the milking qualities
of a cow, and simply assert, with respect to the duration
of the flow of milk, that the mirror that indicates the
greatest quantity will also indicate the longest duration.

“My own attention was called to Guenon’s method of judging
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 its merits; and the result of my observations
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.”

“In my own herd of Ayrshire cows, the largest milkers have
the best escutcheons, and these cows have, in most cases,
transmitted these marks to their descendants. On the other
hand, the cows with medium or poor escutcheons have rarely
transmitted to their calves better ones; but, generally, of the
same or lower class than the dams.

“BULLS.—Guenon’s second and hardly less important discovery
was that the bull had the same marks as the cow, only somewhat
shorter and narrower. Guenon bestows upon these marks the same
name, ‘milk-mirror,’ which may be justified, in as far as the
bull has greater influence upon the sustaining or obtaining of
an abundant yield of milk, as well as the improvement of the
breed.

“SOME TESTIMONY.—Mr. L. A. Hansen, of Bay St. Louis, writes, in
a letter to the _Country Gentleman_:

“I served my apprenticeship for three years on a dairy
farm with two hundred cows, performing all the labor
appertaining to a farm, the same as one of the hired men.
After this, for twenty years, I had dairies of from eighty
to one hundred and seventy cows. Living in the best dairy
country then known, and our butter commanding the very
highest market prices in London, England, (taking the
premium at a butter exhibition in London,) we considered it
the best policy to buy our cows instead of raising them,
and I consequently had to purchase from twenty to thirty
cows every year. Having adopted the Guenon system as a
helping guide in my purchases, I necessarily examined more
than a hundred cows annually, besides having under daily
observation my own cows and those of the neighboring dairy
farms. Thus, I had continual practice through a number of
years. The classifications of the professor, mentioned in
my former article, were, with very rare exceptions, right.
In the first two classes, they did not fail once; in the
lower classes, more frequently; but as the lower classes,
with their sub-division, are of no importance to the
dairyman—only the two first being fit for a dairy—the study
of them becomes unnecessary, and it is of little avail if
they are minutely correct.

“As nothing in this world is perfect, we cannot reasonably
expect the Guenon system to be without defects; but, as
already stated above, the imperfection is to be looked for
in that part which is immaterial for practical application.
Under all circumstances, _as far as my experience goes,
the Guenon theory will always remain a valuable guide in
selecting milk cows_.”

“Mr. L. S. Hardin writes, in a prize essay:

“Very few, if any, modern writers upon cattle have accepted
the complicated theory of Guenon, while no two of them
agree as to the extent in value of the escutcheon. As
a point of beauty, it should certainly be cultivated
in the herd. As to its practical value for indicating
the milking qualities of the cow, my experience is that
a finely-developed escutcheon is rarely seen on a poor
milker, while many excellent milkers have very small or
no escutcheons at all. In other words, its presence is a
good sign, while its absence is not necessarily a cause
for distrust. Milk-veins, as an indication for milking
capacity, are of about the same value as the escutcheon.”

“The editor of the _Jersey Bulletin_, in commenting on this,
says:

“We should be very glad to know of a cow, worthy to be
called an ‘excellent milker’—duration of the flow after
becoming pregnant being one of the tests—which has no
escutcheon at all, or a very small one. As at present
advised, we don’t believe she exists. Most old cow men
would say that, if the escutcheon is as valuable an
indication as the milk-veins, too much effort can hardly be
made to extend knowledge concerning it.”

“Henry Tanner, professor of agriculture, Queen’s College,
Birmingham, England, says, in a volume of prize essays of the
Highland and Agricultural Society:

“Some attention has also been given, within a few years,
to a discovery, made by Mons. Guenon, respecting ‘the
escutcheon,’ as it is termed. Like many other persons,
he was carried beyond the boundary of discretion in his
speculations, and thus his valuable observations were for
a time lost in the mist with which he enveloped them.
Sufficient is already known of its value, at least, to lead
us to the conclusion that it is worthy of more general
knowledge.

“A very extended observation has proved that, other
conditions being equal, the modification of form presented
by the escutcheon will lead to an estimation, not only of
the quantity of milk which the animal will produce, but
also of the time during which the cow will keep up the
supply of milk.

“Without going into detail upon this point, I may briefly
state that the larger the extent of the escutcheon,
the greater is the promise of milk, and also of its
continuance, even after the cow is again in calf. A cow
may have a small escutcheon, and yet be a good milker; but
observation leads to the conclusion that, if she possessed
a more fully developed escutcheon, she would have been a
better milker. It may be considered a point of merit, not
as deciding whether or not the cow is a good milker, but
rather as an additional indication which may be taken into
consideration in conjunction with other characteristic
points. It is also desirable, in estimating the extent of
the escutcheon, to make full allowance for the folds in
the skin; otherwise, a large escutcheon may be taken for a
small one. Besides the escutcheon, there are tufts of hair
(epis) which have a certain degree of value when seen upon
the udder of the cow.”

“I presume there are many men who, although perhaps not caring
a pin for an escutcheon, yet consider themselves fully capable
of selecting a good milk cow. Now, although ignoring the
escutcheon in their judgment, are they not apt, in selecting
an ideal cow of any particular milk breed, to find a good
escutcheon developed of one class or another?

“Perhaps it may be asked, if the Guenon system is a true one,
why are not the Short-Horns a great milk breed, for in them we
often find very large and perfect escutcheons?

“This question may be answered as follows: The Short-Horns
were originally a good milking breed; but, having been
made particularly a beef breed, the milking propensity or
mammary system has in most families been changed or bred out.
Notwithstanding this change, they may retain the escutcheon,
not as a mark of quality, but as one of the characteristic
marks of the breed.

“All farmers are aware that a first-class milk cow may, by
injudicious feed and treatment, especially as regards milking,
become a second-class animal. Now, such a system, carried out
generation after generation, must certainly degenerate a milk
breed, however good their marks and quality.

“Among the Short-Horns, probably the best milkers have good
escutcheons; but an Ayrshire cow, with an inferior escutcheon,
might be found to give more milk than a Short-Horn with a
superior escutcheon, simply because one breed has been bred
especially for beef, the other especially for milk.

“To show how breeding for a purpose through many generations
may ultimately change qualities, let us compare the Short-Horns
with the Dutch or Holsteins. The early Short-Horns, or the
Teeswater breed, as it was called, was of Dutch origin, or
was certainly formed by crossing the native cattle of England
with stock imported from Holland. This breed was originally
considered remarkable for its milking qualities.

“The Dutch breed, bred for generations for the especial purpose
of milk, is to-day noted for large milkers, and among the cows
may be found extraordinarily developed escutcheons.

“The following extract, from a translation from the French of
Magne on milk cows, is _apropos_, as showing the difference
between characteristics of breeds and qualities of the animals:

“A long, fine head, narrow towards the horns, and a slender
chest are given by most writers as characteristics of a
good milk cow. Now, in Flemish, Danish, Dutch, and Brittany
cows the fineness of head and chest is a characteristic
of these races and not the indication of particularly
developed milking qualities, being met with alike in the
good and bad milkers of those races; whilst in some of
the Swiss breeds, and especially in those of St. Gervais,
nearly all the cows, whether good or indifferent, possess
a large head and heavy chest. The farmers of Ariege, while
showing us some remarkably good cows, drew our attention
to their strength of chest, ampleness of the dewlap, and
the volume of the head: these characteristics of race they
mistake for qualities, observing them in their best cows.
On the other hand, it is to be remarked that cows with fine
heads are often inferior milkers. If fineness of head were
a true proof of mammillary activity, would not the cows of
the Durham breed be amongst the best dairy animals in the
world? This characteristic cannot, therefore, be considered
absolutely appreciable, as much depends on the race to
which a cow may belong. It is indicative of milk only,
because it is a remarkable point in those races which have
produced milk cows. Thus a characteristic of race has been
mistaken for a sign of particular qualities.”

“If, then, we should regard the escutcheon, as well as a fine
head, one of the characteristics common in the Short-Horn,
it is not necessary to consider it as an indication of any
particularly developed quality. Although probably the best
milkers would have this sign, yet it might be regarded as
a latent sign of milking qualities which had been bred out
by disuse. The only fair way to judge of the value of the
escutcheon in determining milking qualities, is to consider its
influence in the different breeds separately, not comparing
one breed with another. In judging grade cows, characteristics
and blood must have a certain influence on the judgment. The
general type of the animal must be considered.

“In the Ayrshire cow, we must regard the escutcheon, not as a
special characteristic of the breed, but as one of the signs
denoting quality.