The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Principles of Breeding
    
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: The Principles of Breeding

Author: S. L. Goodale

Release date: June 22, 2007 [eBook #21900]

Language: English

Credits: Produced by Jeannie Howse, Steven Giacomelli and the Online
        Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
        file was produced from images produced by Core Historical
        Literature in Agriculture (CHLA), Cornell University)


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PRINCIPLES OF BREEDING ***




Produced by Jeannie Howse, Steven Giacomelli and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images produced by Core Historical
Literature in Agriculture (CHLA), Cornell University)






       *       *       *       *       *

    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
    | Transcriber's Note:                                       |
    |                                                           |
    | Inconsistent hyphenation and unusual spelling in the      |
    | original document have been preserved.                    |
    |                                                           |
    | Obvious typographical errors have been corrected. For     |
    | a complete list, please see the end of this document.     |
    |                                                           |
    | Note that 'neat cattle' does not refer to cattle that     |
    | dress nicely, nor is it a typo. Neat cattle are           |
    | domesticated straight-backed animals of the bovine        |
    | genus.                                                    |
    |                                                           |
    +-----------------------------------------------------------+

       *       *       *       *       *




THE
PRINCIPLES OF BREEDING:

OR,
GLIMPSES AT THE PHYSIOLOGICAL LAWS
INVOLVED IN THE
REPRODUCTION AND IMPROVEMENT
OF
DOMESTIC ANIMALS.

BY
S.L. GOODALE,
SECRETARY OF THE MAINE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE.

BOSTON:
CROSBY, NICHOLS, LEE AND COMPANY,
117 WASHINGTON ST.
1861.




Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1861,
BY STEPHEN L. GOODALE,
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Maine.



Press of Stevens & Sayward,
Augusta, Maine.




PREFACE.


The writer has had frequent occasion to notice the want of some handy
book embodying the principles necessary to be understood in order to
secure improvement in Domestic Animals.

It has been his aim to supply this want.

In doing so he has availed himself freely of the knowledge supplied by
others, the aim being to furnish a useful, rather than an original
book.

If it serve in any measure to supply the need, and to awaken greater
interest upon a matter of vital importance to the agricultural
interests of the country, the writer's purpose will be accomplished.




CONTENTS.


                                                            PAGE.

CHAPTER I.--INTRODUCTORY,                                       7

       II.--LAW OF SIMILARITY,                                 21

      III.--LAW OF VARIATION,                                  33

       IV.--ATAVISM OR ANCESTRAL INFLUENCE,                    61

        V.--RELATIVE INFLUENCE OF THE PARENTS,                 68

       VI.--LAW OF SEX,                                        89

      VII.--IN-AND-IN BREEDING,                                94

     VIII.--CROSSING,                                         105

       IX.--BREEDING IN THE LINE,                             119

        X.--CHARACTERISTICS OF BREEDS,                        127




THE PRINCIPLES OF BREEDING.




CHAPTER I.

INTRODUCTORY.


The object of the husbandman, like that of men engaged in other
avocations, is _profit_; and like other men the farmer may expect
success proportionate to the skill, care, judgment and perseverance
with which his operations are conducted.

The better policy of farmers generally, is to make stock husbandry in
some one or more of its departments a leading aim--that is to say,
while they shape their operations according to the circumstances in
which they are situated, these should steadily embrace the conversion
of a large proportion of the crops grown into animal products,--and
this because, by so doing, they may not only secure a present
livelihood, but best maintain and increase the fertility of their
lands.

The object of the stock grower is to obtain the most valuable returns
from his vegetable products. He needs, as Bakewell happily expressed
it, "the best _machine_ for converting herbage and other animal food
into money."

He will therefore do well to seek such animals as are most perfect of
their kind--such as will pay best for the expense of procuring the
machinery, for the care and attention bestowed, and for the
consumption of raw material. The returns come in various forms. They
may or may not be connected with the ultimate value of the animal. In
the beef ox and the mutton sheep, they are so connected to a large
extent; in the dairy cow and the fine wooled sheep, this is quite a
secondary consideration;--in the horse, valued as he is for beauty,
speed and draught, it is not thought of at all.

Not only is there a wide range of field for operations, from which the
stock grower may select his own path of procedure, but there is a
demand that his attention be directed _with a definite aim_, and
_towards an end clearly apprehended_. The first question to be
answered, is, what do we want? and the next, how shall we get it?

What we want, depends wholly upon our situation and surroundings, and
each must answer it for himself. In England the problem to be solved
by the breeder of neat cattle and sheep is how "to produce an animal
or a living machine which with a certain quantity and quality of food,
and under certain given circumstances, shall yield in the shortest
time the largest quantity and best quality of beef, mutton or milk,
with the largest profit to the producer and at least cost to the
consumer." But this is not precisely the problem for American farmers
to solve, because our circumstances are different. Few, if any, here
grow oxen for beef alone, but for labor and beef, so that earliest
possible maturity may be omitted and a year or more of labor
profitably intervene before conversion to beef. Many cultivators of
sheep, too, are so situated as to prefer fine wool, which is
incompatible with the largest quantity and best quality of meat.
Others differently situated in regard to a meat market would do well
to follow the English practice and aim at the most profitable
production of mutton. A great many farmers, not only of those in the
vicinity of large towns, but of those at some distance, might, beyond
doubt, cultivate dairy qualities in cows, to great advantage, and this
too, even, if necessary, at the sacrifice, to considerable extent, of
beef making qualities. As a general thing dairy qualities have been
sadly neglected in years past.

Whatever may be the object in view, it should be clearly apprehended,
and striven for with persistent and well directed efforts. To buy or
breed common animals of mixed qualities and use them for any and for
all purposes is too much like a manufacturer of cloth procuring some
carding, spinning and weaving machinery, adapted to no particular
purpose but which can somehow be used for any, and attempting to make
fabrics of cotton, of wool, and of linen with it. I do not say that
cloth would not be produced, but he would assuredly be slow in getting
rich by it.

The stock grower needs not only to have a clear and definite aim in
view, but also to understand the means by which it may best be
accomplished. Among these means a knowledge of the principles of
breeding holds a prominent place, and this is not of very easy
acquisition by the mass of farmers. The experience of any one man
would go but a little way towards acquiring it, and there has not been
much published on the subject in any form within the reach of most. I
have been able to find nothing like an extended systematic treatise on
the subject, either among our own or the foreign agricultural
literature which has come within my notice. Indeed, from the
scantiness of what appears to have been written, coupled with the fact
that much knowledge must exist somewhere, one is tempted to believe
that not all which might have done so, has yet found its way to
printers' ink. That a great deal has been acquired, we know, as we
know a tree--by its fruits. That immense achievements have been
accomplished is beyond doubt.

The improvement of the domestic animals of a country so as greatly to
enhance their individual and aggregate value, and to render the
rearing of them more profitable to all concerned, is surely one of the
achievements of advanced civilization and enlightenment, and is as
much a triumph of science and skill as the construction of a railroad,
a steamship, an electric telegraph, or any work of architecture. If
any doubt this, let them ponder the history of those breeds of animals
which have made England the stock nursery of the world, the perfection
of which enables her to export thousands of animals at prices almost
fabulously beyond their value for any purpose but to propagate their
kind; let them note the patient industry, the genius and application
which have been put forth to bring them to the condition they have
attained, and their doubts must cease.

Robert Bakewell of Dishley, was one of the first of these improvers.
Let us stop for a moment's glance at him. Born in 1725, on the farm
where his father and grandfather had been tenants, he began at the age
of thirty to carry out the plans for the improvement of domestic
animals upon which he had resolved as the result of long and patient
study and reflection. He was a man of genius, energy and perseverance.
With sagacity to conceive and fortitude to perfect his designs, he
laid his plans and struggled against many disappointments, amid the
ridicule and predictions of failure freely bestowed by his
neighbors,--often against serious pecuniary embarrassments; and at
last was crowned by a wonderful degree of success. When he commenced
letting his rams, (a system first introduced by him and adhered to
during his life, in place of selling,) they brought him 17_s._ 6_d._
each, for the season. This was ten years after he commenced his
improvements. Soon the price came to a guinea, then to two or three
guineas--rapidly increasing with the reputation of his stock, until in
1784, they brought him 100 guineas each! Five years later his lettings
for one season amounted to $30,000!

With all his skill and success he seemed afraid lest others might
profit by the knowledge he had so laboriously acquired. He put no pen
to paper and at death left not even the slightest memorandum throwing
light upon his operations, and it is chiefly through his
cotemporaries, who gathered somewhat from verbal communications, that
we know anything regarding them. From these we learn that he formed an
ideal standard in his own mind and then endeavored, first by a wide
selection and a judicious and discriminating coupling, to obtain the
type desired, and then by close breeding, connected with rigorous
weeding out, to perpetuate and fix it.

After him came a host of others, not all of whom concealed their light
beneath a bushel. By long continued and extensive observation,
resulting in the collection of numerous facts, and by the collation of
these facts of nature, by scientific research and practical
experiments, certain physiological laws have been discovered, and
principles of breeding have been deduced and established. It is true
that some of these laws are as yet hidden from us, and much regarding
them is but imperfectly understood. What we do not know is a deal more
than what we do know, but to ignore so much as has been discovered,
and is well established, and can be learned by any who care to do so,
and to go on regardless of it, would indicate a degree of wisdom in
the breeder on a par with that of a builder who should fasten together
wood and iron just as the pieces happened to come to his hand,
regardless of the laws of architecture, and expect a convenient house
or a fast sailing ship to be the result of his labors.

Is not the usual course of procedure among many farmers too nearly
parallel to the case supposed? Let the ill-favored, chance-bred,
mongrel beasts in their barn yards testify. The truth is, and it is of
no use to deny or disguise the fact, the _improvement_ of domestic
animals is one of the most important and to a large extent, one of
the most neglected branches of rural economy. The fault is not that
farmers do not keep stock enough, much oftener they keep more than
they can feed to the most profitable point, and when a short crop of
hay comes, there is serious difficulty in supporting them, or in
selling them at a paying price; but the great majority neither bestow
proper care upon the selection of animals for breeding, nor do they
appreciate the dollars and cents difference between such as are
profitable and such as are profitless. How many will hesitate or
refuse to pay a dollar for the services of a good bull when some sort
of a calf can be begotten for a "quarter?" and this too when one by
the good male would be worth a dollar more for veal and ten or twenty
dollars more when grown to a cow or an ox? How few will hesitate or
refuse to allow to a butcher the cull of his calves and lambs for a
few extra shillings, and this when the butcher's difference in
shillings would soon, were the best kept and the worst sold, grow into
as many dollars and more? How many there are who esteem size to be of
more consequence than symmetry, or adaptation to the use for which
they are kept? How many ever sit down to calculate the difference in
money value between an animal which barely pays for keeping, or
perhaps not that, and one which pays a profit?

Let us reckon a little. Suppose a man wishes to buy a cow. Two are
offered him, both four years old, and which might probably be
serviceable for ten years to come. With the same food and attendance
the first will yield for ten months in the year, an average of five
quarts per day,--and the other for the same term will yield seven
quarts and of equal quality. What is the comparative value of each?
The difference in yield is six hundred quarts per annum. For the
purpose of this calculation we will suppose it worth three cents per
quart--amounting to eighteen dollars. Is not the second cow, while she
holds out to give it, as good as the first, and three hundred dollars
at interest besides? If the first just pays for her food and
attendance, the second, yielding two-fifths more, pays _forty per
cent. profit_ annually; and yet how many farmers having two such cows
for sale would make more than ten, or twenty, or at most, thirty
dollars difference in the price? The profit from one is eighteen
dollars a year--in ten years one hundred and eighty dollars, besides
the annual accumulations of interest--the profit of the other
is--nothing. If the seller has need to keep one, would he not be wiser
to give away the first, than to part with the second for a hundred
dollars?

Suppose again, that an acre of grass or a ton of hay costs five
dollars, and that for its consumption by a given set of animals, the
farmer gets a return of five dollars worth of labor, or meat, or wool,
or milk. He is selling his crop at cost, and makes no profit. Suppose
by employing other animals, better horses, better cows, oxen and
sheep, he can get ten dollars per ton in returns. How much are the
latter worth more than the former? Have they not doubled the value of
the crops, and increased the profit of farming from nothing to a
hundred per cent? Except that the manure is not doubled, and the
animals would some day need to be replaced, could he not as well
afford to give the price of his farm for one set as to accept the
other as a gift?

Among many, who are in fact ignorant of what goes to constitute merit
in a breeding animal, there is an inclination to treat as imaginary
and unreal the higher values placed upon well-bred animals over those
of mixed origin, unless they are larger and handsomer in proportion to
the price demanded. The sums paid for qualities which are not at once
apparent to the eye are stigmatized as _fancy prices_. It is not
denied that fancy prices are sometimes, perhaps often paid, for there
are probably few who are not willing occasionally to pay dearly for
what merely pleases them, aside from any other merit commensurate to
the price.

But, on the other hand, it is fully as true that great intrinsic
value for breeding purposes may exist in an animal and yet make very
little show. Such an one may not even look so well to a casual
observer, as a grade, or cross-bred animal, which although valuable as
an individual, is not, for breeding purposes, worth a tenth part as
much.

Let us suppose two farmers to need a bull; they go to seek and two are
offered, both two years old, of similar color, form and general
appearance. One is offered for twenty dollars--for the other a hundred
is demanded. Satisfactory evidence is offered that the latter is no
better than any or all of its ancestors for many generations back on
both sides, or than its kindred--that it is of a pure and distinct
breed, that it possesses certain well known hereditary qualities, that
it is suited for a definite purpose, it may be a Short-horn, noted for
large size and early maturity, it may be a Devon, of fine color and
symmetry, active and hardy, it may be an Ayrshire, noted for dairy
qualities, or of some other definite breed, whose uses, excellencies
and deficiencies are all well known.

The other is of no breed whatever, perhaps it is called a grade or a
cross. The man who bred it had rather confused ideas, so far as he had
any, about breeding, and thought to combine all sorts of good
qualities in one animal, and so he worked in a little grade Durham,
or Hereford to get size, and a little Ayrshire for milk, and a little
Devon for color, and so on, using perhaps dams sired by a bull in the
neighborhood which had also got some "Whitten"[1] or "Peter Waldo"
calves, (though none of these showed it,) at any rate he wanted some
of the "native" element in his stock, because it was tough, and some
folks thought natives were the best after all. Among its ancestors and
kindred were some good and some not good, some large and some small,
some well favored and fat, some ill favored and lean, some profitable
and some profitless. The animal now offered is a great deal better
than the average of them. It looks for aught they can see, about as
well as the one for which five times his price is asked. Perhaps he
served forty cows last year and brought his owner as many quarters,
while the other only served five and brought an income of but five
dollars. The question arises, which is the better bargain? After
pondering the matter, one buys the low-priced and the other the
high-priced one, both being well satisfied in their own minds.

What did results show? The low-priced one served that season perhaps a
hundred cows; more than ought to have done so, came a second
time;--having been overtasked as a yearling, he lacked somewhat of
vigor. The calves came _of all sorts_, some good, some poor, a few
like the sire, more like the dams--all mongrels and showing mongrel
origin more than he did. There seemed in many of them a tendency to
combine the defects of the grades from which he sprung rather than
their good points. In some, the quietness of the Short-horn
degenerated into stupidity, and in others the activity of the Devon
into nervous viciousness. Take them together they perhaps paid for
rearing, or nearly so. After using him another year, he was killed,
having been used long enough.

The other, we will say, served that same season a reasonable number,
perhaps four to six in a week, or one every day, not more. Few came a
second time and those for no fault of his. The calves bear a striking
resemblance to the sire. Some from the better cows look even better in
some points, than himself and few much worse. There is a remarkable
uniformity among them; as they grow up they thrive better than those
by the low priced one. They prove better adapted to the use intended.
On the whole they are quite satisfactory and each pays annually in its
growth, labor or milk a profit over the cost of food and attendance of
five or ten dollars or more. If worked enough to furnish the exercise
needful to insure vigorous health, he may be as serviceable and as
manageable at eight or ten years old, as at two; meantime he has got,
perhaps, five hundred calves, which in due time become worth ten or
twenty dollars each more than those from the other. Which now seems
the wiser purchase? Was the higher estimate placed on the well bred
animal based upon fancy or upon intrinsic value?

The conviction that a better knowledge of the principles of breeding
would render our system of agriculture more profitable, and the hope
of contributing somewhat to this end, have induced the attempt to set
forth some of the physiological principles involved in the
reproduction of domestic animals, or in other words, the laws which
govern hereditary transmission.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Local names for _lyery_, or black fleshed cattle.




CHAPTER II.

THE LAW OF SIMILARITY.


The first and most important of the laws to be considered in this
connection is that of SIMILARITY. It is by virtue of this law that the
peculiar characters, qualities and properties of the parents, whether
external or internal, good or bad, healthy or diseased, are
transmitted to their offspring. This is one of the plainest and most
certain of the laws of nature. Children resemble their parents, and
they do so because these are hereditary. The law is constant. Within
certain limits progeny always and every where resemble their parents.
If this were not so, there would be no constancy of species, and a
horse might beget a calf or a sow have a litter of puppies, which is
never the case,--for in all time we find repeated in the offspring the
structure, the instincts and all the general characteristics of the
parents, and never those of another species. Such is the law of nature
and hence the axiom that "like produces like." But while experience
teaches the constancy of hereditary transmission, it teaches just as
plainly that the constancy is not absolute and perfect, and this
introduces us to another law, viz: that of variation, which will be
considered by and by; our present concern is to ascertain what we can
of the law of similarity.

The lesson which this law teaches might be stated in five words, to
wit: _Breed only from the best_--but the teaching may be more
impressive, and will more likely be heeded, if we understand the
extent and scope of the law.

Facts in abundance show the hereditary tendency of physical, mental
and moral qualities in men, and very few would hesitate to admit that
the external form and general characteristics of parents descend to
children in both the human and brute races; but not all are aware that
this law reaches to such minute particulars as facts show to be the
case.

We see hereditary transmission of a peculiar type upon an extensive
scale, in some of the distinct races, the Jews, and the Gypsies, for
example. Although exposed for centuries to the modifying influences of
diverse climates, to association with peoples of widely differing
customs and habits, they never merge their peculiarities in those of
any people with whom they dwell, but continue distinct. They retain the
same features, the same figures, the same manners, customs and habits.
The Jew in Poland, in Austria, in London, or in New York, is the same;
and the money-changers of the Temple at Jerusalem in the time of our
Lord may be seen to-day on change in any of the larger marts of trade.
How is this? Just because the Jew is a "thorough-bred." There is with
him no intermarriage with the Gentile--no crossing, no mingling of his
organization with that of another. When this ensues "permanence of
race" will cease and give place to variations of any or of all sorts.

Some families are remarkable during long periods for tall and handsome
figures and striking regularity of features, while in others a less
perfect form, or some peculiar deformity reappears with equal
constancy. A family in Yorkshire is known for several generations to
have been furnished with six fingers and toes. A family possessing the
same peculiarity resides in the valley of the Kennebec, and the same
has reappeared in one or more other families connected with it by
marriage.

The thick upper lip of the imperial house of Austria, introduced by
the marriage of the Emperor Maximillian with Mary of Burgundy, has
been a marked feature in that family for hundreds of years, and is,
visible in their descendants to this day. Equally noticeable is the
"Bourbon nose" in the former reigning family of France. All the Barons
de Vessins had a peculiar mark between their shoulders, and it is said
that by means of it a posthumous son of a late Baron de Vessins was
discovered in a London shoemaker's apprentice. Haller cites the case
of a family where an external tumor was transmitted from father to son
which always swelled when the atmosphere was moist.

A remarkable example of a singular organic peculiarity and of its
transmission to descendants, is furnished in the case of the English
family of "Porcupine men," so called from having all the body except
the head and face, and the soles and palms, covered with hard
dark-colored excrescences of a horny nature. The first of these was
Edward Lambert, born in Suffolk in 1718, and exhibited before the
Royal Society when fourteen years of age. The other children of his
parents were naturally formed; and Edward, aside from this
peculiarity, was good looking and enjoyed good health. He afterward
had six children, all of whom inherited the same formation, as did
also several grand-children.

Numerous instances are on record tending to show that even accidents
do sometimes, although not usually, become hereditary. Blumenbach
mentions the case of a man whose little finger was crushed and twisted
by an accident to his right hand. His sons inherited right hands with
the little finger distorted. A bitch had her hinder parts paralyzed
for some days by a blow. Six of her seven pups were deformed, or so
weak in their hinder parts that they were drowned as useless. A
pregnant cat got her tail injured; in each of her five kittens the
tail was distorted, and had an enlargement or knob near the end of
each. Horses marked during successive generations with red-hot irons
in the same place, transmit visible traces of such marks to their
colts.

Very curious are the facts which go to show that acquired habits
sometimes become hereditary. Pritchard, in his "Natural History of
Man," says that the horses bred on the table lands of the Cordilleras
"are carefully taught a peculiar pace which is a sort of running
amble;" that after a few generations this pace becomes a natural one;
young untrained horses adopting it without compulsion. But a still
more curious fact is, that if these domesticated stallions breed with
mares of the wild herd, which abound in the surrounding plains, they
"become the sires of a race in which the ambling pace is natural and
requires no teaching."

Mr. T.A. Knight, in a paper read before the Royal Society, says, "the
hereditary propensities of the offspring of Norwegian ponies, whether
full or half-bred, are very singular. Their ancestors have been in the
habit of _obeying the voice_ of their riders and _not the bridle_; and
horse-breakers complain that it is impossible to produce this last
habit in the young colts. They are, however, exceedingly docile and
obedient when they understand the commands of their masters."

A late writer in one of the foreign journals, says that he had a "pup
taken from its mother at six weeks old, who although never taught to
'beg' (an accomplishment his mother had been taught) spontaneously
took to begging for every thing he wanted when about seven or eight
months old; he would beg for food, beg to be let out of the room, and
one day was found opposite a rabbit hutch apparently begging the
rabbits to come and play."

If even in such minute particulars as these, hereditary transmission
may be distinctly seen, it becomes the breeder to look closely to the
"like" which he wishes to see reproduced. Judicious selection is
indispensable to success in breeding, and this should have regard to
_every particular_--general appearance, length of limb, shape of
carcass, development of chest; if in cattle, the size, shape and
position of udder, thickness of skin, "touch," length and texture of
hair, docility, &c., &c. if in horses, their adaptation to any
special excellence depending on form, or temperament, or nervous
energy.

Not only should care be taken to avoid _structural defects_, but
especially to secure freedom from _hereditary diseases_, as both
defects and diseases appear to be more easily transmissible than
desirable qualities. There is often no obvious peculiarity of
structure, or appearance, indicating the possession of diseases or
defects which are transmissible, and so, special care and continued
acquaintance are necessary in order to be assured of their absence in
breeding animals; but such a tendency although invisible or
inappreciable to cursory observation, must still, judging from its
effects, have as real and certain an existence, as any peculiarity of
form or color.

Every one who believes that a disease may be hereditary at all, must
admit that certain individuals possess certain tendencies which render
them especially liable to certain diseases, as consumption or
scrofula; yet it is not easy to say precisely in what this
predisposition consists. It seems probable, however, that it may be
due either to some want of harmony between different organs, some
faulty formation or combination of parts, or to some peculiar physical
or chemical condition of the blood or tissues; and that this altered
state, constituting the inherent congenital tendency to the disease,
is duly transmitted from parent to offspring like any other quality
more readily apparent to observation.

Hereditary diseases exhibit certain eminently characteristic
phenomena, which a late writer[2] enumerates as follows:

    1. "They are transmitted by the male as well as by the female
    parent, and are doubly severe in the offspring of parents both
    of which are affected by them.

    2. They develop themselves not only in the immediate progeny of
    one affected by them, but also in many subsequent generations.

    3. They do not, however, always appear in each generation in the
    same form; one disease is sometimes substituted for another,
    analogous to it, and this again after some generations becomes
    changed into that to which the breed was originally liable--as
    phthisis (consumption) and dysentery. Thus, a stock of cattle
    previously subject to phthisis, sometimes become affected for
    several generations with dysentery to the exclusion of phthisis,
    but by and by, dysentery disappears to give place to phthisis.

    4. Hereditary diseases occur to a certain extent independently
    of external circumstances; appearing under all sorts of
    management, and being little affected by changes of locality,
    separation from diseased stock, or such causes as modify the
    production of non-hereditary diseases.

    5. They are, however, most certainly and speedily developed in
    circumstances inimical to general good health, and often occur
    at certain, so called, critical periods of life, when unusual
    demands on the vital powers take place.

    6. They show a striking tendency to modify and absorb into
    themselves all extraneous diseases; for example, in an animal of
    consumptive constitution, pneumonia seldom runs its ordinary
    course, and when arrested, often passes into consumption.

    7. Hereditary diseases are less effectually treated by ordinary
    remedies than other diseases. Thus, although an attack of
    phthisis, rheumatism or opthalmia may be subdued, and the
    patient put out of pain and danger, the tendency to the disease
    will still remain and be greatly aggravated by each attack.

    In horses and neat cattle, hereditary diseases do not usually
    show themselves at birth, and sometimes the tendency remains
    latent for many years, perhaps through one or two generations
    and afterwards breaks out with all its former severity."

The diseases which are found to be hereditary in horses are scrofula,
rheumatism, rickets, chronic cough, roaring, ophthalmia or
inflammation of the eye,--grease or scratches, bone spavin, curb, &c.
Indeed, Youatt says, "there is scarcely a malady to which the horse is
subject, that is not hereditary. Contracted feet, curb, spavin,
roaring, thick wind, blindness, notoriously descend from the sire or
dam to the foal."

The diseases which are found hereditary in neat cattle are scrofula,
consumption, dysentery, diarrhea, rheumatism and malignant tumors.
Neat cattle being less exposed to the exciting causes of disease, and
less liable to be overtasked or exposed to violent changes of
temperature, or otherwise put in jeopardy, their diseases are not so
numerous, and what they have are less violent than in the horse, and
generally of a chronic character.

Scrofula is not uncommon among sheep, and it presents itself in
various forms. Sometimes it is connected with consumption; sometimes
it affects the viscera of the abdomen, and particularly the mesenteric
glands in a manner similar to consumption in the lungs. The scrofulous
taint has been known to be so strong as to affect the foetus, and
lambs have occasionally been born with it, but much oftener they show
it at an early age, and any affected in this way are liable to fall an
easy prey to any ordinary or prevailing disease which develops in such
with unusual severity. Sheep are also liable to several diseases of
the brain and of the respiratory and digestive organs. Epilepsy, or
"fits," and rheumatism sometimes occur.

Swine are subject to nearly the same hereditary diseases as sheep.
Epilepsy is more common with them than with the latter, and they are
more liable to scrofula than any other domestic animals.

When properly and carefully managed, swine are not ordinarily very
liable to disease, but when, as too often kept in small, damp, filthy
styes, and obliged constantly to inhale noxious effluvia, and to eat
unsuitable food, we cannot wonder either that they become victims of
disease or transmit to their progeny a weak and sickly organization.
Swine are not naturally the dirty beasts which many suppose.
"Wallowing in the mire," so proverbial of them, is rather from a wish
for protection from insects and for coolness, than from any inherent
love of filth, and if well cared for they will be comparatively
cleanly.

The practice of close breeding, which is probably carried to greater
extent with swine than with any other domestic animal, undoubtedly
contributes to their liability to hereditary diseases, and when those
possessing any such diseases are coupled, the ruin of the stock is
easily and quickly effected, for as already stated, they are
propagated by either parent, and always most certainly and in most
aggravated form, when occurring in both.

With regard to hereditary diseases, it is eminently true that "an
ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." As a general and almost
invariable rule, animals possessing either defects or a tendency to
disease should not be employed for breeding. If, however, for special
reasons it seems desirable to breed from one which has some slight
defect of symmetry, or a faint tendency to disease, although for the
latter it is doubtful if the possession of any good qualities can
fully compensate, it should be mated with one which excels in every
respect in which the other is deficient, and on no account with one
which is near of kin to it.

Notwithstanding the importance due to the subject of hereditary
diseases, it is also true that few diseases invariably owe their
development to hereditary causes. Even such as are usually hereditary
are sometimes produced accidentally, (as of course there must be a
beginning to everything,) and in such case, they may, or may not be,
transmitted to their progeny. As before shown, it is certain that they
sometimes are, which is sufficient reason to avoid such for breeding
purposes. It is also well known that, in the horse, for instance,
certain forms of limbs predispose to certain diseases, as bone spavin
is most commonly seen where there is a disproportion in the size of
the limb above and below the hock, and others might be named of
similar character; in all such cases the disease may be caused by an
agency which would be wholly inadequate in one of more perfect form,
but once existing, it is liable to be reproduced in the offspring--all
tending to show the great importance of _giving due heed_ in selecting
breeding animals _to all qualities, both external and internal_, so
long as "like produces like."

FOOTNOTES:

[2] Finlay Dun, V.S., in Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society.




CHAPTER III.

THE LAW OF VARIATION.


We come now to consider another law, by which that of similarity is
greatly modified, to wit, the law of variation or divergence. All
organic beings, whether plants or animals, possess a certain
flexibility or pliancy of organization, rendering them capable of
change to a greater or less extent. When in a state of nature
variations are comparatively slow and infrequent, but when in a state
of domestication they occur much oftener and to a much greater extent.
The greater variability in the latter case is doubtless owing, in some
measure, to our domestic productions being reared under conditions of
life not so uniform, and different from, those to which the parent
species was exposed in a state of nature.

Flexibility of organization in connexion with climate, is seen in a
remarkable degree in Indian corn. The small Canada variety, growing
only three feet high and ripening in seventy to ninety days when
carried southward, gradually enlarges in the whole plant until it may
be grown twelve feet high and upwards, and requires one hundred and
fifty days to ripen its seed. A southern variety brought northward,
gradually dwindles in size and ripens earlier until it reaches a type
specially fitted to its latitude.

Variation, although the same in kind, is greater in degree, among
domesticated plants than among animals. From the single wild variety
of the potato as first discovered and taken to Europe, have sprung
innumerable sorts. Kemp, in his work on Agricultural Physiology, tells
us, that on the maritime cliffs of England, there exists a little
plant with a fusiform root, smooth glaucous leaves, flowers similar to
wild mustard and of a saline taste. It is called by botanists,
_Brassica oleracea_. By cultivation there have been obtained from this
insignificant and apparently useless plant--

     1st, all borecoles or kails, 12 varieties or more.
     2d, all cabbages having heart.
     3d, the various kinds of Savoy cabbages.
     4th, Brussels sprouts.
     5th, all the broccolis and cauliflowers which do not heart.
     6th, the rape plant.
     7th, the ruta baga or Swedish turnip.
     8th, yellow and white turnips.
     9th, hybrid turnips.
    10th, kohl rabbi.

Similar examples are numerous among our common useful plants, and
among flowers the dahlia and verbena furnish an illustration of
countless varieties, embracing numberless hues and combinations of
color, from purest white through nearly all the tints of the rainbow
to almost black, of divers hights too, and habits of growth, springing
up under the hand of cultivation in a few years from plants which at
first yielded only a comparatively unattractive and self-colored
flower. In brief, it may be said, that nearly or quite all the
choicest productions both of our kitchen and flower gardens are due to
variations induced by cultivation in a course of years from plants
which in their natural condition would scarcely attract a passing
glance.

We cannot say what might have been the original type of many of our
domestic animals, for the inquiry would carry us beyond any record of
history or tradition regarding it, but few doubt that all our
varieties of the horse, the ox, the sheep and the dog, sprang each
originally from a single type, and that the countless variations are
due to causes connected with their domestication. Of those reclaimed
within the period of memory may be named the turkey. This was unknown
to the inhabitants of the old continent until discovered here in a
wild state. Since then, having been domesticated and widely
disseminated, it now offers varieties of wide departure from the
original type, and which have been nurtured into self-sustaining
breeds, distinguished from each other by the possession of peculiar
characteristics.

Among what are usually reckoned the more active causes of variation
may be named climate, food and habit.

Animals in cold climates are provided with a thicker covering of hair
than in warmer ones. Indeed, it is said that in some of the tropical
provinces of South America, there are cattle which have an extremely
rare and fine fur in place of the ordinary pile of hair. Various other
instances could be cited, if necessary, going to show that a
beneficent Creator has implanted in many animals, to a certain extent,
a _power of accommodation_ to the circumstances and conditions amid
which they are reared.

The _supply of food_, whether abundant or scanty, is one of the most
active cases of variation known to be within the control of man. For
illustration of its effect, let us suppose two pairs of twin calves,
as nearly alike as possible, and let a male and a female from each
pair be suckled by their mothers until they wean themselves, and be
fed always after with plenty of the most nourishing food; and the
others to be fed with skimmed milk, hay tea and gruel at first, to be
put to grass at two months old, and subsequently fed on coarse and
innutritious fodder. Let these be bred from separately, and the same
style of treatment kept up, and not many generations would elapse
before we had distinct varieties, or breeds, differing materially in
size, temperament and time of coming to maturity.

Suppose other similar pairs, and one from each to be placed in the
richest blue-grass pastures of Kentucky, or in the fertile valley of
the Tees; always supplied with abundance of rich food, these live
luxuriously, grow rapidly, increase in hight, bulk, thickness, every
way, they early reach the full size which they are capable of
attaining; having nothing to induce exertion, they become inactive,
lazy, lethargic and fat. Being bred from, the progeny resemble the
parents, "only more so." Each generation acquiring more firmly and
fixedly the characteristics induced by their situation, these become
hereditary, and we by and by have a _breed_ exhibiting somewhat of the
traits of the Teeswater or Durhams from which the improved Short-horns
of the present day have been reared.

The others we will suppose to have been placed on the hill-sides of
New England, or on the barren Isle of Jersey, or on the highlands of
Scotland, or in the pastures of Devonshire. These being obliged to
roam longer for a scantier repast grow more slowly, develop their
capabilities in regard to size not only more slowly, but, perhaps, not
fully at all--they become more active in temperament and habit,
thinner and flatter in muscle. Their young cannot so soon shift for
themselves and require more milk, and the dams yield it. Each
generation in its turn becomes more completely and fully adapted to
the circumstances amid which they are reared, and if bred
indiscriminately with any thing and every thing else, we by and by
have the common mixed cattle of New England, miscalled natives; or if
kept more distinct, we have something approaching the Devon, the
Ayrshire, or the Jersey breeds.

A due consideration of the natural effect of climate and food is a
point worthy the special attention of the stock-husbandman. If the
breeds employed be well adapted to the situation, and the capacity of
the soil is such as to feed them fully, profit may be safely
calculated upon. Animals are to be looked upon as machines for
converting herbage into money. Now it costs a certain amount to keep
up the motive power of any machine, and also to make good the wear and
tear incident to its working; and in the case of animals it is only so
much as is digested and assimilated, _in addition to the amount thus
required_, which is converted into meat, milk or wool; so that the
greater the proportion which the latter bears to the former, the
greater will be the _profit_ to be realized from keeping them.

There has been in New England generally a tendency to choose animals
of large size, as large as can be had from any where, and if they
possess symmetry and all other good qualities commensurate with the
size, and if plenty of nutritious food can be supplied, there is an
advantage gained by keeping such, for it costs less, other things
being equal, to shelter and care for one animal than for two. But our
pastures and meadows are not the richest to be found any where, and if
we select such as require, in order to give the profit which they are
capable of yielding, more or richer food than our farms can supply, or
than we have the means to purchase, we must necessarily fail to reap
as much profit as we might by the selection of such as could be easily
fed upon home resources to the point of highest profit.

Whether the selection be of such as are either larger or smaller than
suit our situation, they will, and equally in both cases, vary by
degrees towards the fitting size or type for the locality in which
they are kept, but there is this noteworthy difference, that if larger
ones be brought in, they will not only diminish, but deteriorate,
while if smaller be brought in, they will enlarge _and improve_.

The bestowal of food sufficient both in amount and quality to enable
animals to develop all the excellencies inherent in them, and to
obtain all the profit to be derived from them, is something very
distinct from undue forcing or pampering. This process may produce
wonderful animals to look at, but neither useful nor profitable ones,
and there is danger of thus producing a most undesirable variation,
for, as in plants, we find that forcing, pampering, high culture or
whatever else it may be called, may be carried so far as to result in
the production of double flowers, (an unnatural development,) and
these accompanied with greater or less inability to perfect seed, so
in animals, the same process may be carried far enough to produce
sterility. Instances are not wanting, and particularly among the more
recent improved Short-horns, of impotency among the males and of
barrenness in the females, and in some cases where they have borne
calves they have failed to secrete milk for their nourishment.[3]
Impotency in bulls of various breeds has not unfrequently occurred
from too high feeding, and especially if connected _with lack of
sufficient exercise_.[4]

_Habit_ has a decided influence towards inducing variation. As the
blacksmith's right arm becomes more muscular from the habit of
exercise induced by his vocation, so we find in domestic animals that
use, or the demand created by habit, is met by a development or change
in the organization adapted to the requirement. For instance, with
cows in a state of nature or where required only to suckle their
young, the supply of milk is barely fitted to the requirement. If more
is desired, and if the milk be drawn completely and regularly, the
yield is increased and continued longer. By keeping up the demand
there is induced in the next generation a greater development of the
secreting organs, and more milk is given. By continuing the practice,
by furnishing the needful conditions of suitable food, &c., and by
selecting in each generation those animals showing the greatest
tendency towards milk, a breed specially adapted for the dairy may be
established. It is just by this mode that the Ayrshires have, in the
past eighty or a hundred years, been brought to be what they are, a
breed giving more good milk upon a given quantity of food than any
other.

It is because the English breeders of modern Short-horns altogether
prefer beef-making to milk-giving properties that they have
constantly fostered variation in favor of the one at the expense of
the other until the milking quality in many families is nearly bred
out. It was not so formerly--thirty years ago the Short-horns (or as
they were then usually called, the Durhams) were not deficient in
dairy qualities, and some families were famous for large yield. By
properly directed efforts they might, doubtless, be bred back to milk,
but of this there is no probability, at least in England, for the
tendency of modern practice is very strong toward having each breed
specially fitted to its use--the dairy breeds for milk and the beef
breeds for meat only. The requirements of the English breeder are in
some respects quite unlike those of New England farmers--for instance,
as they employ no oxen for labor there is no inducement to cultivate
working qualities even, in connection with beef.

As an illustration of the effect of habit, Darwin[5] cites the
domestic duck, of which he says, "I find that the bones of the wing
weigh less, and the bones of the leg more, in proportion to the whole
skeleton, than do the same bones in the wild duck; and I presume that
this change may be safely attributed to the domestic duck flying much
less and walking more than its wild parent." And again, "not a single
domestic animal can be named which has not in some country drooping
ears, and the view suggested by some authors, that the drooping is due
to the disuse of the muscles of the ear, from the animals not being
much alarmed by danger, seems probable."

Climate, food and habit are the principal causes of variation which
are known to be in any marked degree under the control of man; and the
effect of these is, doubtless, in some measure indirect and
subservient to other laws, of reproduction, growth and inheritance, of
which we have at present very imperfect knowledge. This is shown by
the fact that the young of the same litter sometimes differ
considerably from each other, though both the young and their parents
have apparently been exposed to exactly the same conditions of life;
for had the action of these conditions been specific or direct and
independent of other laws, if any of the young had varied, the whole
would probably have varied in the same manner.

Numberless hypotheses have been started to account for variation. Some
hold that it is as much the function of the reproductive system to
produce individual differences as it is to make the child like the
parents. Darwin says "the reproductive system is eminently susceptible
to changes in the conditions of life; and to this system being
functionally disturbed in the parents I chiefly attribute the varying
or plastic condition of the offspring. The male and female sexual
elements seem to be affected before that union takes place which is to
form a new being. But why, because the re-productive system is
disturbed this or that part should vary more or less, we are
profoundly ignorant. Nevertheless we can here and there dimly catch a
faint ray of light, and we may feel sure that there must be some cause
for each deviation of structure however slight."

It may be useless for us to speculate here upon the laws which govern
variations. The fact that these exist is what the breeder has to deal
with, and a most important one it is, for it is this chiefly, which
makes hereditary transmission the problem which it is. His aim should
ever be _to grasp and render permanent and increase so far as
practicable, every variation for the better, and to reject for
breeding purposes such as show a downward tendency_.

That this may be done, there is abundant proof in the success which
has in many instances attended the well directed efforts of
intelligent breeders. A remarkable instance is furnished in the new
Mauchamp-Merino sheep of Mons. Graux, which originated in a single
animal, a product of the law of variation, and which by skillful
breeding and selection has become an established breed of a peculiar
type and possessing valuable properties. Samples of the wool of these
sheep were shown at the great exhibition in London, in 1851, and
attracted much attention. It was also shown at the great recent
Agricultural Exhibition at Paris. A correspondent of the _Mark Lane
Express_, says:

    "One of the most interesting portions of the sheep-show is that
    of the Mauchamp variety of Merinos, having a new kind of wool,
    glossy and silky, similar to mohair. This is an instance of an
    entirely new breed being as it were created from a mere sport of
    nature. It was originated by Mons. J.L. Graux. In the year 1828,
    a Merino ewe produced a peculiar ram lamb, having a different
    shape from the usual Merino, and possessing a long, straight,
    and silky character of wool. In 1830, M. Graux obtained by this
    ram one ram and one ewe, having the silky character of wool. In
    1831, among the produce were four rams and one ewe with similar
    fleeces; and in 1833 there were rams enough of the new sort to
    serve the whole flock of ewes. In each subsequent year the lambs
    were of two kinds; one possessing the curled elastic wool of the
    old Merinos, only a little longer and finer; the other like the
    new breed. At last, the skillful breeder obtained a flock
    combining the fine silky fleece with a smaller head, broader
    flanks, and more capacious chest; and several flocks being
    crossed with the Mauchamp variety, have produced also the
    Mauchamp-Merino breed. The pure Mauchamp wool is remarkable for
    its qualities as a combing-wool, owing to the strength, as well
    as the length and fineness of the fibre. It is found of great
    value by the manufacturers of Cashmere shawls and similar
    goods, being second only to the true Cashmere fleece, in the
    fine flexible delicacy of the fibre; and when in combination
    with Cashmere wool, imparting strength and consistency. The
    quantity of the wool has now become as great or greater than
    from ordinary Merinos, while the quality commands for it
    twenty-five per cent. higher price in the French market. Surely
    breeders cannot watch too closely any accidental peculiarity of
    conformation or characteristic in their flocks or herds."

Mons. Vilmorin, the eminent horticulturist of Paris, has likened the
law of similarity to the centripetal force, and the law of variation
to the centrifugal force; and in truth their operations seem
analogous, and possibly they may be the same in kind, though certainly
unlike in this, that they are not reducible to arithmetical
calculation and cannot be subjected to definite measurement. His
thought is at least a highly suggestive one and may be pursued with
profit.

Among the "faint rays" alluded to by Mr. Darwin as throwing light upon
the changes dependent on the laws of reproduction, there is one,
perhaps the brightest yet seen, which deserves our notice. It is the
apparent influence of the male first having fruitful intercourse with
a female upon her subsequent offspring by other males. Attention was
first directed to this by the following circumstance, related by Sir
Everard Home: A young chestnut mare, seven-eighths Arabian, belonging
to the Earl of Morton, was covered in 1815 by a Quagga, which is a
species of wild ass from Africa, and marked somewhat in the style of a
Zebra. The mare was covered but once by the Quagga, and after a
pregnancy of eleven months and four days gave birth to a hybrid, which
had, as was expected, distinct marks of the Quagga, in the shape of
its head, black bars on the legs and shoulders, &c. In 1817, 1818 and
1821, the same mare was covered by a very fine black Arabian horse,
and produced successively three foals, and although she had not seen
the Quagga since 1816, they all bore his curious and unequivocal
markings.

Since the occurrence of this case numerous others of a similar
character have been observed, a few of which may be mentioned. Mr.
McGillivray says, that in several foals in the royal stud at Hampton
Court, got by the horse "Actæon," there were unmistakable marks of the
horse "Colonel." The dams of these foals were bred from by Colonel the
previous year.

A colt, the property of the Earl of Suffield, got by "Laurel," so
resembled another horse, "Camel," that it was whispered and even
asserted at Newmarket that he must have been got by "Camel." It was
ascertained, however, that the mother of the colt bore a foal the
previous year by "Camel."

Alex. Morrison, Esq., of Bognie, had a fine Clydesdale mare which in
1843 was served by a Spanish ass and produced a mule. She afterwards
had a colt by a horse, which bore a very marked likeness to a
mule--seen at a distance, every one sets it down at once as a mule.
The ears are nine and one-half inches long,--the girth not quite six
feet, stands above sixteen hands high. The hoofs are so long and
narrow that there is a difficulty in shoeing them, and the tail is
thin and scanty. He is a beast of indomitable energy and durability,
and highly prized by his owner.

Numerous similar cases are on record,[6] and it appears to have been
known among the Arabs for centuries, that a mare which has first borne
a mule, is ever after unfit to breed pure horses;[7] and the fact
seems now to be perfectly well understood in all the mule-breeding
States of the Union.

A pure Aberdeenshire heifer, the property of a farmer in Forgue, was
served with a pure Teeswater bull to which she had a first cross calf.
The following season the same cow was served with a pure Aberdeenshire
bull, the produce was in appearance a cross-bred calf, which at two
years old had long horns; the parents were both hornless.

A small flock of ewes, belonging to Dr. W. Wells in the island of
Grenada, were served by a ram procured for the purpose;--the ewes were
all white and woolly; the ram was quite different,--of a chocolate
color, and hairy like a goat. The progeny were of course crosses but
bore a strong resemblance to the male parent. The next season, Dr.
Wells obtained a ram of precisely the same breed as the ewes, but the
progeny showed distinct marks of resemblance to the former ram, in
color and covering. The same thing occurred on neighboring estates
under like circumstances.

Six very superior pure-bred black-faced horned ewes, belonging to Mr.
H. Shaw of Leochel-Cushnie, were served by a Leicester ram,
(white-faced and hornless.) The lambs were crosses. The next year they
were served by a ram of exactly the same breed as the ewes themselves.
To Mr. Shaw's astonishment the lambs were without an exception
hornless and brownish in the face, instead of being black and horned.
The third year (1846) they were again served by a superior ram of
their own breed, and again the lambs were mongrels, but showed less of
the Leicester characteristics than before. Mr. Shaw at last parted
from these fine ewes without obtaining a single pure-bred lamb.[8]

"It has been noticed that a well bred bitch, if she have been
impregnated by a mongrel dog, will not although lined subsequently by
a pure dog, bear thorough-bred puppies in the next two or three
litters."[9]

The like occurrence has been noticed in respect of the sow. "A sow of
the black and white breed became pregnant by a boar of the wild breed
of a deep chestnut color. The pigs produced were duly mixed, the color
of the boar being in some very predominant. The sow being afterwards
put to a boar of the same breed as herself, some of the produce were
still stained or marked with the chestnut color which prevailed in the
first litter and the same occurred after a third impregnation, the
boar being then of the same kind as herself. What adds to the force of
this case is that in the course of many years' observation the breed
in question was never known to produce progeny having the slightest
tinge of chestnut color."[10]

The above are a few of the many instances on record tending to show
the influence of a first impregnation upon subsequent progeny by other
males. Not a few might also be given showing that the same rule holds
in the human species, of which a single one will suffice here:--"A
young woman residing in Edinburgh, and born of white parents, but
whose mother previous to her marriage bore a mulatto child by a negro
man servant, exhibits distinct traces of the negro. Dr. Simpson, whose
patient at one time, the young woman was, recollects being struck with
the resemblance, and noticed particularly that the hair had the
qualities characteristic of the negro."

Dr. Carpenter, in the last edition of his work on physiology, says it
is by no means an infrequent occurrence for a widow who has married
again to bear children resembling her first husband.

Various explanations have been offered to account for the facts
observed, among which the theory of Mr. McGillivray, V.S., which is
endorsed by Dr. Harvey, and considered (as we shall presently see) as
very probable at least by Dr. Carpenter, seems the most satisfactory.
Dr. Harvey says:

    "Instances are sufficiently common among the lower animals where
    the offspring exhibit more or less distinctly over and beyond
    the characters of the male by which they were begotten, the
    peculiarities also of a male by which their mother at some
    former period had been impregnated. * * * Great difficulty has
    been felt by physiological writers in regard to the proper
    explanation of this kind of phenomena. They have been ascribed
    by some to a permanent impression made somehow by the semen of
    the first male on the genitals and more particularly on the ova
    of the female:[11] and by others to an abiding influence exerted
    by him on the imagination and operating at the time of her
    connection subsequently with other males and perhaps during her
    pregnancy; but they seem to be regarded by most physiologists as
    inexplicable.

    Very recently, in a paper published in the Aberdeen Journal, a
    Veterinary Surgeon, Mr. James McGillivray of Huntley, has
    offered an explanation which seems to me to be the true one. His
    theory is that "_when a pure animal of any breed has been
    pregnant to an animal of a different breed, such pregnant animal
    is a cross ever after, the purity of her blood being lost in
    consequence of her connection with the foreign animal, herself_
    BECOMING A CROSS FOREVER, _incapable of producing a pure calf of
    any breed_."

Dr. Harvey believes "that while as all allow, a portion of the
mother's blood is continually passing by absorption and assimilation
into the body of the foetus, in order to its nutrition and
development, a portion of the blood of the foetus is as constantly
passing in like manner into the body of the mother; that as this
commingles there with the general mass of the mother's own blood, it
inoculates her system with the constitutional qualities of the foetus,
and that, as these qualities are in part derived to the foetus from
the male progenitor, the peculiarities of the latter are thereby so
ingrafted on the system of the female as to be communicable by her to
any offspring she may subsequently have by other males."

In support of this view, Mr. McGillivray cites a case in which there
was presented unmistakable evidence that the organization of the
placenta admits the return of the venous blood to the mother; and Dr.
Harvey, with much force, suggests that the effect produced is
analogous to the known fact that constitutional syphilis has been
communicated to a female who never had any of the primary symptoms.
Regarding the occurrence of such phenomena, Dr. Harvey under a later
date says: "since then I have learned that many among the agricultural
body in this district are familiar to a degree that is annoying to
them with the facts then adduced in illustration of it, finding that
after breeding crosses, their cows though served with bulls of their
own breed yield crosses still or rather mongrels; that they were
already impressed with the idea of contamination of blood as the cause
of the phenomenon; that the doctrine so intuitively commended itself
to their minds as soon as stated, that they fancied they were told
nothing but what they knew before, so just is the observation that
truth proposed is much more easily perceived than without such
proposal is it discovered."[12]

Dr. Carpenter, speaking of phenomena analogous to what are here
alluded to, says:

"Some of these cases appear referable to the strong impression left by
the first male parent upon the female; but there are others which seem
to render it more likely that the blood of the female has imbibed from
that of the foetus, through the placental circulation, some of the
attributes which the latter has derived from its male parent, and that
the female may communicate these, with those proper to herself, to the
subsequent offspring of a different male parentage. This idea is borne
out by a great number of important facts. * * As this is a point of
great practical importance it may be hoped that those who have the
opportunity of bringing observation to bear upon it, will not omit to
do so."

In the absence of more general and accurate observations directed to
this point, it is impossible to say to what extent the first male
produces impression upon subsequent progeny by other males. There can
be no doubt, however, but that such an impression is made. The
instances where it is of so marked and obvious a character as in some
of those just related may be comparatively few, yet there is abundant
reason to believe, that although in a majority of cases the effect may
be less noticeable, it is not less real, and demands the special
attention of all breeders.

Whether this result is to be ascribed to inoculation of the system of
the female with the characteristics of the male through the foetus, or
to any other mode of operation, it is obviously of great advantage for
every breeder to know it and thereby both avoid error and loss and
secure profit. It is a matter which deserves thorough investigation
and the observations should be minute and have regard not only to
peculiarities of form, but also to qualities and characteristics not
so obvious; for instance there may be greater or less hardiness,
endurance or aptitude to fatten. These may be usually more dependent
on the dam, but the male is never without a degree of influence upon
them, and it is well established that aptitude to fatten is usually
communicated by the Short-horn bull to crosses with cattle of mixed or
mongrel origin which are often very deficient in this desirable
property.

Mr. McGillivray says: "A knowledge of the fact must be of the greatest
benefit to the breeder in two ways, positively and negatively. I have
known very great disappointment and loss result from allowing an
inferior male to serve a first rate female--the usefulness of such
female being thereby forever destroyed. As for the positive benefits
arising from the inoculation--they are obvious to any unbiased mind.
The black polled and Aberdeenshire cattle common to this country
(Scotland) may be, and often are, improved by the following plan:
Select a good, well formed, and healthy heifer--put her, in proper
season, to a pure Short-horn bull; after the calf to this Durham bull,
breed from the cow with bulls of her own breed; occasionally, and most
likely the first time, a red calf ultimately having horns will appear
even from the polled bull and cow; but in general the calves will be
of the same type with the polled parents but with many points
improved, and an aptitude to fatten, to come earlier to maturity, &c.,
such as no one of the pure polled or Aberdeenshire breed ever
exhibited in this country, or any other country, however well kept,
previous to the introduction of the Short-horn breed. The offspring of
these breeds thus improved, when bred from again, will exhibit many
points and qualities of excellence similar to the best crosses but
retaining much of the hardiness of the original stock, no mean
consideration for this changeable and often severe climate. And,
moreover, such crosses,--for they are crosses--will command high
prices as improved polled or Aberdeenshire cattle. I happen to know of
a case where a farmer, from a distance purchased a two year old
heifer of the stamp referred to, for the purpose of improving his
polled cattle, and for this heifer he paid fifty guineas."

The knowledge of this law[13] gives us a clue to the cause of many of
the disappointments of which practical breeders often complain and to
the cause of many variations otherwise unaccountable, and it suggests
particular caution as to the first male employed in the coupling of
animals, a matter which has often been deemed of little consequence in
regard to cattle, inasmuch as fewer heifers' first calves are reared,
than of such as are borne subsequently.

Another faint ray of light touching the causes of variation is
afforded us by the fact that the qualities of offspring are not only
dependent on the habitual conditions of the parents, but also upon any
peculiar condition existing at the time of sexual congress. For
instance, the offspring of parents ordinarily healthy and temperate,
but begotten in a fit of intoxication, would be likely to suffer
permanently, both physically and mentally, from the condition which
the parents had temporarily brought upon themselves. On the other
hand, offspring begotten of parents in an unusually healthy and active
condition of body and mind, would likely be unusually endowed both
mentally and physically. The Arabs in breeding horses take advantage
of this fact, for before intercourse, both sire and dam are actively
exercised, not to weariness, but sufficiently to induce the most
vigorous condition possible. Of this, too, we have proof in the
phenomenon sometimes observed by breeders, that a strong mental
impression made upon the female by a particular male, will give the
offspring a resemblance to him, even though she have no sexual
intercourse with him. Of this, Mr. Boswell in his prize essay
published in 1828, gives a remarkable instance. He says that Mr.
Mustard of Angus, one of the most intelligent breeders he had ever met
with, told him that one of his cows chanced to come into season while
pasturing on a field bounded by that of one of his neighbors, out of
which field an ox jumped and went with the cow until she was brought
home to the bull. The ox was white, with black spots, and horned. Mr.
Mustard had not a horned beast in his possession, nor one with any
white on it. Nevertheless, the produce of the following spring was a
black and white calf with horns.

The case of Jacob is often quoted in support of this view, and
although many believe some miraculous agency to have been exerted in
his case, and though he could say with truth, "God hath taken away the
cattle of your father and given them to me," it seems, on the whole,
more probable, inasmuch as supernatural agency may never be presumed,
except where we know, or have good reason to believe, that natural
causes are insufficient, that God "gave" them, as he now gives to
some, riches or honors; that is to say, by virtue of the operation of
natural laws. If all who keep cattle would exercise a tithe of the
patriarch's shrewdness and sagacity in improving their stock, we
should see fewer ill-favored kine than at present.

The possibility of some effect being produced by a strong impression
at the time of conception, is not to be confounded with the popular
error that "marks" upon an infant[14] are due to a transient, although
strong impression upon the imagination of the mother at any period of
gestation, which is unsupported by facts and absurd; but there are
facts sufficient upon record to prove that _habitual_ mental
condition, and especially at an early stage of pregnancy, _may_ have
the effect to produce some bodily deformity, and should induce great
caution.

FOOTNOTES:

[3] See Rowley's Prize Report on Farming in Derbyshire, in Journal of
Royal Agricultural Society, Vol. 14.

[4] A _working bull_, though perhaps not so pleasing to the eye as a
fat one, (for fat sometimes covers a multitude of defects,) is a surer
stock-getter; and his progeny is more likely to inherit full health and
vigor.

[5] In his Origin of Species.

[6] It was long ago stated by Haller, that when a mare had a foal by an
ass and afterwards another by a horse, the second offspring begotten by
the horse nevertheless approached in character to a mule.

[7] See Abd el Kader's letter.

[8] Journal of Medical Science, 1850.

[9] Kirke's Physiology.

[10] Philosophical Transactions for 1821.

[11] The late M.A. Cuming, V.S., of New Brunswick, once remarked to the
writer, that it might be due to the fact that the nerves of the uterus,
which before the first impregnation were in a rudimentary state, were
developed under a specific influence from the semen of the first male,
and that they might retain so much of a peculiar style of development
as to impress upon future progeny by other males the likeness of the
first.

[12] Edinburgh Journal Medical Science, 1849.

[13] A very striking fact may be related in this connection, which
while it may or may not have a practical bearing on the breeding of
domestic animals, shows forcibly how mysterious are some of the laws of
reproduction. It is stated by the celebrated traveler, Count de
Strzelecki, in his Physical Description of New South Wales and Van
Dieman's Land. "Whenever," he says, "a fruitful intercourse has taken
place between an aboriginal woman and an European male, that aboriginal
woman is forever after incapable of being impregnated by a male of her
own nation, although she may again be fertile with a European." The
Count, whose means and powers of observation are of the highest
possible order, affirms that "hundreds of instances of this
extraordinary fact are on record in the writer's memoranda all
recurring invariably under the same circumstances, all tending to prove
that the sterility of the female, which is relative only to one and not
to the other male is not accidental, but follows laws as cogent though
as mysterious as the rest of those connected with generation." The
Count's statement is endorsed by Dr. Maunsell of Dublin, Dr. Carmichael
of Edinburgh, and the late Prof. Goodsir, who say they have learned
from independent sources that as regards Australia, Strzelecki's
statement is unquestionable and must be regarded as the expression of a
law of nature. The law does not extend to the negro race, the fertility
of the negro female not being apparently impaired by previous fruitful
intercourse with a European male.

In reply to an inquiry made whether he had ever noticed exceptional
cases, the Count says: "It has not come under my cognizance to see or
hear of a native female which having a child with a European had
afterwards any offspring with a male of her own race."

The Count's statement is suggestive as to the disappearance of the
aborigines of some countries. This has often been the subject of severe
comment and is generally ascribed to the rum and diseases introduced by
the white man. It would now appear that other influences have also been
operative.

[14] Carpenter's Physiology, new edition, page 783.




CHAPTER IV.

ATAVISM, OR ANCESTRAL INFLUENCE.


It may not be easy to say whether this phenomenon is more connected
with the law of similarity, or with that of variation. Youatt, in his
work on cattle published by the Society for the Diffusion of Useful
Knowledge, inclines to the former. He speaks of it as showing the
universality of the application of the axiom that "like produces
like"--that when this "may not seem to hold good, it is often because
the lost resemblance to generations gone by is strongly revived." The
phenomenon, or law, as it is sometimes called, of atavism,[15] or
ancestral influence, is one of considerable practical importance, and
well deserves careful attention by the breeder of farm stock.

Every one is aware that it is nothing unusual for a child to resemble
its grandfather or grandmother or some ancestor still farther back,
more than it does either its own father or mother. The fact is too
familiar to require the citing of examples. We find the same
occurrence among our domestic animals, and oftener in proportion as
the breeds are crossed or mixed up. Among our common stock of neat
cattle, (_natives_, as they are often called,) originating as they
have done from animals brought from England, Scotland, Denmark, France
and Spain, each possessing different characteristics of form, color
and use; and bred, as our common stock has usually been,
indiscriminately together, with no special point in view, no attempt
to obtain any particular type or form, or to secure adaptation for any
particular purpose, we have very frequent opportunities of witnessing
the results of the operation of this law of hereditary transmission.
So common indeed is its occurrence, that the remark is often made,
that however good a cow may be, there is no telling beforehand what
sort of a calf she may have.

The fact is sufficiently obvious that certain peculiarities often lie
dormant for a generation or two and then reappear in subsequent
progeny. Stockmen often speak of it as "breeding back," or "crying
back." The cause of this phenomenon we may not fully understand. A
late writer says, "it is to be explained on the supposition that the
qualities were transmitted by the grandfather to the father in whom
they were _masked_ by the presence of some antagonistic or controlling
influence, and were thence transmitted to the son in whom the
antagonistic influence being withdrawn they manifest themselves." A
French writer on Physiology says, if there is not inheritance of
paternal characteristics, there is at least an _aptitude_ to inherit
them, a disposition to reproduce them; and there is always a
transmission of this aptitude to some new descendants, among whom
these traits will manifest themselves sooner or later.[16] Mr. Singer,
let us say, has a remarkable aptitude for music; but the influence of
Mrs. Singer is such that their children inheriting her imperfect ear,
manifest no musical talent whatever. These children however have
inherited the disposition of the father in spite of its
non-manifestation; and if, when they transmit what in them is latent,
the influence of their wives is favorable, the grand-children may turn
out musically gifted.

The lesson taught by the law of atavism is very plain. It shows the
importance of seeking "thorough-bred" or "well-bred" animals; and by
these terms are simply meant such as are descended from a line of
ancestors in which for many generations the desirable forms, qualities
and characteristics have been _uniformly shown_. In such a case, even
if ancestral influence does come in play, no material difference
appears in the offspring, the ancestors being all essentially alike.
From this stand point we best perceive in what consists the money
value of a good "pedigree." It is in the evidence which it brings that
the animal is descended from a line all the individuals of which were
alike, and excellent of their kind, and so is almost sure to transmit
like excellencies to its progeny in turn;--not that every animal with
a long pedigree full of high-sounding names is necessarily of great
value as a breeder, for in every race or breed, as we have seen while
speaking of the law of variation, there will be here and there some
which are less perfect and symmetrical of their kind than others; and
if such be bred from, they may likely enough transmit undesirable
points; and if they be mated with others possessing similar failings,
they are almost sure to deteriorate very considerably.

Pedigree is valuable in proportion as it shows an animal to be
descended, not only from such as are purely of its own race or breed,
but also from such individuals in that breed as were specially noted
for the excellencies for which that particular breed is esteemed.
Weeds are none the less worthless because they appear among a crop
consisting chiefly of valuable plants, nor should deformed or
degenerate plants, although they be true to their kind, ever be
employed to produce seed. If we would have good cabbages or turnips,
it is needful to select the most perfect and the soundest to grow seed
from, and to continue such selection year after year. Precisely the
same rule holds with regard to animals.

The pertinacity with which hereditary traits cling to the organization
in a latent, masked or undeveloped condition for long after they might
be supposed to be wholly "bred out" is sometimes very remarkable. What
is known among breeders of Short-horns as the "Galloway alloy,"
although originating by the employment for only once of a single
animal of a different breed, is said to be traceable even now, after
many years, in the occasional development of a "smutty nose" in
descendants of that family.

Many years ago there were in the Kennebec valley a few polled or
hornless cattle. They were not particularly cherished, and gradually
diminished in numbers. Mr. Payne Wingate shot the last animal of this
breed, (a bull calf or a yearling,) mistaking it in the dark for a
bear. During thirty-five years subsequently all the cattle upon his
farm had horns, but at the end of that time one of his cows produced a
calf which grew up without horns, and Mr. Wingate said it was, in all
respects, the exact image of the first bull of the breed brought
there.

Probably the most familiar exemplification of clearly marked
ancestral influence among us, is to be found in the ill-begotten,
round-breeched calves occasionally, and not very unfrequently, dropped
by cows of the common mixed kind, and which, if killed early, make
very blue veal, and if allowed to grow up, become exceedingly
profitless and unsatisfactory beasts; the heifers being often sterile,
the cows poor milkers, the oxen dull, mulish beasts, yielding flesh of
very dark color, ill flavor and destitute of fat. They are known by
various names in different localities, in Maine as the "Whitten" and
"Peter Waldo" breed, in Massachusetts as "Yorkshire" and
"Westminster," in New York as the "Pumpkin buttocks," in England as
"_Lyery_" or "_Lyery_ Dutch," &c., &c.

Those in northern New England are believed to be descended chiefly
from a bull brought from Watervliet, near Albany, New York, more than
forty years ago, (in 1818,) by the Shakers at Alfred, in York county,
Maine, and afterwards transferred to their brethren in Cumberland
county. No one who has proved the worthlessness of these cattle can
readily believe that any bull of this sort would have been knowingly
kept for service since the first one brought into the State, and yet
it is by no means a rare occurrence to find calves dropped at the
present time bearing unmistakable evidence of that origin.

It seems likely that this disagreeable peculiarity was first brought
into the country by means of some of the early importations of Dutch
or of the old Durham breed.

Culley, in speaking of the Short-horns, inclines to the opinion that
they were originally from Holland, and himself recollected men who in
the early part of their lives imported Dutch cattle into the county of
Durham, and of one Mr. Dobinson he says, he was noted for having the
best breed of Short-horns of any and sold at high prices. "But
afterwards some other persons of less knowledge, going over, brought
home some bulls that introduced the disagreeable kind of cattle called
_lyery_ or _double lyered_, that is, black-fleshed. These will feed to
great weight, but though fed ever so long will not have a pound of fat
about them, neither within or without, and the flesh (for it does not
deserve to be called beef) is as black and coarse grained as horse
flesh. No man will buy one of this kind if he knows any thing of the
matter, and if he should be once taken in he will remember it well for
the future; people conversant with cattle very readily find them out
by their round form, particularly their buttocks, which are turned
like a black coach horse, and the smallness of the tail; but they are
best known to the graziers and dealers in cattle by the _feel_ or
_touch_ of the fingers; indeed it is this nice touch or feel of the
hand that in a great measure constitutes the judge of cattle."

FOOTNOTES:

[15] From the Latin _Atavus_--meaning any ancestor indefinitely, as a
grandmother's great grandfather.

[16] "S'il n'y a pas héritage des caractéres paternels il y a donc au
moins _aptitude_ à en heriter, disposition à les reproduire, et
toujours cette transmission de cette aptitude à des noveau descendants,
chez lesquels ces mêmes caractéres se manifesteront tôt ou
tard."--_Longet's_ "_Traite de Physiologie_," ii: 133.




CHAPTER V.

RELATIVE INFLUENCE OF THE PARENTS.


The relative influence of the male and female parents upon the
characteristics of progeny has long been a fertile subject of
discussion among breeders. It is found in experience that progeny
sometimes resembles one parent more than the other,--sometimes there
is an apparent blending of the characteristics of both,--sometimes a
noticeable dissimilarity to either, though always more or less
resemblance somewhere, and sometimes, the impress of one may be seen
upon a portion of the organization of the offspring and that of the
other parent upon another portion; yet we are not authorized from such
discrepancies to conclude that it is a matter of chance, for all of
nature's operations are conducted by fixed laws, whether we be able
fully to discover them or not. The same causes always produce the same
results. In this case, not less than in others there are, beyond all
doubt, fixed laws, and the varying results which we see are easily and
sufficiently accounted for by the existence of conditions or modifying
influences not fully patent to our observation.

In the year 1825, the Highland Society of Scotland, proposed as the
subject of prize essays, the solution of the question, "whether the
breed of live stock connected with agriculture be susceptible of the
greatest improvement from the qualities conspicuous in the male or
from those conspicuous in the female parent?" Four essays received
premiums. Mr. Boswell, one of the prize writers, maintained that it is
not only the male parent which is capable of most speedily improving
the breed of live stock, "but that the male is the parent which we can
alone look to for improvement."

His paper is of considerable length and ably written--abounding in
argument and illustrations not easily condensed so as to be given
here, and it is but justice to add that he also holds that "before the
breed of a country can be improved, much more must be looked to than
the answer to the question put by the Highland Society--such as
crossing, selection of both parents, attention to pedigree, and to the
food and care of offspring."

And of crossing, he says, "when I praise the advantage of crossing, I
would have it clearly understood that it is only to bring together
animals _not nearly related_ but always of _the same breed_; never
attempting to breed from a speed horse and a draught mare or vice
versa." Crossing of breeds "may do well enough for once, but will end
in vexation, if attempted to be prolonged into a line."

Mr. Christian, in his essay, supports the view, that the offspring
bears the greatest resemblance to that parent whether male or female,
which has exerted the greatest sway of generative influence in the
formation of the foetus, "that any hypothesis which would assign a
superiority, or set limits to the influence of either sex in the
product of generation is unsound and inadmissible," and he thus
concludes--"as therefore it is unsafe to trust to the qualities of any
individual animal, male or female, in improving stock, the best bred
and most perfect animals of both sexes should be selected and employed
in propagation; there being, in short, no other certain or equally
efficacious means of establishing or preserving an eligible breed."

Mr. Dallas, in his essay, starts with the idea that the seminal fluid
of the male invests the ovum, the formation of which he ascribes to
the female; and he supports the opinion, that where external
appearance is concerned, the influence of the male will be discovered;
but in what relates to internal qualities, the offspring will take
most from the female. He concludes thus:--"When color, quality of
fleece, or outward form is wanted, the male may be most depended on
for these; but when milk is the object, when disposition, hardiness,
and freedom from diseases of the viscera, and, in short, all internal
qualities that may be desired, then the female may be most relied on."

One of the most valuable of these papers was written by the Rev. Henry
Berry of Worcestershire, in which, after stating that the question
proposed is one full of difficulty and that the discovery of an
independent quality such as that alluded to, in either sex, would be
attended with beneficial results, he proceeds to show, that it is not
to sex, but to high blood, or in other words, to animals long and
successfully selected, and bred with a view to particular
qualifications, whether in the male or female parent, that the quality
is to be ascribed, which the Highland Society has been desirous to
assign correctly.

The origin of the prevalent opinion which assigns this power
principally to the male, he explains by giving the probable history of
the first efforts in improving stock. The greatest attention would
naturally be paid to the male, both on account of his more extended
services, and the more numerous produce of which he could become the
parent; in consequence of which sires would be well-bred before dams.
"The ideas entertained respecting the useful qualities of an animal
would be very similar and lead to the adoption of a general standard
of excellence, towards which it would be required that each male
should approximate; and thus there would exist among what may be
termed fashionable sires, a corresponding form and character different
from, and superior to, those of the general stock of the country. This
form and character would in most instances have been acquired by
_perseverance in breeding from animals which possessed the important
or fancied requisites_, and might therefore be said to be almost
_confirmed_ in such individuals. Under these circumstances, striking
results would doubtless follow the introduction of these sires to a
common stock; results which would lead superficial observers to
remark, that individual sires possessed properties as _males_, which
in fact were only assignable to them as _improved_ animals."

The opinion entertained by some, that the female possesses the power
generally ascribed to the male, he explains also by a reference to the
history of breeding: "It is well known to persons conversant with the
subject of improved breeding, that of late years numerous sales have
taken place of the entire stocks of celebrated breeders of sires, and
thus, the females, valuable for such a purpose, have passed into a
great number of hands. Such persons have sometimes introduced a cow so
acquired to a bull inferior in point of descent and general good
qualities, and the offspring is known, in many instances, to have
proved superior to the sire by virtue of the dam's excellence, and to
have caused a suspicion in the minds of persons not habituated to
compare causes with effects, that certain females also possess the
property in question."

The writer gives various instances illustrative of his views, in some
of which the male only, and in others the female only, was the
high-bred animal, in all of which the progeny bore a remarkable
resemblance to the well-bred parent. He says, that where both parents
are equally well bred, and of nearly equal individual excellence, it
is not probable that their progeny will give general proof of a
preponderating power in either parent to impress peculiar
characteristics upon the offspring;--yet in view of all the
information we have upon the subject, he recommends a resort to the
best males as the most simple and efficacious mode of improving such
stocks as require improvement, and the only proceeding by which stock
already good can be preserved in excellence.

Mon. Giron[17] expresses the opinion that the relative age and vigor
of the parents exercises very considerable influence, and states as
the results of his observation, that the offspring of an old male and
a young female resembles the father less than the mother in
proportion as the mother is more vigorous and the father more
decrepit, and that the reverse occurs with the offspring of an old
female and a young male.

Among the more recent theories or hypotheses which have been started
regarding the relative influence of the male and female parents, those
of Mr. Orton, presented in a paper read before the Farmers' Club at
Newcastle upon Tyne, on the Physiology of Breeding, and of Mr. Walker
in his work on Intermarriage, as they both arrived to a certain
extent, at substantially the same conclusions by independent
observations of their own and as these seem to agree most nearly with
the majority of observed facts, are deemed worthy of favorable
mention.

The conclusions of Mr. Orton, briefly stated,[18] are, that in the
progeny there is no casual or haphazard blending of the parts or
qualities of the two parents, but rather that organization is
transmitted by halves, or that each parent contributes to the
formation of certain structures, and to the development of certain
qualities. Advancing a step further, he maintains, that the male
parent chiefly determines the external characters, the general
appearance, in fact, the outward structure and locomotive powers of
the offspring, as the framework, or bones and muscles, more
particularly those of the limbs, the organs of sense and skin; while
the female parent chiefly determines the internal structures and the
general quality, mainly furnishing the vital organs, i.e., the heart,
lungs, glands and digestive organs, and giving tone and character to
the vital functions of secretion, nutrition and growth. "Not however
that the male is without influence on the internal organs and vital
functions, or the female without influence on the external organs and
locomotive powers of their offspring. The law holds only within
certain restrictions, and these form as it were a secondary law, one
of limitations, and scarcely less important to be understood than the
fundamental law itself."

Mr. Orton relies chiefly on the evidence presented by _hybrids_, the
progeny of distinct species, or by crosses between the most distinct
varieties embraced within a single species, to establish his law. The
examples adduced are chiefly from the former. The _mule_ is the
progeny of the male ass and the mare; the _hinny_ that of the horse
and the she ass. Both hybrids are the produce of the same set of
animals. They differ widely, however, in their respective
characters--the mule in all that relates to its external characters
having the distinctive features of the ass,--the hinny, in the same
respects having all the distinctive features of the horse; while in
all that relates to the internal organs and vital qualities, the mule
partakes of the character of the horse, and the hinny of those of the
ass. Mr. Orton says--"The mule, the produce of the male ass and mare,
is essentially a _modified ass_: the ears are those of an ass somewhat
shortened; the mane is that of the ass, erect; the tail is that of an
ass; the skin and color are those of an ass somewhat modified; the
legs are slender and the hoofs high, narrow and contracted, like those
of an ass. In fact, in all these respects it is an ass somewhat
modified. The body and barrel, however, of the mule are round and
full, in which it differs from the ass and resembles the mare.

The hinny, on the other hand, the produce of the stallion and she ass,
is essentially a _modified horse_. The ears are those of a horse
somewhat lengthened; the mane flowing; the tail bushy, like that of
the horse; the skin is finer, like that of the horse, and the color
varies also, like the horse; the legs are stronger and the hoofs broad
and expanded like those of the horse. In fact, in all these respects
it is a horse somewhat modified. The body and barrel, however, of the
hinny are flat and narrow, in which it differs from the horse and
resembles the she ass.

A very curious circumstance pertains to the voice of the mule and the
hinny. The mule _brays_, the hinny _neighs_. The why and wherefore of
this is a perfect mystery until we come to apply the knowledge
afforded us by the law before given. The male gives the locomotive
organs, and the muscles are amongst these; the muscles are the organs
which modulate the voice of the animal; the mule has the muscular
structure of its sire, and brays; the hinny has the muscular structure
of its sire, and neighs."

In connexion with these examples Mr. Orton refers to a special feature
seen equally in the two instances, and which seems at first sight, a
departure from the principle laid down by him. It is this, both
hybrids, the mule and the hinny take after the male parents in all
their external characters save one, which is _size_. In this respect
they both follow the female parents, the mule being in all respects a
larger and finer animal than its sire, the ass; the hinny being in all
respects a smaller and inferior animal to its sire, the horse, the
body and barrel of the mule being large and round, those of the hinny
being flat and narrow; both animals being in these particulars the
reverse of their respective sires, but both resembling their female
parents.

In explanation of this seeming exception is adduced a well known
principle in physiology, which is, that the whole bony framework is
moulded in adaptation to the softer structures immediately related to
it; the muscles covering it in the case of the limbs; and to the
viscera in that of the great cavities which it assists in forming.
Accordingly, in perfect accordance with the views above expressed, the
_general_ size and form which must be mainly that of the _trunk_, will
be determined by the size and character of the viscera of the chest
and abdomen, and will therefore accord with that of the female parents
by whom the viscera in question are chiefly furnished.

The foregoing are the most important of Mr. Orton's statements. He
gives, however, numerous additional illustrations from among beasts,
birds and fishes, of which we quote only the following:

"The mule and the hinny have been selected and placed first, because
they afford the most conclusive evidence and are the most familiar.
Equally conclusive, though perhaps less striking instances, may be
drawn from other sources. Thus, it has been observed that when the
Ancon or Otter sheep were allowed to breed with common ewes, the cross
is not a medium between the two breeds, but that the offspring retains
in a great measure the short and twisted legs of the sire."

Buffon made a cross between the male goat and the ewe; the resulting
hybrid in all the instances, which were many, were strongly
characteristic of the male parent, more particularly in the hair and
length of leg. Curious enough, the number of teats in some of the
cases corresponded with those of the goat.

A cross between the male wolf and a bitch illustrates the same law;
the offspring having a markedly wolfish aspect; skin, color, ears and
tail. On the other hand, a cross between the dog and female wolf
afforded animals much more dog-like in aspect--slouched ears and even
pied in color. If you look at the descriptions and illustrations of
these two hybrids, you will perceive at a glance that the doubt arises
to the mind in the case of the first, 'what genus of _wolf_ is this?'
whereas in the case of the second, 'what a curious _mongrel dog_!'

The views of Mr. Walker in his work on Intermarriage, before alluded
to, agree substantially with those of Mr. Orton, _so far as regards
crossing between different breeds_; but they cover a broader field of
observation and in some respects differ. Mr. Walker maintains that
when both parents are of the _same breed_ that _either parent may
transmit either half_ of the organization. That when they are of
_different varieties_ or breeds (and by parity of reasoning the same
should hold, strongly, when hybrids are produced by crossing different
_species_) and supposing also that both parents are of equal age and
vigor, that the _male_ gives the _back head and locomotive organs_ and
the _female_ the _face and_ nutritive organs--I quote his language:
"when both parents are of the same variety, _one parent communicates
the anterior part of the head, the bony part of the face, the forms of
the organs of sense_ (the external ear, under lip, lower part of the
nose and eye brows being often modified) _and the whole of the
internal nutritive system_, (the contents of the trunk or the thoracic
and abdominal viscera, and consequently the form of the trunk itself
in so far as that depends on its contents.)

The resemblance to that parent is consequently found in the forehead
and bony parts of the face, as the orbits, cheek bones, jaws, chin and
teeth, as well as the shape of the organs of sense and the tone of the
voice.

_The other parent communicates the posterior part of the head, the
cerebel situated within the skull immediately above its junction with
the back of the neck, and the whole of the locomotive system_; (the
bones, ligaments and muscles or fleshy parts.)

The resemblance to that parent is consequently found in the back head,
the few more movable parts of the face, as the external ear, under
lip, lower part of the nose, eyebrows, and the external forms of the
body, in so far as they depend on the muscles as well as the form of
the limbs, even to the fingers, toes and nails. * *

It is a fact established by my observations that in animals of the
_same variety, either the male or the female parent_ may give _either
series of organs_ as above arranged--that is _either_ forehead and
organs of sense, together with the vital and nutritive organs, _or_
back head, together with the locomotive organs."

To show that among domesticated animals organization is transmitted by
halves in the way indicated, and that either parent may give either
series of organs, he cites among other instances the account of the
Ancon sheep. "When both parents are of the Ancon or Otter breed, their
descendants inherit their peculiar appearance and proportions of form.
When an Ancon ewe is impregnated by a common ram, the progeny
resembles wholly either the ewe or the ram. The progeny of a common
ewe impregnated by an Ancon ram follows entirely in shape the one or
the other without blending any of the distinguishing and essential
peculiarities of both.

'Frequent instances have occurred where common ewes have had twins by
Ancon rams; when one exhibited the complete marks and features of the
ewe and the other of the ram. The contrast has been rendered
singularly striking when one short legged and one long legged lamb
produced at a birth have been sucking the dam at the same time.'

As the short and crooked legs or those of opposite form, here indicate
the parent giving the locomotive system, it is evident that one of
the twins derived it from one parent and the other twin from the other
parent;--the parent not giving it, doubtless communicating in each
case, the vital or nutritive system."

Where the parents are of different varieties or species, Mr. Walker
says, "The second law, namely, that of CROSSING, operates where each
parent is of a _different breed_, and where, supposing both to be of
equal age and vigor the _male_ gives the _back head_ and _locomotive
organs_, and the _female_ the _face_ and _nutritive organs_."

After giving numerous illustrations from facts and many quotations
from eminent breeders, he says, "thus, in crosses of cattle as well as
of horses, the male, except where feebler or of inferior voluntary and
locomotive power, gives the locomotive system, the female the vital
one."

W.C. Spooner, V.S., one of the most eminent authorities of the present
day on this subject, and writing within the past year in the Journal
of the Royal Agricultural Society, says:--"The most probable
supposition is, that propagation is done by halves, each parent giving
to the offspring the shape of one half of the body. Thus the back,
loins, hind-quarters, general shape, skin and size follow one parent;
and the fore-quarters, head, vital and nervous system, the other; and
we may go so far as to add, that the former in the great majority of
cases go with the male parent, and the latter with the female. A
corroboration of this fact is found in the common system of putting an
ordinary mare to a thorough-bred horse; not only does the head of the
offspring resemble the dam but the forelegs likewise, and thus it is
fortunately the case that the too-frequently faulty and tottering legs
of the sire are not reproduced in the foal, whilst the full thighs and
hind quarters which belong to the blood-horse are generally given to
the offspring. There is however a minority of cases in which the
opposite result obtains. That size is governed more by the male parent
there is no great difficulty in showing; familiar examples may be
found in the pony-mare and the full sized horse, which considerably
exceed the dam in size. Again, in the first cross between the small
indigenous ewe and the large ram of another improved breed--the
offspring is found to approach in size and shape very much to the ram.
The mule offspring of the mare also much resembles both in size and
appearance its donkey sire. These are familiar examples of the
preponderating influence of the male parent, so far as the external
form is considered. To show however that size and hight do not
invariably follow the male, we need go no further for illustration
than the human subject. How often do we find that in the by no means
unfrequent case of the union of a tall man with a short woman, the
result in some instances is that all the children are tall and in
others all short; or sometimes that some are short and others tall.
Within our own knowledge in one case, where the father was tall and
the mother short, the children, six in number, are all tall. In
another instance, the father being short and the mother tall, the
children, seven in number, are all of lofty stature. In a third
instance, the mother being tall and the father short, the greater
portion of the family are short. Such facts as these are sufficient to
prove that hight or growth does not exclusively follow either the one
parent or the other. Although this is the case, it is also a striking
fact that the union of tall and short parents rarely, if ever,
produces offspring of a medium size--midway, as it were, between the
two parents.

Thus, in the breeding of animals, if the object be to modify certain
defects by using a male or female in which such defects may not exist,
we cannot produce this desired alteration; or rather it cannot be
equally produced in all the offspring, but can only be attained by
weeding out those in whom the objectionable points are repeated. We
are, however, of opinion that in the majority of instances, the hight
in the human subject, and the size and _contour_ in animals, is
influenced _much more by the male_ than the female parent--and on the
other hand, that the constitution, the chest and vital organs, and the
forehand generally more frequently follow the female."

Dr. Carpenter, the highest authority in Physiology, says "it has long
been a prevalent idea that certain parts of the organism of the
offspring" are derived from the male, and certain other parts from the
female parent; and although no universal rule can be laid down upon
this point, yet the independent observations which have been made by
numerous practical breeders of domestic animals seem to establish that
such a _tendency_ has a real existence; the characters of the _animal_
portion of the fabric being especially (but not exclusively) derived
from the male parent, and those of the _organic_ apparatus being in
like manner derived from the female parent. The former will be chiefly
manifested in the external appearance, in the general configuration of
the head and limbs, in the organs of the senses (including the skin)
and in the locomotive apparatus; whilst the latter show themselves in
the size of the body (which is primarily determined by the development
of the viscera contained in the trunk) and in the mode in "which the
vital functions are performed."

On the whole it may be said that the evidence both from observation
and the testimony of the best practical breeders goes to show that
each parent usually contributes certain portions of the organization
to the offspring, and that each has a modifying influence upon the
other. Facts also show that the same parent does not always contribute
the same portions, but that the order is reversed. Now, as no
operation of nature is by accident, but by virtue of _law_, there must
be fixed laws here, and there must also be, at times, certain
influences at work to modify the action of these laws. Where animals
are of distinct species, or of distinct breeds, transmission is
usually found to be in accordance with the rule above indicated, i.e.
the male gives mostly the outward form and locomotive system, and the
female chiefly the interior system, constitution, &c. Where the
parents are of the same breed, it appears that the portions
contributed by each are governed in large measure by the condition of
each in regard to age and vigor, or by virtue of individual potency or
superiority of physical endowment.

This _potency_ or power of transmission seems to be legitimately
connected with high breeding, or the concentration of fixed qualities
obtained by continued descent for many generations from such only as
possess in the highest degree the qualities desired. On the other hand
it must be admitted that there are exceptional cases not easily
accounted for upon any theory, and it seems not improbable that in
these the modifying influences may be such as to effect what may
approximate a reconstruction or new combination of the elements, in a
manner analogous to the chemical changes which we know take place in
the constituents of vegetables, as for instance, we find that sugar,
gum and starch, substances quite unlike in their appearance and uses,
are yet formed from the same elements and in nearly or precisely the
same proportions, by a chemistry which we have not yet fathomed.
Whether this supposition be correct or not, there is little doubt that
if we understood fully all the influences at work, and could estimate
fairly all the data to judge from, we might predict with confidence
what would be the characteristics of the progeny from any given union.

Practically, the knowledge obtained dictates in a most emphatic manner
that every stock-grower use his utmost endeavor to obtain the services
of the best sires; that is, _the best for the end and purposes in
view_--that he depend chiefly on the sire for outward form and
symmetry--that he select dams best calculated to develop the good
qualities of the male, depending chiefly upon these for freedom from
internal disease, for hardihood, constitution, and generally for all
qualities dependent upon the vital or nutritive system.

The neglect which is too common, and especially in breeding horses, to
the qualities of the dam, miserably old and inferior females being
often employed, cannot be too strongly censured. In rearing valuable
horses the dams are not of less consequence than the sires, although
their influence upon the progeny be not the same. This is well
understood and practiced upon by the Arab, who cultivates endurance
and bottom. If his mare be of the true Kochlani breed he will part
with her for no consideration whatever, while you can buy his stallion
at a comparatively moderate price. The prevalent practice in England
and America of cultivating speed in preference to other qualities, has
led us to attach greater importance to the male, and the too common
neglect of health, vigor, endurance and constitution in the mares has
in thousands of cases entailed the loss of qualities not less
valuable, and without which speed alone is of comparatively little
worth.

FOOTNOTES:

[17] In his work, "De la Generation," Paris, 1828.

[18] Quoted, in part, from a paper by Alex. Harvey, M.D., read before
the Medical Society of Southampton, June 6th, 1854.




CHAPTER VI.

SEX.


With regard to the laws which regulate the sex of progeny very little
is known. Many and extensive observations have been made, but without
arriving at any definite conclusions. Nature seems to have provided
that the number of either sex produced, shall be nearly equal, but by
what means this result is attained, has not been discovered. Some
physiologists think the sex decided by the influence of the sire,
others think it due to the mother. Sir Everard Home believed the
_ovum_ or germ, previous to impregnation to be of no sex, but so
formed as to be equally fitted to become either male or female, and
that it is the process of impregnation which marks the sex and forms
the generative organs; that before the fourth month the sex cannot be
said to be confirmed, and that it will prove male or female as the
tendency to the paternal or maternal type may preponderate.

Mr. T.A. Knight[19] was of opinion that the sex of progeny depended
upon the influence of the female parent. He says, "The female
parent's influence upon the sex of offspring in cows, and I have
reason to believe in the females of our other domestic animals, is so
strong, that it may, I think, be pronounced nearly positive," He also
says, "I have repeatedly proved that by dividing a herd of thirty cows
into three equal parts, I could calculate with confidence upon a large
majority of females from one part, of males from another, and upon
nearly an equal number of males and females from the remainder. I have
frequently endeavored to change the habits by changing the male
without success." He relates a case as follows:--"Two cows brought all
female offspring, one fourteen in fifteen years, and the other fifteen
in sixteen years, though I annually changed the bull. Both however
produced one male each, and that in the same year; and I confidently
expected, when the one produced a male that the other would, as she
did."

M. Giron, after long continued observation and experiment, stated with
much confidence, that the general law upon this point was, that the
sex of progeny would depend on the greater or less relative vigor of
the individuals coupled. In many experiments purposely made, he
obtained from ewes more males than females by coupling very strong
rams with ewes either too young, or too aged, or badly fed, and more
females than males by a reverse choice in the ewes and rams he put
together.

Mon. Martegoute, formerly Professor of Rural Economy, in a late
communication to the "Journal D'Agriculture Pratique," says that as
the result of daily observations at a sheepfold of great importance,
that of the Dishley Mauchamp Merinos of M. Viallet at Blanc, he has,
if not deceived, obtained some new hints. He states that Giron's law
developed itself regularly at the sheepfold in all cases where
difference of vigor was observed in the ewes or rams which were
coupled; but he adds another fact, which he had observed every year
since 1853, when his observations began. This fact consists--

_First_, In that at the commencement of the rutting season when the
ram is in his full vigor he procreated more males than females.

_Second_, When, some days after, and the ewes coming in heat in great
numbers at once, the ram being weakened by a more frequent renewal of
the exertion, the procreation of females took the lead.

_Third_, The period of excessive exertion having passed, and the
number of ewes in heat being diminished, the ram also found less
weakened, the procreation of males in majority again commenced."

In order to show that the cause of such a result is isolated from all
other influences of a nature to be confounded with it, he gives the
details of his observations in a year when the number of births of
males and females were about equal. He also goes on to say, that, "at
the end of each month all the animals at the sheepfold are weighed
separately, and thanks to these monthly weighings, we have drawn up
several tables from which are seen the diminution or increase in
weight of the different animals classed in various points of view,
whether according to age, sex or the object for which they were
intended.

Two of these tables have been appropriated to bearing ewes--one to
those which have borne and nursed males and the other to those which
have borne and brought up females. The abstract results of these two
tables have furnished two remarkable facts.

_First_, The ewes that have produced the female lambs are, on an
average, of a weight superior to those that produced the males; and
they evidently lose more in weight than these last during the suckling
period.

_Second_, The ewes that produce males weigh less, and do not lose in
nursing so much as the others.

If the indications given by these facts come to be confirmed by
experiments sufficiently repeated, two new laws will be placed by the
side of that which Giron de Bazareingues has determined by his
observations and experiments. On the one hand, as, at liberty, or in
the savage state, it is a general rule that the predominance in acts
of generation belongs to the strongest males to the exclusion of the
weak, and as such a predominance is favorable to the procreation of
the male sex, it would follow that the number of males would tend to
surpass incessantly that of the females, amongst whom no want of
energy or power would turn aside from generation, and the species
would find in it a fatal obstacle to its reproduction. But, on the
other hand, if it was true that the strongest females and the best
nurses amongst them produce females rather than males, nature would
thus oppose a contrary law, which would establish the equilibrium, and
by an admirable harmony would secure the perfection and preservation
of the species, by confiding the reproduction of either sex to the
most perfect type of each respectively."

FOOTNOTES:

[19] Philosophical Transactions, 1809.




CHAPTER VII.

IN-AND-IN BREEDING.


It has long been a disputed point whether the system of breeding
_in-and-in_ or the opposite one of frequent crossing has the greater
tendency to maintain or improve the character of stock. The advocates
of both systems are earnest and confident of being in the right. The
truth probably is, as in some other similar disputes, that both are
right and both wrong--to a certain extent, or within certain limits.

The term _in-and-in_ is often very loosely used and is variously
understood; some, and among these several of the best writers, confine
the phrase to the coupling of those of exactly the same blood, i.e.
brothers and sisters; while others include in it breeding from parents
and offspring, and others still employ the term to embrace those of
more distant relationship. For the latter, the term breeding in, or
close breeding, is deemed more fitting.

The prevalent opinion is decidedly against the practice of breeding
from any near relationships; it being usually found that degeneracy
follows, and often to a serious degree; but it is not proved that
this degeneracy, although very common and even usual, is yet a
necessary consequence. That ill effects follow in a majority of cases
is not to be doubted, but this is easily and sufficiently accounted
for upon other grounds. In a state of nature animals of near
affinities interbreed without injurious results, and it is found by
experience that where domesticated animals are of a pure race, or of a
distinct, well defined and pure breed, the coupling of those of near
affinities is not so often followed by injurious effects as when they
are crosses, or of mixed or mongrel origin, like the great majority of
the cattle in the country at large. In the latter case breeding
in-and-in is _usually_ found to result in decided and rapid
deterioration. We should consider also that few animals in a state of
domestication are wholly free from hereditary defects and diseases,
and that these are propagated all the more readily and surely when
possessed by both parents, and that those nearly related are more
likely than others, to possess similar qualities and tendencies.

If such is to be regarded as the true explanation, it follows that the
same method would be also efficacious in perpetuating and confirming
good qualities. Such is the fact; and it is well known that nearly all
who have achieved eminence as breeders, have availed themselves
freely of its benefits. Bakewell, the Messrs. Colling, Mr. Mason, Mr.
Bates and others, all practiced it. Mr. Bates' rule was, "breed
in-and-in from a bad stock and you cause ruin and devastation, they
must always be changing to keep even moderately in caste; but _if a
good stock_ be selected, you may breed in-and-in as much as you
please."[20] Bakewell originated his famous sheep by crossing from the
best he could gather from far or near; but when he had obtained such
as suited him, he bred exclusively from within his own. As in all
breeding from crosses, it was needful to throw out as weeds, a large
proportion of the progeny, but by rigidly doing so, and saving none to
breed from but such as became more and more firmly possessed of the
forms and qualities desired, the weeds gradually became fewer, until
at length he fully established the breed; and he continued it, and
sustained its high reputation during his life by in-breeding
_connected with proper selections for coupling_. After his death,
others, not possessing his tact and judgment in making selections,
were less fortunate, and in some hands the breed degenerated
seriously, insomuch that it was humorously remarked, "there was
nothing but a little tallow left." In others it has been maintained by
the same method. Mr. Valentine Barford of Foscote, has the pedigree
of his Leicester sheep since the day of Bakewell, in 1783, and since
1810, he has bred entirely from his own flock, sire and dam, without
an inter-change of male or female from any other flock. He observes
"that his flock being bred from the nearest affinities--commonly
called in-and-in breeding--has not experienced any of the ill effects
ascribed to the practice." W.C. Spooner, V.S., speaking of Mr.
Barford's sheep says, "His flock is remarkably healthy and his rams
successful, but his sheep are small."

Mr. Charles Colling, after he procured the famous bull Hubback,
selected cows most likely to develop his special excellencies, and
from the progeny of these he bred very closely. From that day to this,
the Short-horns as a general thing, have been very closely bred,[21]
and the practice has been carried so far, the selections not always
being the most judicious possible, as to result in many cases in
delicacy of constitution, and in some where connected with pampering,
in sterility.[22]

Col. Jaques, of the Ten Hills Farm near Boston, imported a pair of
Bremen geese in 1822. They were bred together till 1830, when the
gander was accidentally killed. Since then the goose bred with her
offspring till she was killed by an attack of dogs in 1852. Great
numbers were bred during this time, and of course there was much of
the closest breeding, yet there was no deterioration, and in fact
some of the later ones were larger and better than the first pair.

The same gentleman also obtained a pair of wild geese from Canada in
1818, which with their progeny were bred from without change until
destroyed by dogs with the above named in 1852. They continued perfect
as at first.

Among gregarious ruminating animals in a state of nature, all who
associate in a herd acknowledge a chieftain, or head, who maintains
his position by virtue of physical health, strength and general
superiority. He not only directs all their movements but is literally
the father of the herd. When a stronger than he comes, the post of
chieftain and sire is yielded, but in all probability his successor is
one of his own sons, who in turn begets offspring by his sisters. The
progeny inheriting full health, strength and development, the herd
continues in full power and vigor,[23] and does not degenerate as
often happens when man assumes to make the selections, and chooses
according to fancy or convenience. The continuance of health, strength
and perfect physical development is believed to depend on the _wisdom
of the selection, upon the presence of the desirable hereditary
qualities, and the absence of injurious ones_, and not upon
relationship whether near or remote.

It has fallen within the observation of most persons that in the human
race frequent intermarriages in the same family for successive
generations often tend to degeneracy of both mind and body; size and
vigor diminishing, and constitutional defects and diseases being
perpetuated and aggravated; but neither in this case is the result
believed to be a necessary and inevitable consequence. Else how could
it be, that Infinite Wisdom, whose operations are ever in accordance
with the laws of his own institution, in originating a "peculiar
people," chosen to be the depositories of intellectual and physical
power, wealth and influence, and who, in spite of oppression without
parallel in the world's history, have ever maintained the possession
of a goodly share of all these,--would have allowed their first
progenitor, Abraham, to marry his near kinswoman Sarah, a half sister,
niece or cousin, and Isaac their son to wed his first cousin Rebecca,
and Jacob who sprang from that union, to marry first cousins, and
their offspring for long generations to intermarry within their own
people and tribes alone? At a later period, marriages within certain
degrees of consanguinity were forbidden by Divine authority, but not
until the peculiar race was fully established, and so far multiplied,
as to allow departure from close breeding without change of
characteristics, and not improbably the prohibition was even then
based more upon moral reasons, or upon man's ignorance or recklessness
regarding selection, than upon physical law.

Such laws exist among us at present, and it is well they do, inasmuch
as for the reasons already given there is greater probability of
degeneracy by means of such connections than among those not so
related by blood. But they present an instance of the imperfection of
human laws, it being impossible for any legal enactments to prevent
wholly the evil thus sought to be avoided. It would be better far, if
such a degree of physiological knowledge existed and such caution was
exercised among the community generally, as would prevent the
contraction of any marriages, where, from the structure and endowments
of the parties, debility, deformity, insanity or idiocy must
inevitably be the portion of their offspring whether they are more
nearly related than through their common ancestor, Noah, or not.

If we adopt Mr. Walker's views, it is easy to see how parents of near
affinities may produce offspring perfect and healthy, or the reverse.
He holds, that to secure satisfactory results from any union, there
should be some inherent, constitutional, or fundamental difference;
some such difference as we often see in the human family to be the
ground of preference and attachment; as men generally prefer women of
a feminine rather than a masculine type. All desire, in a mate,
properties and qualities not possessed by themselves. Now assuming as
Mr. Walker holds, that organization is transmitted by halves, and
that, in animals of the same variety, either parent may give either
series of organs, we can see in the case of brother and sister that if
one receives the locomotive system of the father and the nutritive
system of the mother, and the other the locomotive system of the
mother and the nutritive system of the father, they are essentially
unlike, there is scarcely any similarity between them, although, as we
say, of precisely the same blood; and their progeny if coupled might
show no deterioration; whereas, if both have the same series of organs
from the same parents, they would be essentially the same, a sort of
quasi identity would exist between them, and they are utterly unfit to
be mated. There might be impotency, or barrenness, or the progeny, if
any, would be decidedly inferior to the parents; and the same applies,
more or less, to other relatives descended from a common ancestry, but
more distant than brother and sister. Mr. Walker also holds that
where the parents are not only of the same variety but of the same
family in the narrowest sense, the female always gives the locomotive
system and the father the nutritive; in which case the progeny is
necessarily inferior to the parents.

A careful consideration of the subject brings us to the following
conclusions, viz:

That in general practice, with the grades and mixed animals common in
the country, _close breeding should be scrupulously avoided_ as highly
detrimental. It is better _always_ to avoid breeding from near
affinities whenever stock-getters of the same breed and of equal merit
can be obtained which are not related. Yet, where this is not
possible, or where there is some desirable and clearly defined purpose
in view, as the fixing and perpetuating of some valuable quality in a
particular animal not common to the breed, and the breeder possesses
the knowledge and skill needful to accomplish his purpose, and the
animals are perfect in health and development, close breeding may be
practiced with advantage.

FOOTNOTES:

[20] Mr. Bates, although eminent as a breeder, was not infallible in
making his selections, and after long continued close breeding, he was
compelled to go out of his own herd to procure breeding animals.

[21] Probably few who have not critically examined the facts regarding
close breeding in the improved Short-horns are aware of the extent to
which it has been carried. On the 28th of March, 1860, at a sale of
Short-horns at Milcote, near Stratford upon Avon (England) thirty-one
descendants of a cow called "Charmer," bred of Mr. Colling's purest
blood, and praised in the advertisement as "capital milkers and very
prolific, _not having been pampered_," sold for £2,140, averaging about
$350 each, and many of them were calves. The stock was also praised as
"offering to the public as much of the pure blood of 'Favorite' as
could be found in any herd." With reference to this sale, which also
comprised other stock, the Agricultural Gazette, published a few days
previous, had some remarks from which the following is extracted:

"It is unquestionable that the ability of a cow or bull to transmit the
merit either may possess does in a great degree depend upon its having
been inherited by them through a long line of ancestry. Nothing is more
remarkable than the way in which the earlier improvers of the
Short-horn breed carried out their belief in this. They were indeed
driven by the comparative fewness of well bred animals to a repeated
use of the same sire on successive generations of his own begetting,
while breeders now-a-days have the advantage of fifty different strains
and families from which to choose the materials of their herd, but
whether it were necessity or choice it is certain that the pedigree of
no pure bred Short-horn can be traced without very soon reaching many
an illustration of the way in which 'breeding in-and-in' has influenced
its character, deepened it, made it permanent, so that it is handed
down unimpaired and even strengthened in the hands of the judicious
breeder. What an extraordinary influence has thus been exerted by a
single bull on the fortunes of the Short-horn breed! There is hardly a
single choice pure-bred Short-horn that is not descended from
'Favorite' (252) and not only descended in a single line--but descended
in fifty different lines. Take any single animal, and this bull shall
occur in a dozen of its preceding generations and repeatedly up to a
hundred times! in the animals of some of the more distant generations.
His influence is thus so paramount in the breed that one fancies he has
created it and that the present character of the whole breed is due the
'accidental' appearance of an animal of extraordinary endowments on the
stage in the beginning of the present century. And yet this is not
so;--he is himself an illustration of the breeding in-and-in
system--his sire and dam having been half brother and sister, both got
by 'Foljambe.' And this breeding in-and-in has handed down his
influence to the present time in an extraordinary degree. Take for
instance, the cow 'Charmer,' from which as will be seen elsewhere, no
fewer than thirty-one descendants are to be sold next Wednesday. She
had of course two immediate parents, four progenitors in the second
generation, eight in the third, sixteen in the fourth, the number
necessarily doubling each step farther back. Of the eight bulls named
in the fourth generation from which she was descended, one was by
'Favorite.' She is one-sixteenth 'Favorite' on that account, but the
cow to which he was then put was also descended from 'Favorite,' and so
are each of the other seven bulls and seven cows which stand on the
same level of descent with the gr. gr. g. dam of 'Charmer.' And in fact
it will be found on examination that in so far as 'Charmer's' pedigree
is known, which it is in some instances to the sixteenth generation,
she is not one-sixteenth only but nearly nine-sixteenths of pure
Favorite blood. This arises from 'Favorite' having been used repeatedly
on cows descended from himself. In the pedigree of 'Charmer' we
repeatedly meet with 'Comet'--'Comet' was by 'Favorite' and his dam
'Young Phoenix' was also by 'Favorite;' with 'George'--'George' was by
'Favorite' and his dam 'Lady Grace' was also by 'Favorite;' with
'Chilton'--'Chilton' was by 'Favorite' and his dam was also by
'Favorite;' with 'Minor'--'Minor' was by 'Favorite' and his dam also
was by 'Favorite;' with 'Peeress'--she was by 'Favorite' and her dam
also by 'Favorite;' with 'Bright Eyes'--she was by 'Favorite' and her
dam also by 'Favorite;' with 'Strawberry'--she was by 'Favorite' and
her dam by 'Favorite;' 'Dandy,' 'Moss Rose,' among the cows and 'North
Star' among the bulls are also of similar descent.

There is no difficulty therefore in understanding how this name appears
repeatedly in any given generation of the pedigree of any given animal
of the Short-horn breed."

[22] Journal Royal Agricultural Society, volume 20, page 297.

[23] It may be said with truth, that the average health and vigor of a
wild herd is much higher than it would be if the feebler portion of the
young were reared, as in a state of domestication, instead of being
destroyed by the stronger, or perishing from hardship; but if close
breeding be, of itself and necessarily, injurious, the whole herd
should gradually fail, which is not found to be the case.




CHAPTER VIII.

CROSSING.


The practice of crossing, like that of close breeding, has its strong
and its weak side. Substantial arguments can be brought both in its
favor and against it. Judiciously practiced, it offers a means of
procuring animals _for the butcher_, often superior to and more
profitable than those of any pure breed. It is also admissible as the
foundation of a systematic and well considered attempt to establish a
new breed. Such attempts, however, as they necessarily involve
considerable expense, and efforts continued during a long term of
years, will be rarely made. But when crossing is practiced
injudiciously and indiscriminately, and especially when so done for
the purpose of procuring _breeding animals_, it cannot be too severely
censured, and is scarcely less objectionable than careless in-and-in
breeding.

The following remarks, from the pen of W.C. Spooner, V.S., are
introduced as sound and reliable, and as comprising nearly all which
need be said on the subject of crossing breeds possessing distinctive
characteristics:

    "Crossing is generally understood to refer to the alliance of
    animals of different breeds, such as between a thorough-bred and
    a half-bred among horses or a South Down and Leicester among
    sheep. Now the advantages or disadvantages of this system depend
    entirely on the object we have in view, whether merely to beget
    an animal for the butcher, or for the purpose of perpetuating
    the species. If the latter is the object, then crossing should
    be adopted gradually and with care, and by no means between
    distant or antagonistic qualities, as for example a
    thorough-bred and a cart-horse. The result of the latter
    connection is generally an ill-assorted and unfavorable animal,
    too heavy perhaps for one purpose, and too light for another. If
    we wish to instil more activity into the cart-horse breed, it is
    better to do so by means of some half-bred animal, whilst the
    latter can be improved by means of the three-parts-bred horse
    and this again by the thorough-bred. There is a remarkable
    tendency, in breeding, for both good qualities and bad to
    disappear for one or two generations, and to reappear in the
    second and third; thus an animal often resembles the grand dam
    more than the dam. This peculiarity is itself an objection to
    the practice of crossing, as it tends to prevent uniformity and
    to encourage contrarieties; and thus we find in many flocks and
    herds that the hopes of the breeders have been entirely baffled
    and a race of mongrels established.

    The first cross is generally successful--a tolerable degree of
    uniformity is produced, resembling in external conformation the
    sire, which is usually of a superior breed; and thus the
    offspring are superior to the dams. These cross-bred animals are
    now paired amongst each other, and what is the consequence?
    Uniformity at once disappears; some of the offspring resemble
    the grandsire, and others the grandams, and some possess the
    disposition and constitution of the one and some of the other;
    and consequently a race of mongrels is perpetuated. If, however,
    the cross is really a good and desirable one, then, by means of
    rigorous and continued selection, pursued for several
    generations, that is, by casting aside, as regards breeding
    purposes, every animal that does not exhibit uniformity, or
    possess the qualifications we are desirous of perpetuating, a
    valuable breed of animals may in the course of time be
    established. By this system many varieties of sheep have been so
    far improved as to become almost new breeds; as for instance the
    New Oxford Downs which have frequently gained prizes at the
    great Agricultural Meetings as being the best long wooled sheep.

    To cross, however, merely for crossing sake--to do so without
    that care and vigilance which we have deemed so essential--is a
    practice which cannot be too much condemned. It is in fact a
    national evil and a sin against society, that is, if carried
    beyond the first cross, or if the cross-bred animals are used
    for breeding. A useful breed of animals may thus be lost, and a
    generation of mongrels established in their place, a result
    which has followed in numerous instances amongst every breed of
    animals.

    The principal use of crossing, however, is to raise animals for
    the butcher. In this respect it has not (with sheep) been
    adopted to the extent which it might to advantage. The male
    being generally an animal of a superior breed and of a vigorous
    nature, almost invariably stamps his external form, size and
    muscular development on the offspring, which thus bear a strong
    resemblance to him, whilst their internal nature derived from
    the dam, well adapts them to the locality, as well as to the
    treatment to which their dams have been accustomed.

    With regard to cattle, the system cannot be so advantageously
    pursued (except for the purpose of improving the size and
    qualities of the calf, where veal is the object) in as much as
    every required qualification for breeding purposes can be
    obtained by using animals of the pure breeds. But with sheep,
    where the peculiarities of the soil as regards the goodness of
    feed, and exposure to the severities of the weather, often
    prevent the introduction of an improved breed, the value of
    using a new and superior ram is often very considerable, and the
    weight of mutton is materially increased, without its quality
    being impaired, while earlier maturity is at the same time
    obtained. It involves, however, more systematic attention than
    farmers usually like to bestow, for it is necessary to employ a
    different ram for each purpose; that is, a native ram for a
    portion of the ewes to keep up the purity of the breed, and a
    foreign ram to raise the improved cross-bred animals for fatting
    either as lambs or sheep. This plan is adopted by many breeders
    of Leicester sheep, who thus employ South Down rams to improve
    the quality of the mutton. One inconvenience attending this
    plan, is the necessity of fatting the maiden ewes as well as the
    wethers; they may however be disposed of as fat lambs, or the
    practice of spaying might be adopted, so as to increase the
    fatting disposition of the animal. Crossing, therefore, should
    be adopted with the greatest caution and skill where the object
    is to improve the breed of animals; it should never be practiced
    carelessly or capriciously, but it may be advantageously pursued
    with a view to raising superior and profitable animals for the
    butcher."

In another paper on this subject, after presenting many interesting
details regarding British breeds of sheep and the results of crossing,
Mr. Spooner says:

    "We cannot do better, in concluding our paper, than gather up
    and arrange in a collected form, the various points of our
    subject, which appear to be of sufficient importance to be again
    presented to the attention of our readers. We think, therefore,
    we are justified in coming to the conclusions:

    1st. That there is a direct pecuniary advantage in judicious
    cross-breeding; that increased size, disposition to fatten, and
    early maturity, are thereby induced.

    2d. That while this may be caused for the most part, by the very
    fact of crossing, yet it is principally due to the superior
    influence of the male over the size and external appearance of
    the offspring; so that it is desirable, for the purpose of the
    butcher, that the male should be of a larger frame than the
    female, and should excel in those peculiarities we are desirous
    of reproducing. Let it be here however, repeated, as an
    exceptional truth, that though as a rule the male parent
    influences mostly the size and external form, and the female
    parent the constitution, general health and vital powers, yet
    that the opposite result sometimes takes place.

    3d. Certain peculiarities may be imparted to a breed by a single
    cross. Thus, the ponies of the New Forest exhibit
    characteristics of blood, although it is many years since that a
    thorough-bred horse was turned into the forest for the purpose.
    So, likewise, we observe in the Hampshire sheep the Roman nose
    and large heads, which formed so strong a feature in their
    maternal ancestors, although successive crosses of the South
    Down were employed to change the character of the breed. * * *

    4th. Although in the crossing of sheep for the purpose of the
    butcher, it is generally advisable to use males of a larger
    breed, provided they possess a disposition to fatten; yet, in
    such cases, it is of importance that the _pelvis_ of the female
    should be wide and capacious, so that no injury should arise in
    lambing, in consequence of the increased size of the heads of
    the lambs. The shape of the ram's head should be studied for the
    same reason. In crossing, however, for the purpose of
    establishing a new breed, the size of the male must give way to
    other more important considerations; although it will still be
    desirable to use a large female of the breed which we seek to
    improve. Thus the South Downs have vastly improved the larger
    Hampshires, and the Leicester the huge Lincolns and the
    Cotswolds.

    5th. Although the benefits are most evident in the first cross,
    after which, from pairing the cross-bred animals, the defects of
    one breed or the other, or the incongruities of both, are
    perpetually breaking out--yet, unless the characteristics and
    conformation of the two breeds are altogether averse to each
    other, nature opposes no barrier to their successful admixture;
    so that in the course of time, by the aid of selection and
    careful weeding, it is practicable to establish a new breed
    altogether. This, in fact, has been the history of our principal
    breeds. * * *

    We confess that we cannot entirely admit either of the
    antagonistic doctrines held by the rival advocates of crossing
    and pure breeding. The public have reason to be grateful to the
    exertions of either party; and still more have they respectively
    reason to be grateful to each other. * * * *

    Let us conclude by repeating the advice that, when equal
    advantages can be attained by keeping a pure breed of sheep,
    such pure breed should unquestionably be preferred; and that,
    although crossing for the purpose of the butcher may be
    practiced with impunity, and even with advantage, yet no one
    should do so for the purpose of establishing a new breed, unless
    he has clear and well defined views of the object he seeks to
    accomplish, and has duly studied the principles on which it can
    be carried out, and is determined to bestow for the space of
    half a life-time his constant and unremitting attention to the
    discovery and removal of defects."

The term crossing is sometimes used in a much more restricted sense,
as in the remark of Mr. Boswell in his essay quoted on page 69 where
he says, "When I praise the advantage of crossing I would have it
clearly understood that it is only to bring together animals _not
nearly related_ but always of _the same breed_." It is evident that
such crossing as this is wholly unobjectionable; no one but an avowed
and ultra advocate of close breeding could possibly find any fault
with it.

There is yet another style of crossing which when practicable, may, it
is believed, be made a means to the highest degree of improvement
attainable, and especially in the breeding of horses. The word "breed"
is often used with varying signification. In order to be understood,
let me premise that I use it here simply to designate a class of
animals possessing a good degree of uniformity growing out of the fact
of a common origin and of their having been reared under similar
conditions. The method proposed is to unite animals _possessing
similarity of desirable characteristics, with difference of breed_;
that is to say, difference of breed in the sense just specified. From
unions based upon this principle, the selections being guided by a
skillful judgment and a discriminating tact, we may expect progeny
possessing not only a fitting and symmetrical development of the
locomotive system, but also an amount and intensity of nervous energy
and power unattainable by any other method.

Such was in all probability the origin of the celebrated horse Justin
Morgan; an animal which not only did more to stamp excellence and
impart value to the roadsters of New England than any other, but was
the originator of the only distinct, indigenous breed of animals of
which America can boast;--a breed which as fast and durable road
horses and for any light harness work, is not equalled by any other,
any where. In the present state of our knowledge it is scarcely
conceivable how an animal possessing the endowments of Justin Morgan
could have originated in any other way than from such a parentage as
above indicated. On the other hand it is very certain that _contrast
in character_, as well as in breed, has occasioned much of the
disappointment of which breeders have had occasion to complain.

The principle here laid down is one of broad application, and should
never be lost sight of in attempts at improvement by crossing. Another
point worthy special attention is that all crossing, to insure
successful results, should be gentle rather than violent; that is,
never couple animals possessing marked dissimilarity, but endeavor to
remedy faults and to effect improvement by gradual approaches. Harmony
of structure and a proper balancing of desirable characteristics, "an
equilibrium of good qualities," as it has been happily expressed, can
be secured only in this way.

It may not be out of place here to say, that much of the talk about
_blood_ in animals, especially horses, is sheer nonsense. When a
"blood horse" is spoken of, it means, so far as it means any thing,
that his pedigree can be traced to Arabian or Barbary origin, and so
is possessed of the peculiar type of structure and great nervous
energy which usually attaches to "thorough-bred" horses. When a bull,
or cow, or sheep is said to be of "pure blood," it means simply that
the animal is of some distinct variety--that it has been bred from an
ancestry all of which were marked by the same peculiarities and
characteristics.

So long as the term "blood" is used to convey the idea of definite
hereditary qualities it may not be objectionable. We frequently use
expressions which are not strictly accurate, as when we speak of the
sun's rising and setting, and so long as every body knows that we
refer to apparent position and not to any motion of the sun, no false
ideas are conveyed. But to suppose that the hereditary qualities of
an animal attach to the blood more than to any other fluid or to any
of the tissues of the body, or that the blood of a high-bred horse is
essentially different from that of another, is entirely erroneous. The
qualities of an animal depend upon its organization and endowments,
and the blood is only the vehicle by which these are nourished and
sustained;--moreover the blood varies in quality, composition and
amount, according to the food eaten, the air breathed and the exercise
taken. If one horse is better than another it is not because the fluid
in his veins is of superior quality, but rather because his structure
is more perfect mechanically, and because nervous energy is present in
fitting amount and intensity.

For illustration, take two horses--one so built and endowed that he
can draw two tons or more, three miles in an hour; the other so that
he can trot a mile in three minutes or less. Let us suppose the blood
coursing in the veins of each to be transferred to the other; would
the draft horse acquire speed thereby, or the trotter acquire power?
Just as much and no more as if you fed each for a month with the hay,
oats and water intended for the other.

It is well to attend to pedigree, for thus only can we know what are
the hereditary qualities, but it is not well to lay too much stress
upon "blood," What matters it that my horse was sired by such a one or
such a one, if he be himself defective? In breeding horses,
_structure_ is first, and endowment with nervous energy is next to be
seen to, and then pedigree--afterwards that these be fittingly united,
by proper selection for coupling, in order to secure the highest
degree of probability which the nature of the case admits, that the
offspring may prove a perfect machine and be suitably endowed with
motive power.

"The body of an animal is a piece of mechanism, the moving power of
which is the vital principle, which like fire to the steam engine sets
the whole in motion; but whatever quantity of fire or vital energy may
be applied, neither the animal machine nor the engine will work with
regularity and effect, unless the individual parts of which the
machine is composed are properly adjusted and fitted for the purposes
for which they are intended; or if it is found that the machine does
move by the increase of moving power, still the motion is irregular
and imperfect; the bolts and joints are continually giving way, there
is a continued straining of the various parts, and the machine becomes
worn out and useless in half the time it might have lasted if the
proportions had been just and accurate. Such is the case with the
animal machine. It is not enough that it is put in motion by the
noblest spirit or that it is nourished by the highest blood; every
bone must have its just proportion; every muscle or tendon its proper
pulley; every lever its proper length and fulcrum; every joint its
most accurate adjustment and proper lubrication; all must have their
relative proportions and strength, before the motions of the machine
can be accurate, vigorous and durable. In every machine modifications
are required according as the purposes vary to which it is applied.
The heavy dray horse is far from having the arrangement necessary for
the purposes of the turf, while the thorough-bred is as ill adapted
for the dray. Animals are therefore to be selected for the individual
purposes for which they are intended, with the modifications of form
proper for the different uses to which they are to be applied; but for
whatever purpose they may be intended, there are some points which are
common to all, in the adjustment of the individual parts. If the bones
want their due proportions, or are imperfectly placed--if the muscles
or tendons want their proper levers--if the flexions of the joints be
interrupted by the defectiveness of their mechanism, the animal must
either be defective in motion or strength; the bones have irregular
pressure, and if they do not break, become diseased; if the muscles or
tendons do not become sprained or ruptured, they are defective in
their action; if friction or inflammation does not take place in the
joints, the motions are awkward and grotesque. As in every other
machine, the beauty of the animate, whether in motion or at rest,
depends upon the arrangement of the individual parts."




CHAPTER IX.

BREEDING IN THE LINE.


The preferable style of breeding for the great majority of farmers to
adopt, is neither to cross, nor to breed from close affinities,
(except in rare instances and for some specific and clearly understood
purpose,) but to _breed in the line_, that is, select the breed or
race best adapted to fulfill the requirements demanded, whether it be
for the dairy, for labor or for beef in cattle, or for such
combination of these as can be had without too great sacrifice of the
principal requisite; whether for fine wool as a primary object and for
meat as a secondary one, or for mutton as a primary and wool for a
secondary object, and then procure a _pure bred_ male of the kind
determined on, and breed him to the females of the herd or of the
flock; and if these be not such as are calculated to develop his
qualities, endeavor by purchase or exchange to procure such as will.
Let the progeny of these be bred to another _pure bred_ male of the
same breed, but as distantly related to the first as may be. Let this
plan be steadily pursued, and although we cannot, without the
intervention of well bred females, obtain stock purely of kind
desired, yet in several generations, if proper care be given in the
selection of males, that each one be such as to retain and improve
upon the points gained by his predecessor, the stock for most
practical purposes will be as good as if thorough-bred. Were this plan
generally adopted, and a system of letting or exchange of males
established, the cost might be brought within the means of most
persons, and the advantages which would accrue would be almost beyond
belief.

The writer on Cattle in the Library of Useful Knowledge well
remarks:--"At the outset of his career, the farmer should have a clear
and determined conception of the object that he wishes to accomplish.
He should consider the nature of his farm; the quality, abundance or
deficiency of his pasturage, the character of the soil, the seasons of
the year when he will have plenty or deficiency of food, the locality
of his farm, the market to which he has access and the produce which
can be disposed of with greatest profit, and these things will at once
point to him the breed he should be solicitous to obtain. The man of
wealth and patriotism may have more extensive views, and nobly look to
the general improvement of cattle; but the farmer, with his limited
means and with the claims that press upon him, regards his cattle as a
valuable portion of his own little property, and on which every thing
should appear to be in natural keeping, and be turned to the best
advantage. The best beast for him is that which suits his farm the
best, and with a view to this, he studies, or ought to study, the
points and qualities of his own cattle, and those of others. The
dairyman will regard the quantity of milk--the quality--its value for
the production of butter and cheese--the time that the cow continues
in milk--the character of the breed for quietness, or as being good
nurses--the predisposition to garget or other disease, or dropping
after calving--the natural tendency to turn every thing to
nutriment--the ease with which she is fattened when given up as a
milker, and the proportion of food requisite to keep her in full milk
or to fatten her when dry. The grazier will consider the kind of beast
which his land will bear--the kind of meat most in demand in his
neighborhood--the early maturity--the quickness of fattening at any
age--the quality of the meat--the parts on which the flesh and fat are
principally laid--and more than all the hardihood and the adaptation
to the climate and soil.

In order to obtain these valuable properties the good farmer will make
himself perfectly master of the characters and qualities of his own
stock. He will trace the connection of certain good qualities and
certain bad ones, with an almost invariable peculiarity of shape and
structure; and at length he will arrive at a clear conception, not so
much of beauty of form (although that is a pleasing object to
contemplate) as of that outline and proportion of parts with which
_utility_ is oftenest combined. Then carefully viewing his stock he
will consider where they approach to, and how far they wander from,
this utility of form; and he will be anxious to preserve or to
increase the one and to supply the deficiency of the other. He will
endeavor to select from his own stock those animals that excel in the
most valuable points, and particularly those which possess the
greatest number of these points, and he will unhesitatingly condemn
every beast that manifests deficiency in any one important point. He
will not, however, too long confine himself to his own stock, unless
it be a very numerous one. The breeding from close affinities has many
advantages to a certain extent. It was the source whence sprung the
cattle and sheep of Bakewell and the superior cattle of Colling; and
to it must also be traced the speedy degeneracy, the absolute
disappearance of the New Leicester cattle, and, in the hands of many
agriculturists, the impairment of constitution and decreased value of
the New Leicester sheep and of the Short-horns. He will therefore seek
some change in his stock every second or third year, and that change
is most conveniently effected by introducing a new bull. This bull
should be of the same breed, and pure, coming from a similar pasturage
and climate, but possessing no relationship--or, at most, a very
distant one--to the stock to which he is introduced. He should bring
with him every good point which the breeder has labored to produce in
his stock, and if possible, some improvement, and especially in the
points where the old stock may have been somewhat deficient, and most
certainly he should have no manifest defect of form; and that most
essential of all qualifications, a hardy constitution, should not be
wanting.

There is one circumstance, however, which the breeder occasionally
forgets, but which is of as much importance to the permanent value of
his stock as any careful selection of animals can be--and that is,
good keeping. It has been well said that all good stock must be both
bred with attention and well fed. It is necessary that these two
essentials in this species of improvement should always accompany each
other; for without good resources of keeping, it would be vain to
attempt supporting a valuable stock. This is true with regard to the
original stock. It is yet more evident when animals are absurdly
brought from a better to a poorer soil. The original stock will
deteriorate if neglected and half-starved, and the improved breed will
lose ground even more rapidly, and to a far greater extent."

A very brief resumé of the preceding remarks may be expressed as
follows:

The Law of Similarity teaches us to select animals for breeding which
possess the desired forms and qualities in the greatest perfection and
best combination.

Regard should be had not only to the more obvious characteristics, but
also to such hereditary traits and tendencies as may be hidden from
cursory observation and demand careful and thorough investigation.

From the hereditary nature of all characteristics, whether good or
bad, we learn the importance of having all desirable qualities and
properties _thoroughly inbred_; or, in other words, so firmly fixed in
each generation, that the next is warrantably certain to present
nothing worse,--that no ill results follow from breeding back towards
some inferior ancestor,--that all undesirable traits or points be, so
far as possible, _bred out_.

So important is this consideration, that in practice, it is decidedly
preferable to employ a male of ordinary external appearance, provided
his ancestry be all which is desired, rather than a grade or
cross-bred animal, although the latter be greatly his superior in
personal beauty.

A knowledge of the Law of Divergence teaches us to avoid, for breeding
purposes, such animals as exhibit variations unfavorable to the
purpose in view; and to endeavor to perpetuate every real improvement
gained; also to secure as far as practicable, the conditions
necessary to induce or to perpetuate any improvement, such as general
treatment, food, climate, habit, &c.

Where the parents do not possess the perfection desired, selections
for coupling should be made with critical reference to correcting the
faults or deficiencies of one by corresponding excellence in the
other.

But to correct defects too much must not be attempted at once. Pairing
those very unlike, oftener results in loss than in gain. Mating a
horse for speed with a draft mare, will more likely beget progeny good
for neither, than for both. Avoid all extremes, and endeavor by
moderate degrees to obtain the object desired.

Crossing, between different breeds, for the purpose of obtaining
animals for the shambles, may be advantageously practiced to
considerable extent, but not for the production of breeding animals.
As a general rule cross-bred males should not be employed for
propagation, and cross-bred females should be served by thorough-bred
males.

In ordinary practice, breeding from near relationships is to be
_scrupulously avoided_; for certain purposes, under certain conditions
and circumstances, and in the hands of a skillful breeder, it may be
practiced with advantage, but not otherwise.

In a large majority of cases (other things being equal) we may expect
in progeny the outward form and general structure of the sire,
together with the internal qualities, constitution and nutritive
system of the dam; each, however, modified by the other.

Particular care should always be taken that the male by which the dam
first becomes pregnant is the best which can be obtained; also, that
at the time of sexual congress both are in vigorous health.

Breeding animals should not be allowed to become fat, but always kept
in thrifty condition; and such as are intended for the butcher should
never be fat but once.

In deciding with what breeds to stock a farm, endeavor to select those
best adapted to its surface, climate, and degree of fertility; also
with reference to probable demand and proximity to markets.

No expense incurred in procuring choice animals for propagation, or
any amount of skill in breeding, can supersede, or compensate for, a
lack of liberal feeding and good treatment. The better the stock, the
better care they deserve.




CHAPTER X.

CHARACTERISTICS OF VARIOUS BREEDS.


The inquiry is frequently made, what is the best breed of cattle,
sheep, &c., for general use. In reply it may be said that no breed can
by any possibility fulfill all requirements in the best possible
manner; one is better for meat and early maturity, another for milk,
another for wool, and so on. Because under certain circumstances it
may be necessary or advisable for a man to serve as his own builder,
tailor, tanner and blacksmith, it by no means follows that all which
is required will be as well, or as easily done, as by a division of
labor. So it is better for many reasons, and more profit can be made,
by employing different breeds for different purposes, than by using
one for all, and towards such profitable employment we should
constantly aim. At the same time there is a large class of farmers so
situated that they cannot keep distinct breeds, and yet wish to employ
them for different uses, and whose requirements will best be met by a
kind of cattle, which, without possessing remarkable excellence in any
one direction, shall be sufficiently hardy, the oxen proving docile
and efficient laborers for a while, and then turn quickly into good
beef upon such food as their farms will produce, the cows giving a
fair quantity and quality of milk for the needs of the family and
perhaps to furnish a little butter and cheese for market.

Before proceeding to answer the inquiry more definitely, it may be
well to remark further, that among the facts of experience regarding
cattle, sheep and horses, nothing is better established than that no
breed can be transferred from the place where it originated, and to
which it was suited, to another of unlike surface, climate and
fertility, and retain equal adaptation to its new situation, nor can
it continue to be what it was before. It must and will vary. The
influence of climate alone, aside from food and other agencies in
causing variation, is so great that the utmost skill in breeding, and
care in all other respects, cannot wholly control its modifying
effects.

It is also pretty well established that no breed brought in from
abroad can be fully as good, _other things being equal_, as one
indigenous to the locality, or what approximates the same thing, as
one, which by being reared through repeated generations on the spot
has become thoroughly acclimated; so that the presumption is strongly
in favor of _natives_.

When we look about us however, we find, if we except the Morgan
horses, nothing which deserves the name of indigenous breeds or races.
The cattle and sheep known as "natives" are of mixed foreign origin,
and have been bred with no care in selection, but crossed in every
possible way. They possess no fixed hereditary traits, and although
among them are many of very respectable qualities, and which possess
desirable characteristics, they cannot be relied upon _as breeders, to
produce progeny of like excellence_. Instead of constancy, there is
continual variation, and frequent "breeding back," exhibiting the
undesirable traits of inferior ancestors. That a breed might be
established from them, by careful selection continued during repeated
generations, aided perhaps by judicious crossing with more recent
importations, fully as good as any now existing, is not to be doubted.
Very probably, a breed for dairy purposes might be thus created which
should excel any now existing in Europe, for some of our so called
native cows, carelessly as they have been bred, are not surpassed by
any of foreign origin upon which great care has been expended. To
accomplish this is an object worthy the ambition of those who possess
the skill, enthusiasm, ample means and indomitable perseverance
requisite to success. But except the single attempt of Col. Jaques, of
the Ten Hills Farm, to establish the Creampot breed,[24] of which, as
little has been heard since his death, it is fair to presume that it
has dropped into the level of common grade cattle, no systematic and
continued effort has come to our knowledge. Consequently such as may
be deemed absolutely the best is a thing of the future; they do not
yet exist--and there is no probability that the desideratum will soon
be attained. We Yankees are an impatient people; we dislike to wait,
for any thing, or to invest where five, ten, twenty or fifty years may
be expected to elapse before satisfactory dividends may be safely
anticipated.

Still, if all would begin to-day, to use what skill and judgment they
have, or can acquire, in breeding only from the best of such as they
have, coupling with reference to their peculiarities, and consigning
to the butcher as fast as possible every inferior animal, and if, in
addition, they would do what is equally necessary, namely, improve
their general treatment as much as lies in their power, there would
result an immediate, a marked and a steadily progressive improvement
in stock. To the acclimation or Americanization already acquired,
would be added increased symmetry of form and greater value in many
other respects. This is within the power of every man, and whatever
else he may be obliged to leave undone, for want of ability, none
should be content to fall short of this. Those who have the command of
ample means will of course desire that improvement should be as rapid
as possible. They will endeavor at once to procure well bred animals,
or in other words, such as already possess the desired qualities so
thoroughly inwrought into their organization that they can rely with a
good degree of confidence on their imparting them to their progeny.

It may be well to allude here to a distinction between breeds and
races. By _breeds_, are understood such varieties as were originally
produced by a cross or mixture, like the Leicester sheep for example,
and subsequently established by selecting for breeding purposes only
the best specimens and rejecting all others. In process of time
deviations become less frequent and greater uniformity is secured; but
there remains a tendency, greater or less in proportion to the time
which elapses and the skill employed in selection, to resolve itself
into its original elements, to breed back toward one or other of the
kinds of which it was at first composed.

By _races_, are understood such varieties as were moulded to their
peculiar type by natural causes, with no interference of man, no
intermixture of other varieties, and have continued substantially the
same for a period beyond which the memory and knowledge of man does
not reach. Such are the North Devon cattle, and it is fortunate that
attention was drawn to the merits of this variety before facilities
for inter-communication had so greatly increased as of late, and while
yet the race in some districts remained pure. All that breeders have
done to better it, is by selections and rejections from within itself;
and so, much improvement has been effected without any adulteration.
Consequently we may anticipate that so long as no crossing takes
place, there will be little variation.


Among the established breeds of cattle the IMPROVED SHORT-HORNS are
the most fashionable, and the most widely diffused; and where the
fertility of the soil, and the climate, are such as to allow the
development of their peculiar excellencies, they occupy the highest
rank as a meat-producing breed. Their beef is hardly equal in quality
to that of the Devons, Herefords or Scots, the fat and lean being not
so well mixed together and the flesh of coarser grain. But they
possess a remarkable tendency to lay on fat and flesh, attaining
greater size and weight, and coming earlier to maturity than any other
breed. These properties, together with their symmetry and stately
beauty, make them very popular in those counties of England, where
they originated, and wherever else they have been carried, provided
their surroundings are such as to meet their wants. In the rich
pastures of Kentucky and in some other parts of the west, they seem as
much at home as on the banks of the Tees, and are highly and
deservedly esteemed. The Short-horns have also been widely and
successfully used to cross with most other breeds, and with inferior
mixed cattle, as they are found to impress strongly upon them their
own characteristics.

Without entering into the question of its original composition, or of
its antiquity, regarding both of which much doubt exists, it may
suffice here to say, that about a hundred years ago, Charles Colling
and others entered zealously and successfully into an attempt to
improve them by careful breeding, in whose hands they soon acquired a
wide spread fame and brought enormous prices; and the sums realized
for choice specimens of this breed from that time to the present, have
been greater than for those of any other. Much of their early
notoriety was due to the exhibition of an ox reared by Charles Colling
from a common cow by his famous bull "Favorite," and known as the
"Durham" ox, and also as the "Ketton" ox, (both which names have since
then been more or less applied to the breed, but which are now mostly
superceded by the original and more appropriate one of Short-horn,)
which was shown in most parts of England and Scotland from 1801 to
1807, and whose live weight was nearly four thousand pounds, and which
was at one time valued for purposes of exhibition as high as $10,000.

The old Teeswater cattle were remarkably deep milkers, and although it
does not appear that good grazing points necessarily conflict with
excellence for the dairy, the fact is, that as improvement in feeding
qualities was gained, the production of milk in most cases fell off;
and although some families at the present time embrace many excellent
milkers, the majority of them have deteriorated in this respect about
in proportion to the improvement effected as meat-producing animals.
The earlier Short-horns introduced into this country were from the
very best milking families, and their descendants have usually proved
valuable for dairy purposes--but many of those more recently imported
are unlike them in this respect. By crossing the males upon the common
cows of the country the progeny inherited increased size and symmetry
of form, more quiet dispositions, greater aptitude to feed and earlier
maturity. Notwithstanding the prejudices with which they were at first
received, they gradually rose in estimation, more of them have been
introduced than of any other breed, and probably more of the
improvement which has taken place in cattle for the last forty years
is due to them than to any other; yet _as a pure breed they are not
adapted to New England wants_. Their size is beyond the ability of
most farms to support profitably: crossed upon such as through neglect
in breeding, scanty fare and exposure were bad feeders, too small in
size, and too slow in growth, they effected great improvement in all
these respects; and this improvement demanded and encouraged the
bestowal of more food and better treatment, and so they
prospered;--inheriting their constitutions chiefly from the hardy and
acclimated dams, the grades were by no means so delicate and sensitive
as the pure bred animals to the cold and changes of a climate very
unlike that of the mild and fertile region where they originated.

The lethargic temperament characteristic of the Short-horn and which
in the grades results in the greater quietness and docility so highly
valued, necessarily unfits them for active work; pure bred animals
being altogether too sluggish for profitable labor. This temperament
is inseparably connected with their aptitude to fatten and early
maturity, and these both demand abundant and nutritious food beyond
the ability of many to supply and at the same time are incompatible
with the activity of habit and hard service demanded of the working
ox.


The NORTH DEVONS are deemed to be of longer standing than any other of
the distinct breeds of England, and they have been esteemed for their
good qualities for several centuries. Mr. George Turner, a noted
breeder of Devons, describes them as follows:--"Their color is
generally a bright red, but varying a little either darker or more
yellow; they have seldom any white except about the udder of the cow
or belly of the bull, and this is but little seen. They have long
yellowish horns, beautifully and gracefully curved, noses or muzzles
white, with expanded nostrils, eyes full and prominent, but calm, ears
of moderate size and yellowish inside, necks rather long, with but
little dewlap, and the head well set on, shoulders oblique with small
points or marrow bones, legs small and straight and feet in
proportion. The chest is of moderate width, and the ribs round and
well expanded, except in some instances, where too great attention has
been paid to the hind quarters at the expense of the fore, and which
has caused a falling off, or flatness, behind the shoulders. The loins
are first rate, wide, long and full of flesh, hips round and of
moderate width; rumps level and well filled at the bed; tail full near
the rump and tapering much at the top. The thighs of the cows are
occasionally light, but the bull and ox are full of muscle, with a
deep and rich flank. On the whole there is scarcely any breed of
cattle so rich and mellow in its touch, so silky and fine in its hair,
and altogether so handsome in its appearance, as the North Devon,
added to which they have a greater proportion of weight in the most
valuable joints and less in the coarse, than any other breed, and also
consume less food in its production.

As milkers they are about the same as most other breeds;--the general
average of a dairy of cows being about one pound of butter per day
from each cow during the summer months, although in some instances the
very best bred cows give a great deal more.

As working oxen they greatly surpass any other breed. They are
perfectly docile and excellent walkers, are generally worked until
five or six years old, and then fattened at less expense than most
other oxen."

The author of the report on the live stock shown at the exhibition of
the Royal Agricultural Society at Warwick in 1859 (Mr. Robert Smith)
says:

"Although little has been written on it, the improvement of the Devon
has not been neglected; on the contrary, its breeding has been studied
like a science, and carried into execution with the most sedulous
attention and dexterity for upwards of two hundred years. The object
of the Devon breeder has been to lessen those parts of the animal
frame which are least useful to man, such as the bone and offal, and
at the same time to increase such other parts (flesh and fat) as
furnish man with food. These ends have been accomplished by a
judicious selection of individual animals possessing the wished for
form and qualities in the highest degree, which being perpetuated in
their progeny in various proportions, and the selection being
continued from the most approved specimens among these, enabled the
late Mr. Francis Quartly at length to fully establish the breed with
the desired properties. This result is substantially confirmed by the
statistics contained in Davy's 'Devon Herd-Book.' We have been curious
enough to examine these pedigrees, and find that nine-tenths of the
present herds of these truly beautiful animals are directly descended
(especially in their early parentage) from the old Quartly stock.
Later improvements have been engrafted on these by the Messrs. Quartly
of the present day. The example of various opulent breeders and
farmers in all parts of the country has tended to spread this
improvement, by which the North Devon cattle have become more general
and fashionable. The leading characteristics of the North Devon breed
are such as qualify them for every hardship. They are cast in a
peculiar mold, with a degree of elegance in their movement which is
not to be excelled. Their hardihood, resulting from compactness of
frame and lightness of offal, enables them (when wanted) to perform
the operations of the farm with a lively step and great endurance. For
the production of animal food they are not to be surpassed, and in
conjunction with the Highland Scot of similar pretension, they are the
first to receive the attention of the London West-end butcher. In the
show-yard, again, the form of the Devon and its rich quality of flesh
serve as the leading guide to all decisions. He has a prominent eye,
with a placid face, small nose and elegantly turned horns, which have
an upward tendency (and cast outward at the end) as if to put the last
finish upon his symmetrical form and carriage. These animals are
beautifully covered with silken coats of a medium red color. The
shoulder points, sides, and foreflanks are well covered with rich
meat, which, when blended with their peculiar property of producing
meat of first-rate quality along their tops, makes them what they
are--'models of perfection.' Of course, we here speak of the best-bred
animals. Some object to the North Devon, and class him as a small
animal, with the remark, 'He is too small for the grazier.' In saying
this it should ever be remembered that the Devon has its particular
mission to perform, viz., that of converting the produce of cold and
hilly pastures into meat, which could not be done to advantage by
large-framed animals, however good their parentage."

The Devons have been less extensively, and more recently, introduced
than the Short-horn, but the experience of those who have fairly tried
them fully sustains the opinions given above, and they promise to
become a favorite and prevailing breed. The usual objection made to
them by those who have been accustomed to consider improvement in
cattle to be necessarily connected with enlargement of size, is, that
they are too small. But their size instead of being a valid objection,
is believed to be a recommendation, the Devons being as large as the
fertility of New England soils generally are _capable of feeding fully
and profitably_.

Their qualities as working oxen are unrivalled, no other breed so
uniformly furnishing such active, docile, strong and hardy workers as
the Devons, and their uniformity is such as to render it very easy to
match them. Without possessing so early maturity as the Short-horns,
they fatten readily and easily at from four to six years old, and from
their compact build and well balanced proportions usually weigh more
than one accustomed to common cattle would anticipate.

The Devons are not generally deep milkers but the milk is richer than
that of most other breeds, and some families, where proper care and
attention have been given to this quality in breeding, yield largely.
It is, however, as a breed for general use, combining beef, labor and
milk, in fair proportion, that the Devons will generally give best
satisfaction, as they are hardy enough to suit the climate, and
cheaply furnish efficient labor and valuable meat.

Farmers, whose ideas upon stock have been formed wholly from their
experience with Short-horns and their grades, have often been
surprised at witnessing the facility with which Devons sustain
themselves upon scanty pasturage, and not a few when first critically
examining well bred specimens, sympathize with the feeling which
prompted the remark made to the reporter of the great English
Exhibition at Chester, after examining with him fine specimens of the
Devons--"I am delighted; I find we Short-horn men have yet much to
learn of the true formation of animals; their beautiful contour and
extreme quality of flesh surprise me."


The HEREFORDS are an ancient and well established breed, and are
probably entitled to be called a race. Little is known with certainty
of their origin beyond the fact that for many generations they can be
traced as the peculiar breed of the county whence they derive their
name. Youatt says that "Mr. Culley, although an excellent judge of
cattle, formed a very erroneous opinion of the Herefords when he
pronounced them to be nothing but a mixture of the Welsh with a
bastard race of Long Horns. They are evidently an aboriginal breed,
and descended from the same stock as the Devon. If it were not for the
white face and somewhat larger head and thicker neck it would not at
all times be easy to distinguish between a heavy Devon and a light
Hereford."

Mr. Gisborne says "The Hereford brings good evidence that he is the
British representative of a widely diffused and ancient race. The most
uniform drove of oxen which we ever saw, consisted of five hundred
from the Ukraine. They had white faces, upward horns and tawny bodies.
Placed in Hereford, Leicester or Northampton markets, they would have
puzzled the graziers as to the land of their nativity; but no one
would have hesitated to pronounce that they were rough Herefords."

Mr. Rowlandson, in his prize report on the farming of Herefordshire,
says "The Herefords, or as they have sometimes been termed, the middle
horned cattle have ever been esteemed a most valuable breed, and when
housed from the inclemency of the weather, probably put on more meat
and fat in proportion to the food consumed, than any other variety.
They are not so hardy as the North Devon cattle, to which they bear a
general resemblance; they however are larger than the Devons,
especially the males. On the other hand, the Herefords are larger
boned, to compensate for which defect, may be cast in the opposite
scale the fact that the flesh of the Hereford ox surpasses all other
breeds for that beautiful marbled appearance caused by the
intermixture of fat and lean which is so much prized by the epicure.
The Hereford is usually deeper in the chine, and the shoulders are
larger and coarser than the Devon. They are worse milkers than the
Devon, or than, perhaps, any other breed, for the Hereford grazier has
neglected the female and paid the whole of his attention to the male."
It is said that formerly they were of a brown or reddish brown color,
and some had grey or mottled faces. Mr. P. Tully states that the white
face originated accidentally on a farm belonging to one of his
ancestors. "That about the middle of the last century the cow-man came
to the house announcing as a remarkable fact that the favorite cow had
produced a white faced bull calf. This had never been known to have
occurred before, and, as a curiosity it was agreed that the animal
should be kept and reared as a future sire. Such, in a few words, is
the origin of a fact that has since prevailed through the country, for
the progeny of this very bull became celebrated for white faces." Of
late years there has been much uniformity of color; the face, throat,
the under portion of the body, the inside and lower part of the leg's
and the tip of the tail being white, and the other parts of the body a
rich deep red.

Compared with the Short-horn the Hereford is nearly as large, of
rather less early maturity, but a better animal for grazing, and
hardier. The competition between these breeds in England is very close
and warm, and taking many facts together it would seem probable that
the Hereford is in some instances rather more profitable, and the
Short-horn generally more fashionable. Challenges have been repeatedly
offered by Hereford men to Shorthorn men to feed an equal number of
each in order to test their respective merits, and have usually been
declined, perhaps because if the decision was against them, the loss
might be serious, and if they won, the gain would be little or
nothing, the Short-horns being more popular already and commanding
higher prices.

As working oxen the Herefords are preferable to the Short-horns, being
more hardy and active. Some complaint is made of their being
"breachy." Their large frames demand food, and if enough be furnished
they are content, but if not, they have intelligence and activity
enough to help themselves if food be within reach. Their chief merit
is as large oxen, for heavy labor, and for beef. Some grade cows from
good milking dams give a fair quantity of milk, and what they give is
always rich, but wherever they have been introduced, milking qualities
generally deteriorate very much.


The AYRSHIRES are a breed especially valuable for dairy purposes.
Regarding its origin, Mr. Aiton who felt much interest in the subject,
and whose opportunities for knowing the facts were second to those of
no other, writing about forty years since, says, "The dairy breed of
cows in the county of Ayr now so much and so deservedly esteemed, is
not, in their present form, an ancient or indigenous race, but a breed
formed during the memory of living individuals and which have been
gradually improving for more than fifty years past, till now they are
brought to a degree of perfection that has never been surpassed as
dairy stock in any part of Britain, or probably in the world. They
have increased to double their former size, and they yield about four
and some of them five times as much milk as formerly. By greater
attention to breeding and feeding, they have been changed from an
ill-shaped, puny, mongrel race of cattle to a fixed and specific breed
of excellent color and quality. So gradually and imperceptibly were
improvements in the breed and condition of the cattle introduced,
that although I lived in Ayrshire from 1760 to 1785, and have
traversed it every year since, I have difficulty in stating from my
own observation or what I have learned from others, either the precise
period when improvement began, or the exact means by which a change so
important was wrought." He then relates several instances in which
between 1760 and 1770 some larger cows were brought in of the English
or Dutch breeds, and of their effect he says, "I am disposed to
believe that although they rendered the red color with white patches
fashionable in Ayr, they could not have had much effect in changing
the breed into their present highly improved condition," and thinks it
mainly due to careful selections and better treatment.

Mr. Aiton says "the chief qualities of a dairy cow are that she gives
a copious draught of milk, that she fattens readily and turns out well
in the shambles. In all these respects combined the Ayrshire breed
excels all others in Scotland, and is probably superior to any in
Britain. They certainly yield more milk than any other breed in
Europe. No other breed fatten faster, and none cut up better in the
shambles, and the fat is as well mixed with the lean flesh, or
marbled, as the butchers say, as any other. They always turn out
better than the most skillful grazier or butcher who are strangers to
the breed could expect on handling them. They are tame, quiet, and
feed at ease without roaming, breaking over fences, or goring each
other. They are very hardy and active, and are not injured but rather
improved by lying out all night during summer and autumn."

Since Mr. Aiton wrote, even greater care and attention has been paid
to this breed than before, and it is now well entitled to rank as the
first dairy breed in the world, quantity and quality of yield and the
amount of food required being all considered. Compared with the
Jersey, its only rival as a dairy breed, the milk of the Ayrshire is
much more abundant, and richer in caseine, but not so rich in oily
matter, although better in this respect than the average of cows.

Experience of their qualities in this country shows that if they do
not here fully sustain their reputation in Scotland, they come near to
it, as near as the difference in our drier climate allows, giving more
good milk upon a given amount of food than any other. Upon ordinarily
fertile pastures they yield largely and prove very hardy and docile.
The oxen too are good workers, fatten well, and yield juicy, fine
flavored meat.


The JERSEY race, formerly known as the Aldernay, is almost exclusively
employed for dairy purposes, and may not be expected to give
satisfaction for other uses. Their milk is richer than that of any
other cows, and the butter made from it possesses a superior flavor
and a deep rich color, and consequently commands an extraordinary
price in all markets where good butter is appreciated.

The Jersey cattle are of Norman origin, and until within about twenty
or thirty years were far more uninviting in appearance than now, great
improvement having been effected in their symmetry and general
appearance by means of careful selections in breeding, and this
without loss of milking properties. The cows are generally very docile
and gentle, but the males when past two or three years of age often
become vicious and unmanageable. It is said that the cows fatten
readily when dry, and make good beef.

There is no branch of cattle husbandry which promises better returns
than the breeding and rearing of milch cows. Here and there are to be
found some good enough. In the vicinity of large towns and cities are
many which having been culled from many miles around, on account of
dairy properties, are considerably above the average, but taking the
cows of the country together they do not compare favorably with the
oxen. Farmers generally take more pride in their oxen, and strive to
have as good or better than any of their neighbors, while if a cow
will give milk enough to rear a large steer calf and a little besides,
it is often deemed satisfactory.


SHEEP.--The sheep first introduced into this country were of English
origin, and generally not very dissimilar to the ancient unimproved
Down sheep. Probably some were these--as many of the first cattle were
the Devons of that day. More than fifty years since the Merinos were
introduced and extensively bred. At various periods other choice
breeds have been introduced. The number kept has fluctuated very much,
depending mainly on the market value of wool. When it was high many
kept sheep, and when it fell the flocks were neglected.

The true mission of the sheep in fulfilling the threefold purpose of
furnishing _food, and raiment, and the means of fertilization_, seems
not yet to be generally apprehended. One of the most serious defects
in the husbandry of New England at the present time, is the prevalent
neglect of sheep. Ten times the present number might be easily fed,
and they would give in meat, wool and progeny, more direct profit than
any other domestic animal, and at the same time the food they consume
would do more towards fertilizing the farms than an equal amount
consumed by any other animal.

It is notorious that our pastures have seriously deteriorated in
fertility and become overrun with worthless weeds and bushes to the
exclusion of nutritious grasses. Sheep husbandry has declined. If
these two facts as uniformly stand to each other in the relation of
cause and effect, as they certainly do in many instances, the remedy
is suggested at once--replace the animal with "golden feet." After
devoting the best land to cultivation and the poorest to wood, we have
thousands upon thousands of acres evidently intended by the Creator
for sheep walks, because better adapted for this purpose than for any
other. An indication of Providence so unmistakable as this should not
be unheeded.


The MERINOS are perhaps the most ancient race of sheep extant. They
originated in Spain, and were for ages bred there alone. In 1765 they
were introduced into Saxony, where they were bred with care and with
special reference to increasing the fineness of the wool, little
regard being paid to other considerations. They were also taken to
France and to Silesia, and from all these sources importations have
been made into the United States. The Spanish Merino has proved the
most successful, and by skill and care in breeding has been greatly
improved, insomuch that intelligent judges are of opinion that some of
the Vermont flocks are superior to the best in Europe, both in form,
hardiness, quantity of fleece and staple. They are too well known to
require a detailed description here. Suffice it to say that they are
below rather than above medium size, possessing a good constitution,
and are thrifty, and cheaply kept. Their chief merit is as fine wooled
sheep, and as such they excel all others. As mutton sheep they are
constitutionally and anatomically deficient, being of late maturity
and great longevity, (a recommendation as fine wooled sheep,) having
too flat sides, too narrow chests, too little meat in the best parts,
and too great a percentage of offal when slaughtered. Their mutton,
however, is of fair quality when mature and well fatted. As nurses
they are inferior to many other breeds. Many careful, extensive and
protracted attempts have been made to produce a breed combining the
fleece of the Merino with the carcass of the Leicester or other long
wooled sheep. They have all signally failed. The forms,
characteristics and qualities of breeds so unlike seem to be
incompatible with one another. A cross of the Merino buck and
Leicester ewe gives progeny which is of more rapid growth than the
Merino alone, and is hardier than the Leicester. It is a good cross
for the butchers' use, but not to be perpetuated. Improvement in the
Merino should be sought by skillful selection and pairing the parents
in view of their relative fitness to one another.


The LEICESTER, or more properly the New Leicester, is the breed which
Bakewell established, and is repeatedly referred to in the preceding
pages. It has quite superseded the old breed of this name. His aim was
to produce sheep which would give the greatest amount of meat in the
shortest time on a given amount of food, and for early maturity and
disposition to fatten, it still ranks among the highest. The
objections to the breed for New England are, that they are not hardy
enough for the climate, and require richer pastures and more abundant
food than most farmers can supply. Its chief value in such locations
is for crossing upon ordinary sheep for lambs and mutton.


The COTSWOLDS derive their name from a low range of hills in
Gloucestershire. These have long been noted for the numbers and
excellence of the sheep there maintained, and are so called from Cote,
a sheepfold, and Would, a naked hill. An old writer says:--"In these
woulds they feed in great numbers flocks of sheep, long necked and
square of bulk and bone, by reason (as is commonly thought) of the
weally and hilly situation of their pastures, whose wool, being most
fine and soft, is held in passing great account amongst all nations."
Since his time, however, great changes have passed both upon the sheep
and the district they inhabit. The improved Cotswolds are among the
largest British breeds, long wooled, prolific, good nurses, and of
early maturity. More robust, and less liable to disease than the
Leicesters, of fine symmetry and carrying great weight and light
offal, they are among the most popular of large mutton sheep.


The SOUTH DOWN is an ancient British breed, taking its name from a
chalky range of hills in Sussex and other counties in England about
sixty miles in length, known as the South Downs, by the side of which
is a tract of land of ordinary fertility and well calculated for sheep
walks, and on which probably more than a million of this breed of
sheep are pastured. The flock tended by the "Shepherd of Salisbury
Plain," of whose earnest piety and simple faith Hannah More has told
us in her widely circulated tract, were South Downs. Formerly these
sheep possessed few of the attractions they now present. About the
year 1782 Mr. John Ellman of Glynde turned his attention to their
improvement. Unlike his cotemporary Bakewell, he did not attempt to
make a new breed by crossing, but by attention to the principles of
breeding, by skillful selections for coupling and continued
perseverance for fifty years, he obtained what he sought--health,
soundness of constitution, symmetry of form, early maturity, and
facility of fattening, and thus brought his flock to a high state of
perfection. Before he began we are told that the South Downs were of
"small size and ill shape, long and thin in the neck, high on the
shoulders, low behind, high on the loins, down on the rumps, the tail
set on very low, sharp on the back, the ribs flat," &c., &c., and were
not mature enough to fatten until three years old or past. Of his
flock in 1794, Arthur Young[25] says: "Mr. Ellman's flock of sheep, I
must observe in this place, is unquestionably the first in the
country; there is nothing that can be compared with it; the wool is
the finest and the carcass the best proportioned; although I saw
several noble flocks afterwards which I examined with a great degree
of attention; some few had very fine wool, which might be equal to
his, but then the carcass was ill-shaped, and many had a good carcass
with coarse wool; but this incomparable farmer had eminently united
both these circumstances in his flock at Glynde. I affirm this with
the greater degree of certainty, since the eye of prejudice has been
at work in this country to disparage and call in question the quality
of his flock, merely because he has raised the merit of it by
unremitted attention above the rest of the neighboring farmers, and it
now stands unrivalled." This, it will be noticed, was only twelve
years after he began his improvements. To Mr. Ellman's credit be it
said that he exhibited none of the selfishness which characterized Mr.
Bakewell's career, but was always ready to impart information to
those desirous to learn, and labored zealously to encourage general
improvement. That he was pecuniarily successful is evident from the
continued rise in the price of his sheep. The Duke of Richmond, Mr.
Jonas Webb, Mr. Grantham, and other cotemporaries and successors of
Mr. Ellman have carried successfully forward the work so well begun by
him. The Improved South Downs now rank first among British breeds in
hardiness, constitution, early maturity, symmetry, and quality of
mutton and of wool combined. The meat usually brings one to two cents
per pound more than that of most other breeds in Smithfield market. It
is of fine flavor, juicy, and well marbled. The South Downs are of
medium size, (although Mr. Webb has in some cases attained a live
weight in breeding rams of 250 pounds, and a dressed weight of 200
pounds in fattened wethers,) hardy, prolific, and easily kept,
succeeding on short pastures, although they pay well for liberal
feeding.


The OXFORD DOWNS may be named as an instance of successful
cross-breeding. They originated in a cross between the Improved
Cotswolds and the Hampshire Downs.[26] Having been perpetuated now for
more than twenty years, they possess so good a degree of uniformity
as to be entitled to the designation of a distinct breed, and have
lately been formally recognized as such in England. They were first
introduced into Massachusetts by R.S. Fay, Esq., of Lynn, and into
Maine by Mr. Sears, both in 1854. They were first bred with a view to
unite increased size with the superiority of flesh and patience of
short keep which characterize the Downs. It is understood that they
inherit from the Cotswold a carcass exceeding in weight that of the
Downs from a fifth to a quarter; a fleece somewhat coarser but heavier
than that of the Downs by one-third to one-half; and from the latter
they inherit rotundity of form and fullness of muscle in the more
valuable parts, together with the brown face and leg.

In reply to a note of inquiry addressed to Mr. Fay, he says: "I
selected the Oxford Downs with some hesitation as between them and the
Shropshire Downs, after a careful examination of all the various
breeds of sheep in England. My attention was called to them by
observing that they took, (1854,) without any distinct name, all the
prizes as mutton sheep at Birmingham and elsewhere, where they were
admitted to compete. They were only known under the name of half or
cross bred sheep, with name of the breeder. Mr. Rives of Virginia and
myself went into Oxfordshire to look at them, and so little were they
known as a class, that Philip Pusey, Esq., President of the Royal
Agricultural Society, knew nothing about them, although one of his
largest tenants, Mr. Druce, had long bred them. It is only within two
years that they were formally recognized at a meeting, I believe, of
the Smithfield club, and they then received the name which I gave them
years ago, of Oxford Downs. By this name they are now known in
England. I can only add that an experience of six years confirms all
that is claimed for them. Fifty-two ewes produced seventy-three
healthy lambs from February 13th to March 15th, this year. The same
ewes sheared an average of more than seven pounds to the fleece,
unwashed wool, which sold for 34 cents per pound. A good ram should
weigh as a shearling from 180 to 250 pounds; a good ewe from 125 to
160 pounds. They fatten rapidly, and thrive on rough pasture. My
flock, now the older and poorer ones have been disposed of, will
average, I have no doubt, eight pounds of wool to the fleece. The
mutton is exceedingly fine and can be turned into cash in 18 months
from birth."

       *       *       *       *       *

The kind of sheep most desirable, on the whole, in any given case,
depends chiefly on the surface, character and fertility of the farm
and its location. At too great a distance from a good meat market to
allow of a profitable sale of the carcass, the Spanish Merino is
doubtless to be preferred, but if nearer, the English breeds will pay
better. Mutton can be grown cheaper than any other meat. It is daily
becoming better appreciated, and strange as it may seem, good mutton
brings a higher price in our best markets than the same quality does
in England. Its substitution in a large measure for pork would
contribute materially to the health of the community.

Winter fattening of sheep may often be made very profitable and
deserves greater attention, especially where manure is an object--(and
where is it not?) In England it is considered good policy to fatten
sheep if the increase of weight will pay for the oil cake or grain
consumed; the manure being deemed a fair equivalent for the other
food, that is, as much straw and turnips as they will eat. Lean sheep
there usually command as high a price per pound in the fall as fatted
ones in the spring, while here the latter usually bear a much higher
price, which gives the feeder a great advantage. The difference may be
best illustrated by a simple calculation. Suppose a wether of a good
mutton breed weighing 80 pounds in the fall to cost 6 cents per pound
($4.80) and to require 20 pounds of hay per week, or its equivalent in
other food, and to gain a pound and a half each week, the gain in
weight in four months would be about 25 pounds, which at 6 cents per
pound would be $1.50 or less than $10 per ton for the hay consumed;
but if the same sheep could be bought in fall for 3 cents per pound
and sold in spring for 6 cents, the gain would amount to $3.90 or
upwards of $20 per ton for the hay--the manure being the same in
either case.

For fattening it is well to purchase animals as large and thrifty and
in as good condition as can be done at fair prices; and to feed
liberally so as to secure the most rapid increase which can be had
without waste of food.

The fattening of sheep by the aid of oil cake or grain purchased for
the purpose, may often be made a cheaper and altogether preferable
mode of obtaining manure than by the purchase of artificial
fertilizers, as guano, superphosphate of lime, &c. It is practiced
extensively and advantageously abroad and deserves at least a fair
trial here.


HORSES.--It does not seem necessary in this connection to give
descriptions of the various breeds of horses, as comparatively few of
our animals can fairly be said to be of any pure or distinct
varieties. Names are common enough, but the great majority of the
horses among us are so mixed in their descent from the breeds which
have been introduced at various times from abroad, as to be almost as
near of kin to one as to another. Success in breeding will depend far
more upon attention to selection in regard to structure and endowments
than to names. Although it may be somewhat beyond the scope of an
attempt to treat merely of the principles of breeding to offer remarks
regarding its practice, a few brief hints may be pardoned; and first,
let far more care be taken in respect of breeding mares. Let none be
bred from which are too old, or of feeble constitution, or the
subjects of hereditary disease. No greater mistake can be made than to
suppose that a mare fit for nothing else, is worthy to be bred from.
If fit for this, she is good for much else--gentle, courageous, of
good action, durable and good looking; outward form is perhaps of less
importance than in the male, but serious defect in this greatly
lessens her value. She should be _roomy_, that is the pelvis should be
such that she can well develop and easily carry and deliver the foal.
Youatt says, "it may, perhaps, be justly affirmed that there is more
difficulty in selecting a good mare to breed from, than a good horse,
because she should possess somewhat opposite qualities. Her carcass
should be long to give room for the growth of the foetus, yet with
this there should be compactness of form and shortness[27] of leg."

The next point is the selection of a stallion. It is easy enough to
say that he should be compactly built, "having as much goodness and
strength as possible condensed in a little space," and rather smaller
relatively than the mare, that he should be of approved descent and
possess the forms, properties and characteristics which are desired to
be perpetuated. It is not very difficult to specify with tolerable
accuracy what forms are best adapted for certain purposes, as an
oblique shoulder, and depth, rather than width, of chest are
indispensable for trotting; that in a draft horse this obliquity of
shoulder is not wanted, one more upright being preferable, and so
forth; but after all, a main point to secure success is _relative
adaptation of the parents to each other_, and here written directions
are necessarily insufficient and cannot supply the place of skill and
judgment to be obtained only by careful study and practical
experience; nor is it always easy, even if fully aware of the
necessary requirements, to find them in the best combination in the
horses nearest at hand. A stallion may be all which can be desired for
one dam and yet be very unsuitable for another. In this aspect we can
perceive how valuable results may accrue from such establishments as
now exist in various sections of the country, where not a single
stallion only is kept, but many, and where no pains nor expense are
spared to secure the presence of superior specimens of the most
approved breeds, and choice strains of blood in various combinations;
so that the necessary requirements in a sire are no sooner fairly
apprehended than they are fully met. On this point therefore, my
suggestion is, that this relative adaptation of the parents to one
another be made the subject of patient and careful study; and a word
of caution is offered lest in the decisions made, too great importance
be attached to speed alone. That speed is an element of value is not
doubted, nor do I intimate that he who breeds horses to sell, may not
aim to adapt his wares to his market as much as the man who breeds
neat cattle and sheep, or the man who manufactures furniture to sell.
But I do say that speed may be, and often has been, sought at too dear
a rate, and that bottom, courage, docility and action are equally
elements of money value and equally worthy of being sought for in
progeny. Nor is it unlikely that an attempt to breed for these last
named qualities, with a proper reference to speed, would result in the
production of as many fast horses as we now get, and in addition to
this, a much higher average degree of merit in the whole number
reared.

Another suggestion may not be out of place. Hitherto (if we except
fast trotting) there has been little attention paid to breeding for
special purposes, as for draft horses, carriage horses, saddle horses,
etc., and the majority of people at the present time undoubtedly
prefer horses of all work. This is well enough so long as it is a fact
that the wants of the masses are thus best met, but it is equally true
that as population increases in density and as division of labor is
carried farther, it will be good policy to allow the horse to share in
this division of labor, and to breed with reference to different uses;
just as it is good policy for one man to prepare himself for one
department of business and another for another. The same principle
holds in either case.

Sufficient attention has never been paid to the breaking and training
of horses. Not one in a thousand receives a proper education. It ought
to be such as to bring him under perfect control, with his powers
fully developed, his virtues strengthened and his vices eradicated.
What usually passes for breaking is but a distant approximation to
this. The methods recently promulgated by Rarey and Baucher are now
attracting attention, and deservedly too, not merely for the immediate
profit resulting from increased value in the subjects, but in view of
the ultimate results which may be anticipated; for, as we have seen
when treating of the law of similarity, acquired habits may in time
become so inbred as to be transmissible by hereditary descent.

FOOTNOTES:

[24] This was commenced by a cross of Coelebs, a Short-horn bull, upon
a common cow of remarkable excellence.

[25] Annals of Agriculture, Vol. 11, p. 224.

[26] The Hampshires are somewhat larger than the South Downs, and quite
as hardy--the fleece a trifle shorter. The Oxford Downs are not to be
confounded with the New Oxfordshires.

[27] Mr. Youatt here probably refers to length below, rather than
above, the knee and hock.



       *       *       *       *       *

    +-----------------------------------------------------------+
    | Typographical errors corrected in text:                   |
    |                                                           |
    | Page  34: maratime replaced with maritime                 |
    | Page  53: analagous replaced with analogous               |
    | Page 155: suceeding replaced with succeeding              |
    |                                                           |
    +-----------------------------------------------------------+

       *       *       *       *       *







End of Project Gutenberg's The Principles of Breeding, by S. L. Goodale



*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PRINCIPLES OF BREEDING ***


    

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.


START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
    other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
    whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
    of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
    at www.gutenberg.org. If you
    are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
    of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
  
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

    • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
        the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
        you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
        to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
        agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
        within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
        legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
        payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
        Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
        Literary Archive Foundation.”
    
    • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
        you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
        does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
        License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
        copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
        all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
        works.
    
    • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
        any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
        electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
        receipt of the work.
    
    • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
        distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
    

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.