The Stock-Feeder's Manual Part 20

AVERAGE a.n.a.lYSES OF GRAIN.

--------------+-------+------+-----+--------+------+-----+--------+------ Indian Rye Buck- Barley. Bere. Oats. Oatmeal. Corn. Rice. (Irish). wheat.

+-------+------+-----+--------+------+-----+--------+------ Water 160 1425 140 1300 145 140 160 1419 Flesh-formers 105 1010 115 1600 100 53 90 858 Fat-formers 670 6460 645 6800 690 785 660 5191 Woody fibre 35 903 70 175 50 25 80 2312 Mineral matter 30 202 30 125 15 07 10 220 +-------+------+-----+--------+------+-----+--------+------ 1000 10000 1000 10000 1000 1000 1000 10000 --------------+-------+------+-----+--------+------+-----+--------+------

_Barley_ is inferior in composition to wheat. As a feeding stuff, the English farmers a.s.sign to it a higher, and the Scotch farmers a lower, place than oats, which, perhaps, merely proves that in Scotland the oat thrives better than the barley, and in England the barley better than the oat. Barley-meal is extensively used by the English feeders, and with excellent results. Where _barley-dust_ can be obtained it is a far cheaper feeding stuff than the meal. Barley husks should never be given to animals unless in a cooked or fermented state.

_Oat Grain_ is, perhaps, the most valuable of the concentrated foods which are given to fattening stock. When it is cheap it will be found a more economical feeding stuff than linseed-cake, and, unlike that substance, can be used without the fear of adulteration. Oats are equal to wheat in their amount of flesh-forming matters; but their very high proportion of indigestible woody fibre detracts from their nutritive value. Oat-meal is more nutritious than wheat-meal; and oat-flour, especially if finely dressed, greatly excels wheat-flour in its nutrimental properties, because, unlike the latter, the finer it is the greater is its amount of flesh-formers. Bread made of oat-flour is very heavy, and is far less palatable than the bread of wheat. Oat-meal has been found to contain nearly 20 per cent. of nitrogenous matters. The white oat is more nutritious than the black, and the greatest amount of aliment is found in the grain which has not been allowed to over-ripen in the field. Oat husk is very inferior to the bran of wheat. Toppings are seldom worth the price at which they are sold.

_Indian Corn_ has been highly extolled as a fattening food for stock, and its chemical composition would seem to justify the high opinion which practical men have formed of its relative nutritive value. In the United States, the feeding of horses on Indian corn and hay has been found very successful; but in these countries oats will be found a more economical food. For fattening purposes Indian corn appears exceedingly well adapted, as it contains more ready-formed fat--45 per cent.--than is found in most of the other grains, and, on an average, 70 per cent.

of starch. Pigs thrive well on this grain. The Galatz round yellow grain is somewhat superior to the American flat yellow seed.

_Rye_ is not extensively cultivated in this country, but on the Continent it is raised in large quant.i.ties. In the north of Europe it forms a considerable proportion of the food of both man and the domesticated animals. In Holland it is commonly consumed by horses, but in England there has always been a prejudice against the use of this grain as food for the equine tribe. It has been highly recommended for dairy stock, five pounds of rye-meal, with a sufficiency of cut straw, const.i.tuting, it is stated, a dietary on which cows yield a maximum supply of milk. Irish-grown rye contains less starch, and more flesh-formers and oil, than the Black Sea grain.

_Rice_, although it forms the chief pabulum of nearly one-third of the human family, is the least nutritious of the common food grains.

Rice-dust, an article obtained in cleaning rice for European consumption, is said to promote the flow of milk when given to cows. It is sold in large quant.i.ties in Liverpool, where, according to Voelcker, it often commands a higher price than it is worth.

_Buckwheat_ is chiefly used as a food for game and poultry.

_Malted Corn._--During a late session of Parliament a Bill was pa.s.sed to exempt from duty malt intended to be used as food for cattle. As feeders may now become their own maltsters, it may be of some use to them to have here a _resume_ of this Bill:--

1. Any person giving security and taking out a licence may make malt in a malt-house approved by the Excise for the purpose; and all malt so made and mixed with linseed-cake or linseed-meal as directed, shall be free from duty.

2. The security required is a bond to Her Majesty, with sureties to the satisfaction of the Excise, not to take from any such malt-house any malt except duly mixed with material prescribed by the Act.

3. The malt-house must be properly named upon its door.

4. All malt made in it shall be deposited in a store-room, and shall be conveyed to and from the room upon such notice as the officer of Excise shall appoint.

5. The maltster shall provide secure rooms in his malt-house, to be approved in writing by the supervisor, for grinding the malt made by him in such malt-house, and mixing and storing the same when mixed; and all such rooms shall be properly secured and kept locked by the proper officer of Excise.

6. All malt before removal from the malt-house shall be ground and thoroughly mixed with one-tenth part at least of its weight of ground linseed-cake or linseed-meal, and ground to such a degree of fineness and in such manner as the commissioners shall approve, and mixed together in a quant.i.ty not less than forty bushels at a time in the presence of an officer of Excise.

7. The maltster shall keep account of the quant.i.ty of all malt mixed as aforesaid which he shall from time to time send out or deliver from his malt-house, with the dates and addresses of the person for whom such mixed malt shall be so sent or delivered.

8. If any person shall attempt to separate any malt from any material with which the same shall have been mixed as aforesaid, or shall use this malt for the brewing of beer or distilling of spirits, he shall forfeit the sum of 200.

9 and 10. The penalties of existing Acts are recited.

11. This Act shall continue and be in force for five years.

Some samples of malt and barley examined in May, 1865, by Dr. Voelcker for the Central Anti-Malt Tax a.s.sociation, afforded the following results:--

-------------------------+-------+--------------------------------------- Barley Malt marked marked No. 1. No. 5. No. 7. No. 9. No. 14. No. 16.

-------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------- Moisture 1176 872 743 776 835 706 Sugar 375 429 548 785 946 986 Starch and dextrine 7040 7103 6970 6757 6753 6767 [*] Alb.u.minous compounds (flesh-forming matters) 775 844 881 937 860 831 Woody fibre (cellular) 446 522 638 538 414 511 Mineral matter (ash) 188 230 220 207 192 199 +-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+------- 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 [* Containing nitrogen] 124 135 141 150 138 133 -------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------

A great deal has been said and written in favor of malt as a feeding stuff, but I greatly doubt its alleged decided superiority over barley; and until the results of accurately conducted comparative experiments made with those articles incontestably prove that superiority, I think it is somewhat a waste of nutriment to convert barley into malt for feeding purposes. The gentlemen who verbally, or in writing, refer so favorably to malt, acknowledge, with one or two exceptions, that their experience of the article is limited. Mr. John Hudson, of Brandon, states that he made a comparative experiment, the results of which proved the superiority of malt. But, in fact, the only properly-conducted experiments to determine the relative values of malt and barley were those made some years ago by Dr. Thompson, of Glasgow, by the direction of the Government, and those recently performed by Mr.

Lawes, both producing results unfavorable to the malt. The issue of Dr.

Thompson's investigations proved that milch cows fed on barley yielded more milk and b.u.t.ter than when supplied with an equal weight of malt.

I do not deny the probability that malt, owing to its agreeable flavor and easy solubility, may be a somewhat better feeding stuff than barley; and that, weight for weight, it may produce a somewhat greater increase in the weight of the animals fed upon it: but although a pound-weight of malt may be better than a pound-weight of barley, I am quite satisfied that a pound's worth of barley will put up more flesh than a pound's worth of malt. Barley-seeds consist of water, starch, nitrogenous substances--such as gluten and alb.u.men--fatty substances, and saline matter. The amount of starch is considerable, being sometimes about 70 per cent. In the process of malting (which is simply the germination of the seed under peculiar conditions), a portion of the starch is converted into sugar and gum, the grain increases in size and becomes friable when dried, and the internal structure of the seed is completely broken up. During these changes a partial decomposition of the solid matter of the seeds takes place, and a large amount of nutriment is dissipated, chiefly in the form of carbonic acid gas. From the results of the experience of the maltster, and of special experiments made by scientific men, it would appear that a ton of barley will produce only 16 cwt. of malt. Allowance must, however, be made for the difference between the amount of water contained in barley and in malt, the latter being much drier. According to Mr. E. Holden, the centesimal loss sustained in malting may be stated thus:--

Water 600 Organic matter 1252 Saline matter 048 ------ 10000

Dr. Thompson[35] sets down the loss of nutriment (exclusive of that occasioned by kiln-drying), as follows:--

Carried off by the steep 15 Dissipated on the floor 30 Roots separated by cleaning 30 Waste 05 --- 80

We may say, then, that by the malting of barley we lose at least 2-1/2 cwt. of solid nutriment out of every ton of the article, and this loss falls heaviest on the nitrogenous, or flesh-forming const.i.tuents of the grain. When there are added to this loss the expense of carting the grain to and from the malt-house, and the maltster's charge for operating upon it (I presume in this case that the feeder is not his own maltster), it will be found that two tons of malt will cost the farmer nearly as much as three tons of barley; and he will then have to solve the problem--_Whether or not malt is 40 or 50 per cent. more valuable as a feeding-stuff than barley_.

The difference in value between barley and malt is generally 14s. per barrel; but it is sometimes more or less, according to the supply and demand. Barley, well malted, will lose on the average 25 per cent. of its weight, the loss depending, to some extent, upon the degree to which the process is carried, and on the germinating properties of the barley.

Barley malted for roasters ought not to lose more than 21 per cent. of its original weight--53 lbs. to the barrel. The heavier the barley the less it loses in malting; a barrel of 224 lbs., and value from 15s. to 16s., ought to produce a barrel of malt of 196 lbs., value 29s. to 30s.

If we deduct from the cost of a barrel of malt the amount of duty at present levyable upon it, the price of the article will be still nearly 50 per cent. greater than that of an equal weight of barley. The cheaper barley is the greater will be the relative cost of malt. The maltster's charge for converting a barrel of barley into malt is about 4s.; so that if the price of the grain be so low as 12s. per barrel, which it sometimes is, the cost of malting it would amount to 33 per cent. of its price. Then, the diminution in the weight of, and the cost of carting the grain, must be taken into account; and when the whole expense attendant upon the process of malting is ascertained, it will be found that I have not exaggerated in stating that a ton of malt costs as much as a ton and a half of barley.

If the consumer of malt germinate the seeds himself, he may probably, if he require large quant.i.ties of the article, produce it at a somewhat cheaper rate than if he bought it from the maltster; but few persons who have the slightest knowledge of the vexatious restrictions of the Inland Revenue authorities would be likely to place his premises under the _espionage_ of an excise officer.

As the superiority of malt over barley (if such be really the case) must be chiefly due to the looseness of its texture, which allows the juices of the stomach to act readily upon it, barley in a cooked state might be found quite as nutritious: It would not be fair to inst.i.tute comparisons between dense hard barley-seeds and the easily soluble malted grains.

During the cooking of barley a portion of the starch is changed into sugar, but in this case with only an inappreciable waste of nutriment.

When the cooking process is continued for a few hours, a considerable amount of sugar is formed, and the barley acquires a very sweet flavor.

When the malt for cattle question was under discussion, I made a little experiment in relation to it, the results of which are perhaps of sufficient interest to mention:--Two pounds weight of barley-meal were moistened with warm water; after standing for three hours more water was added, and sufficient heat applied to cause the fluid to boil. After fifteen minutes' ebullition, a few ounces of the pasty-like ma.s.s which was produced were removed, thoroughly dried, and on being submitted to a.n.a.lysis yielded six per cent. of sugar. The addition of a small quant.i.ty of malt to barley undergoing the process of cooking will rapidly convert the starch into sugar.

Barley is naturally a well-flavored grain, and all kinds of stock eat it with avidity. It may be rendered still more agreeable if properly cooked, and this process will, by disintegrating its hard, fibrous structure, set free its stores of nutriment. I incline strongly to the opinion that barley, when well boiled, is almost, if not quite, as digestible as malt.

A serious disadvantage in the use of malt is, that it must be consumed, it is said, in combination with 10 per cent. of its weight of linseed-meal or cake. Now, malt is a very laxative food, and so is linseed; and if the diet of stock were largely made up of these articles the animals would, sooner or later, suffer from diarrhoea. In such case, then, the addition of bean-meal, or of some other binding food, would become necessary, and the compound of malt, linseed, and bean-meal thereby formed would certainly prove anything but an economical diet.

_Malt Combs._--I should mention that a portion of the nutriment which the barley loses in malting pa.s.ses into the radicles, or young roots, which project from the seeds, and are technically known by the term "combs," "combings," or "dust." At present these combs are separated from the malt, but if the latter be intended for feeding purposes this separation is unnecessary, and in such case the barley will not be so much deteriorated. The combs, which const.i.tute about 4 per cent. of the weight of the malt, are sometimes employed as a feeding stuff. I have made an a.n.a.lysis of malt-combings for the County of Kildare Agricultural Society, and have obtained the following results:--

100 PARTS CONTAINED--

Water 842 [*] Flesh-forming (alb.u.minous) substances 2150 Digestible fat-forming substances (starch, sugar, gum, &c.) 5347 Indigestible woody fibre 857 [+] Saline matter (ash) 804 ------ 10000

[* Yielding nitrogen 344]

[+ Containing potash 135 Containing phosphoric acid 174]

This article was sold as a manure at 3 6s. per ton--a sum for which it was not good value; but as a feeding substance it was probably worth 4 or 5 per ton. Its composition indicates a high nutritive power; but it is probable that its nitrogenous matters are partly in a low degree of elaboration, which greatly detracts from its alimental value.

In conclusion, then, I would urge the following points upon the attention of the farmer:--

1st. Before using malt for feeding purposes, wait until you learn the general results of the experience of other farmers with that article.

The manufacture of malt for feeding purposes is rapidly on the decline, instead of, as had been antic.i.p.ated, on the increase.

2nd. Should you experiment with barley and malt, use equal money's worth of each, and employ the barley in a cooked state.

3rd. Use malt-combings as a feeding stuff, and not as a manure. They are good value for at least 3 10s. per ton.

4th. Bear in mind that a ton of barley contains more saline matter than an equal weight of malt; consequently, that stock fed upon barley will produce a manure richer in potash and phosphates than those supplied with malt.