ANSWER. Names of the four specimens of plants sent me are as follows: No. 2-St. Johnswort, Hypericum perforatum, L. Concerning No. 1, see our Third Annual Report, page 169. No. 2 has been for many years regarded as a very pernicious weed in Eastern United States, and like others of the same class of plants is moving westward; it is a hardy perennial, soon over running neglected fields. No. 3 is a native of the United States, and is common in gravely soils and in roadways little used; it is not thought very troublesome. No. 4 is seldom regarded a bad weed, as it seldom advances into cultivated fields. It prefers rich and rather wet soils. Mowing several times a season usually destroys it. Prof. W. R. Lazenby: ASHTABULA, O., February 1, 1885. DEAR SIR: Have you at hand, or can you make an analysis, showing the feeding value of the Hubbard squash? I raised about an acre and one-eighth of squash last year, in amount, about 14 tons. I did not keep an account of the expense, but would say that it was less than the cost of raising the same amount (in land) of corn. I sold about two tons, and as there was no market for the rest I fed them to my cattle and I think with very good results. First, in increasing the flow of milk from the cows, in adding to the richness of it and in giving a very fine aroma to the butter and making it a nice yellow, equal to June butter. I also fed to three head of stock that were fattening and they gained very fast, indeed, but as I had no scales with which to weigh them, I could not tell how fast. A couple of calves, also to which I gave a few, grew beyond all precedent, so that I am convinced that there is great feeding value in them and shall try a larger field of them this season, and if desirable, will report the result. I might give some few figures but do not know as they would be of interest to you, as my experiments were not exhaustive enough to form any sufficient test as to the exact amount gained by feeding the squashes. I am looking quite anxiously for your report and hope to receive it as soon as published. The only record I have of squash analysis is one published in the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station Report of 1884. This is as follows, and for sake of comparison, I also append analysis of beets (Mangolds). Squash, Total dry Nitrogen Ash. .40 4.19 .82 1.05 Beets (Mangolds), While the Station has made no practical tests of the feeding value of the Hubbard squash, I know it to be a cheap and valuable stock food. When in charge of the Horticultural Department of Cornell University, I kept an accurate account with one half acre of Hubbard squashes and found that the crop cost a trifle less than $3.00 per ton. This statement covers the expenditures from March 7, 1885, to March 15, 1886. The current expenses to the close of the year (May 1st) will entirely exhaust the balance on hand. The salary of the chemist and the expense of distributing the Annual Report must come from this balance, leaving scarcely enough to pay the usual labor account. The smallest amount usually appropriated to any experiment station in the United States, excepting that of the State of Ohio, is $8.000. In order to success ully carry out for another year the work now fully inauguated at the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station this sum is required. EMMETT MIX, W. N. COWDEN, Auditing Committee. J. C. STEVENS, Treasurer. Acknowledge the receipt of this, if you wish subsequent reports. |