ITEMS FOR FARMERS.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXVI, Issue 8463, 31 May 1916, Page 8

ITEMS FOR FARMERS.

Some of the principal averages at last Sydney stock sales were:—-Bul-locks: 9 at £25 ss, 11 af £23, 15. at £22 18s 6d, 19 at £21.2s 9d, 9at £20 lls Id, 10 at £20 Is. Bullocks and steers: 10 at £18 16s 3d, 35 at £17 5s 2d. Cows: 5 at £15 fe 2d. Cows and heifers: 36 at £13 2s lOd. Steers: 5 at £19 ss, 6 at £18 17s 6d. Heifers: 6 at £12 6s. Calves: 11 at £4. 4s 2d, 5 at £3 10s 2d. Vealers: 31 at £11 7s 6d. .

Maiae and barley meal are of just about the same value for fattening pigs. Neither of these foods (says p. Homo exchange, in replying to fnc query of a correspondent) is really suitable for feeding alone, as they both contain an excess, of starchy matter, and the ration should therefore be balanced .by some food containing a fair proportion of albuminoids or fleshformers. Sharps do not contain sufficient of this constituent for young . animals, but you could provide agootl daily ration for. pigs;by using maize meal and separated milk of buttermilk. As regards the quantity of food, this should be regulated according to the appetites of the pigs, feeding as. much at each meal as they can conveniently clear up, sfeeing that no stale food is left over in the trough. About 31b to I 41b of dry food per head per day will now be.required, and must be fed in gradually increasing minhtities as the pigs gain in weight. Young fattening pigs ought to have" a ration fortified by some good quality meal, and homegrown pea or bean meal will be excel-lent-for this purpose. After they are about five months old, however, they will be'better able to deal with a ration containing an excess of starch, and you ■may then feed them with anything up to 51b to 61b per heatl per day of maize meal and sharps in'equal quantities.

A case of considerable interest to farmers, and contractors was decided at the Magistrate's Court "at Lawrence, before Mr J. R. Acheson, S.M., on Tuesday (writes the "Otago Daily Times" own correspondent). Tliis was an action to recover from R. Cowie, farmer, Weathers tone, £22 7s, for ploughing 37 acres of land at Bow Bell, a property recently, acquired by the defendant. It was admitted by the defendant that the work had been done, and that the price, was as agreed; but he set up the-defence'that the ploughing was only a portion of the contract, the plaintiff having agreed to plough, work-up, and sow the land in turnips by the middlo of December. As a consea uence of the plaintiff's failure to complete the work he counter-claimed £72 12s-3d,, being £8 12s 3d, the difference between Hoare's contract and the. amount he had subsequently to pay to got the work carried out, and £64 for estimated ~ loss of £2 per acre on the crop, which was a failure owing to tlie late date of sowing. Evidence in support of the counter-claim was given by the defendant, his two sons, and J. Mclntosh, Jas. Brydie, A. McStay, W. Pearson, and J. Franklin. The plain- ; tiff admitted he had undertaken to carry out the whole of the work, but stated, that the message delivered, to iiiinl before leaving Cowie's property was to the effect that he was only to do the ploughing, and that his prices for the other work were too high. This was supported by R. Hunter, junr., who alleged ,that on November 2 he had a conversation with Cowie, in which Hoaro's prices were discussed, 'the'defendant expressing the opinion "that they were too high, and that he was only getting Hoare to do the ploughing in the meantime. A good- deal of evidence was also given to show that the poor quality of tlic land and the late 'ploughing were more accountable for the poor crop than the late sowing and climatic conditions. His Worship said he was satisfied that a contract to do the whole-of the work had been ar-; ranged in defendant's house, but on analysing the evidence he had come to the conclusion that immediately Hoare had loft the defendant had, considering the price of the work as high, changed his mind and decided to have only the ■ploughing done. ,Ho therefore gave iudgment for plaintiff for the amount, planned,, and for defendant (Hoare) on the countpr-rL'iim, with costs amounting to £22 11s.