Buchanan County bulletin. [volume] (Independence, Iowa) 1869-1891, 1874-08-07
Motive Power ON the Farm.

This question is largely governed
by circumstances. Where there is
much work and large amount of
power employed the mule is the ami
NAL to use, as he can be obtained
cheaper, kept cheaper, and is much
longer lived than either the horse or
the OK; beside, he is tougher, less liza
BILE to injury and disease, and has
more work i'll him where endurance
is the test. He is therefore the ami
NAL for the farm where economy is
considered. Hence, where farming
is largely carried on, the mule is not
only the animal wanted, but he is by
far the most profitable.
A horse team, if good one, as it
should be, will cost, say $500. 1t
will last if properly used, say twenty
years. Divide the $500 by twenty,
and we have SIS yearly for wear.
The interest on $500 is $2l per year.
The keeping of team, grain $40, hay,
sl2O; total, 1926 per year. Deduct
ing S26 for the manure, there will be
left 5000 yearly expense for a horse
team.
A mule can be raised or purchas-
ed at a less cost-shall we say one
third less?- making the wear but IS
year (reckoning the service forty
years, double that of the horsc), in
terest $l4, expense Of feeding, say,
grain, $50, other fodder $50, in all
amounting to $l49 a year-a differ
ence annually of $50, or one-fourth.
And vet the same amount of work, if
not more, is performed. This for
one team, which in the course of Il
mans average lifetime on the farm
will amount to nice sum. Where
large force is employed, the advan-
tages of using mule power will show
in large figures.
The question here comes up peril
nently whether horse or a mule
team should be employed where but
one is needed. There are those who
take pride in a mule team, even for
the carriage, and good, active mules
make fine appearance. The mule
can be obtained active enough, do
Gle, of a good disposition, affection
ate even, and intelligent. l see no
reason why it should not be more
preferred. "A good mule is more re-
liable than the horse, endures more,
recupcrates sooner from fatigue and
exhaustion, is less liable to hurts, is
sure-footed, a good walker, patient,
with other desirable qualities. There
are those that, through bad lineage
and bad treatment, are vicious. Some
of them are "breachy," stubborn,
diminutive, with other undesirable
qualities. A bad mule and an infer
ior horse are not wanted on the
farm.
There is a prejudice against the
mule that is not entertained by those
who know the animal best. 1t is
through Ignorance that this preju-
dice or repugnance exists, and it is
at a loss to the farmer. What is
clear is, thlt we need more of these
hybrids to do our work. The South
and West are already supplied, and
the North and East will find it for
their interest to use this animal. My
remarks have been made on the score
of economy mostly. For show and
readiness, but principally from assoc
citation, the horse will be used by our
Northern and Eastern farmers who
are we'll to do and need but a single
team to work their small farms; or if
Il heavier force is required, the favor
lite carriage team is not likely to be
dispensed with or replaced by a pair
of hybrids, even if rivals of the horses
or superior to them in size, appear
ance and trustworthiness. The horse
can never be wholly displaced.
AS to the OK team, it can hardly be
said to be a competitor. Cheapness
is its recommendation. The yoke
and chain are it's harness. Its keep
compares favorably with both the
horse and mule; and SO its original
cost. 1t is handy, always in harness,
always ready; and, if good heavy
pair, is fitted for heavy work, such as
blowing sod, doing the work here of
three ordinary horscs), hauling heavy
loads, etc. But it's years of labor are
comparatively few. Its carcass, how
ever, can be turced off to advantage.
But cattle, whether bulls, oxen, or
cows, will never supplant the mule Or
the horse. The little advantage they
afford is exceptional.-Cor. Country
Gentleman.