Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1874-06-11
THE HER AID
Horse, Mule or Cattle Teams ?


This question is largely governed
bv circumstances. Where there 10
much work and large amount of
power employed, the mule is the an
imal to use, as be can be obtained
cheaper. and is much longer-lived
than either the horse or the OK; be-
sides, he is tougher, less liable to inJu-
nv and disease, and has more work
in him where endurance is the test.
lie is therefore the animal for the
farm whose economy is considered.
Hence, where farming is largely car
ried on, the mule is not the only an
imal wanted, but he is by far the
most profitable.
A horse team, if a good one, as 1t
should be, would cost say $500. 1t
will last, if proberly used, twenty
years. Divide the $500 by twenty
and we have SIS yearly ifor wear.
The interest of $500 is S21 per year.
The keeping of the team, grain, $40;
hay $3.50; total, 1926 per year. De-
Quoting S26 for the manure there
will be left 5000 yearly expense tor
q horse team.
A mule can be raised or purchased
at less cost-shall we say one-third
less ?-making the wear but So a
year (reckonIng the service forty
years, double that of the horse in
terest S14, expense of feeding, say,
grain $50, other fodder $50, amounts
ing in all to S149 year-a difference
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 mans
average lifetime on the farm, will
amount to a nice sum. Where
large force is employed, the advan-
tages of using mule power will show
in large figures.
The question here comes up per-
tinently 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 q fine appearance. The mule
can be obtained active enough, docile
of good disposition, affectionate
even, and intelligent. | see no reas-
on why it should not be more pre-
ferred A good mule is more relia-
bic than a horse, endures more, re-
cuperates sooner from fatigue and
exhaustion, is less liable to inj jury, is
sure-footed, a good walker, patient,
with other desirable qualities Where
are those that, through bad lineage
and bad treatment, are vicious. Some
of them are "breachy," stubborn,
diminutive, with othor undesirable
qualities. A bad mule ADD an infer
ior horse arc not wanted on any
farm.
There is prejudice against the mule
that is not entertained by those who
know the animal best. tits through
Ignorance that this prejudice or re-
pugnance exists, and it is at q loss to
the farmer. What is clear is. that
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 to their interest
to use the animal. My remarks
have been made on the score of
economy mostly. For show and
readiness, but principally from asso-
cation, the horse will be used by our
northern and eastern farmers, who
arc we'll to-do, and need but single
tca n to work their small farms or
if heavier force is required, the
favorlte carriage team is not likely
to be dispensed with or replaced by
a pair of hybirds, even if rivals of
the horses or superior to them in
size, appearance of trustworthiness
The horse can never be wholly DIS
placed.
As to the OK team, it can hardly
be said to be competitor. Cheap
ness is its recommendation. The
yoke and chain are it's harness Its
keep compares favorably with both
the horse and mule; and so it's origi-
nal cost. 1t is handy, always in
harness, always ready; and, if a
good heavy pair, is fitted for heavy
work, such as blowing sod doing
the work here of three ordinary
horses), hauling heavy loads, etc.
Bat its years of labor are compare
lively few. It's carcass. however,
can be turned off to advantage. But
cattle, whether oxen, bulls or cows,
will never suppIant the mule or
horse. The little advantage they
afford is exceptional Cor. Country
Gentleman. .