The bulls of his get apparently derived their characters from their grandsire, Grand Duke, a very superior animal, while the heifers resembled their grandam.

Duke of Airdrie, who was got by Duke of Gloster out of Duchess of Athol, a superior animal and an excellent breeder, was a superior sire of both males and females.

The defects of Duke of Gloster as a breeder were apparently supplemented by Duchess of Athol, although they were closely related, so that the balance of organization was fully restored in their son.

Without reference to the principle of correllated development, cases like this are not easily explained.

On the same principle, a cross in color within the limits of the family has been recommended, and with apparent good

reason.

As there is a practical difficulty in detecting all the peculiar tendencies of individuals so as to make selection, that would properly supplement each other, the general rule might be laid down, in breeding within the limits of a family, to match animals with reference to the essential, or more constant characters of the family, and mis-match them with reference to the varying or non-essential characters.

If this idea of supplementing qualities is accepted as of some possible value, the fashionable method of breeding only from animals of the desired color must be very objectionable.

If the views presented in this paper are correct, success or failure in the art of breeding will depend to a great extent upon the skill and judgment exercised in making a selection of breeding stock.

As all the characters of both parents are inherited by the offspring, a thorough knowledge of the qualities of animals and the tendencies of their organization in all its parts, will be required on the part of the breeder, to enable him to make a selection of desirable variations and at the same time reject all characters that may tend to interfere with the symmetrical and healthy development of the animal.

We have seen that the artificial conditions in which animals are placed, to secure the development of the special char

acters we seek, have a tendency at the same time to produce a delicacy of constitution and a defective performance of important functions.

Even if this unsymmetrical development of the organization does not proceed far enough to constitute actual disease, it becomes a predisposing tendency to disease that is liable to be made active by any slight causes.

If animals are selected that have a tendency to barrenness, and the conditions under which they are kept are such as to increase this predisposition, they will finally cease to breed, even if any approach to close breeding is carefully avoided.

Any defects that animals may possess will certainly become fixed by in-and-in breeding.

From the difficulty of detecting slight variations that tend to produce disease close breeding should not be practiced by careless or inexperienced breeders.

In the hands of those possessing the requisite knowledge and skill, however, it may not only be practiced with advantage when used as a means of accomplishing a definite object, but it becomes an essential element of success.

The opponents of in-and-in breeding seem to base their arguments upon the false assumption that those who defend it are in favor of the indiscriminate and promiscuous interbreeding of all of the animals of a herd or flock.

Such a practice would certainly be disastrous, and cannot be too strongly deprecated.

It does not, however, follow from this that it should not be practiced under any circumstances, or that it is in itself injurious.

If we would succeed in securing the highest possible development of our domestic animals, we cannot afford to discard any means that may be made use of, on the ground that it cannot be safely employed in the hands of the unskillful.

Slight variations in form and quality that are difficult to secure, may be fixed by a judicious inter-breeding of the animals possessing them when they could not be secured in any other way.

As a means of developing prepotency, it will perhaps be desirable to limit it, to the families from which we select males,

so that they may have a predominating influence in determining the character of their offspring.

SUMMARY.

All distinguished breeders have practiced close breeding to a greater or less extent, and apparently with the same object,— to fix certain desired characters in their stock,-and to shut out all influences that tend to produce a variation from their standard of excellence.

Close breeding in itself considered, does not improve animals. All characters of both parents are inherited by the offspring. Close breeding fixes the dominant characters and gives prepotency in the transmission of those characters.

Animals are varied by the conditions under which they are placed, and the supply of food they receive..

The most desirable characters of our improved animals are highly artificial, and they adapt the animal to special purposes. An excessive development of an artificial character in a special direction is usually accompanied by a modification of other parts of the system, and a certain delicacy of constitution.

The development of special characters with reference to a particular standard, gives rise to resemblances, which constitute family characteristics.

In attempts to engraft any new character upon a family, care must be taken to prevent a loss of the typical peculiarities of the family.

Close breeding does not in itself considered, injure animals. Any defects arising from other causes will, however, be fixed and thus lead to injurious results.

The fat-producing breeds are more likely to show a tendency to barrenness, than those adapted to the production of milk or wool.

High fattening qualities are not favorable to the active exercise of the reproductive function. There is a close sympathy between the organs of lactition and those of reproductiongood milkers are usually good breeders.

The reproductive organs are sometimes affected by "fatty degeneration."

With high fattening qualities other functions may be impaired, thus leading indirectly to loss of fecundity.

Changes of food and habit will often interfere with the healthy performance of the reproductive powers.

The fact that many high bred animals are good breeders shows that close breeding does not necessarily cause barren

ness.

Animals that are closely related may be separated and kept under different conditions, and thus prevent the development of precisely the same tendencies in their organization.

Too great a difference in the conditions under which the animals are placed, will, however, produce divergent variations that would tend to obscure the typical characteristics of the family.

A tendency to loss of fertility may be corrected by breeding within the limits of the family, if the characters of one parent are supplemented by the other,-a cross of color or of other unessential individual characters may sometimes be made with advantage on the same principle.

Success in breeding will depend upon the skill with which selections are made. If animals are defective in organization, or have a tendency to the feeble performance of any function from lack of constitution, their offspring will inherit the same peculiarities, even if they are not closely bred.

Close breeding in the hands of careless and inexperienced breeders cannot be too strongly discouraged, as it will undoubtedly result in fixing undesirable characters.

The highest success, however, can only be attained by those who possess the knowledge and skill required in fixing those slight variations of form and qualities, that make the nearest approach to the standard of perfection, by a judicious system of selection and close breeding.

As the influence of inter-breeding upon psychological characters has a more intimate relation to human physiology in its bearings upon social science, its discussion has been omitted in this paper, as it involves no additional principles of practical interest in stock breeding.

SOIL EXHAUSTION AND ROTATION IN

CROPS.

The lecture of Prof. Johnson of the Sheffield Scientific School, is so valuable in itself and contains matters of such importance to the farmers of this State, that it has been decided to give the lecture in full in the present Report of the Secretary of the State Board of Agriculture. I have been requested by the President of the Board to write an article introducing the subject to the farmers of Michigan; yet it must be confessed that any thing from the pen of Prof. Johnson does not need any elaborate introduction to bring it to the notice of the intelligent public.

Cultivators of new soil are prone to deny that exhaustion of soil by cropping is possible, and we often hear them boast of the inexhaustible fertility of their soil. The Dutch settlers of the Mohawk Valley considered their soil so rich that the application of manure would be an injury and for some years carted their stable manure onto the ice of the Mohawk River, so that the spring flood might effectually relieve them of a useless encumbrance. The early settlers on the banks of River Raisin, held manure in about the same estimation, but did not often resort to the same means to get rid of it. The farmers on the western prairies still boast of the inexhaustible qualities of their soil.

If the owners of these rich lands would stop to consider that these virgin soils are in high condition, because that, practically, they have lain in fallow for untold ages,—that so far as cropping is concerned, they have not produced a crop