We have several varieties, all of which are imported, as there are no natives of the Western Continent. The early importations were princ.i.p.ally made from the Azores, and Cape de Verd Islands, and were mostly of an inferior character. A superior Maltese Jack was presented to Gen. Washington, in 1787, by La Fayette, and is believed to be the first ever sent to this country. Mr. Custis describes him as of moderate size, clean-limbed, possessing great activity, the fire and ferocity of a tiger, of a dark brown and nearly black, with white belly and muzzle, and manageable only by one groom, nor then safely. He lived to a great age. His mules were all active, spirited, and serviceable, and when from stout mares, attained considerable size.

A Spanish Jack and Jennet were also presented to Washington about the same time, by the King of Spain. The first is characterized by the same authority, as a huge, ill-shapen animal, nearly 16 hands high, very large head, clumsy limbs, and to all appearance little calculated for active service; he was of a gray color, and not much valued for his mules, which were unwieldy and dull. From the Maltese Jack and Spanish Jennet, which approach the size of the large Spanish Jack, was bred a valuable animal, _Compound_, which partook of all the good qualities of the sire, with the weight of the dam. From him descended many of the best mules of Mount Vernon.

Many other valuable importations followed these animals, and it is believed we have for many years had as fine specimens of the a.s.s as the world affords.

Jennets, or she-a.s.ses, are used among us princ.i.p.ally for breeding Jacks, and of course are not numerous. They are sometimes, though seldom, bred to the horse. It is difficult to induce the horse to notice them, and the produce, which is called a _hinny_, is less hardy and useful than the mule. The milk of the she-a.s.s is lighter and more digestible than that of any other animal, and in former times was in great request for invalids.

The a.s.s is occasionally used in the cart, or as a beast of burden. Such as are employed for these purposes are generally of an inferior kind, and are only used for the lightest work. They may sometimes be seen among the fishmongers and small vegetable dealers about our city markets, but little larger than a Newfoundland dog or Shetland pony, trundling along a light cart with a wheelbarrow load. In ancient times they have been, and in foreign countries--even at the present time, they are extensively used. But the most enlightened of the moderns have adopted the mule as the proper and almost exclusive subst.i.tute for the a.s.s; and it would show a still greater intelligence and economy, if it much more extensively took the place of the horse.

THE MULE

Is the hybrid produced by the a.s.s with the mare. How early this animal was bred, is uncertain, but we know he was in high repute in the reign of David, near 3,000 years ago, for he was rode by Absalom, the favorite prince of Israel, on the field of battle. They have from time immemorial been bred in various parts of the East, on the borders of the Mediterranean, and throughout Spain, Portugal, and other countries, many of them being of splendid appearance and of fine qualities. In these countries, they are frequently used by the grandees and n.o.bles, and indeed by royalty itself; and however much they may be undervalued elsewhere, when they are finely bred and trained, and richly caparisoned, they exhibit a stateliness and bearing, that few of the highest bred horses can match.

Breeding Mules in the United States,

Was commenced with much spirit in some of the New England states, soon after the American revolution. The object was not to breed them for their own use, but only as an article of commerce. They were at first shipped exclusively to the West Indies; and afterwards to the South and West, for employment in the various work of the plantation. Indifferent animals, both as sires and dams, were used at first, as any thing which bore the name of mule, then commanded a ready sale. The progeny were necessarily inferior brutes, and viewed with almost universal derision; and being considered the type of their race, a prejudice was excited against them, which more than half a century has not been sufficient to dispel.

Among a few thinking men at the North, they have been adopted and made highly useful in the various duties of the farm. They have been largely introduced at the South and West, but princ.i.p.ally in the slave states, where the management of the team devolves upon the ignorant and heedless. It is there, and in other and hotter climates, that the superior merits of the mule over the horse as a laboring animal, are peculiarly manifest. In many instances they are indifferently fed, hardly worked, and greatly neglected by their drivers; yet they sustain themselves for years, in defiance of usage that would annihilate two generations of horses. Their powers have been largely increased and their merits improved, by the introduction of some of the best Maltese and Spanish Jacks, and the use of large, blood mares. The propriety of this course is seen in the value of the product; for while some of the inferior are unsaleable at $50, others of the same age, and reared under the same circ.u.mstances of keep and condition, could not be purchased for $150.

The Breeding, Rearing, and Management of Mules

Is similar to that of colts. They will be found, equally with horses, to repay generous keep and attention, by their increased and rapid growth.

But they should not be pampered by high feed, as it not only has a tendency to produce disease, but to form habits of fastidiousness, which materially lessens their economical feeding in after life. The diseases to which mules are subjected, (which are always few, and if properly managed will seldom or ever occur,) require a treatment like that of horses.

_The breeding from mules_ has sometimes been questioned, but it has been demonstrated in several instances. Neither the s.e.xual development nor propensities are wanting, but they are seldom indulged with effect. Mr.

Kilby, of Virginia, states in the Farmer's Register, that a mare mule brought two colts from a young horse, which they closely resembled. The first was a male, and died, apparently with staggers, which no treatment could arrest, at six months old. The second was a female, 16 months younger than the first, marked like the sire, being jet-black, excepting a white foot and star in the forehead, and died at a year old, after two days' illness, notwithstanding the utmost care was bestowed upon it. Successful propagation of this hybrid, however, beyond the first cross, seems to be incompatible with the fixed laws of nature.

With a view of encouraging the subst.i.tution of mules for a part of the horses now employed in American husbandry, we give the following testimony from experienced individuals, of great intelligence and careful observation.

ADVANTAGES OF MULE OVER HORSE LABOR.

The official report of an agricultural committee in South Carolina, in 1824, says:--"The annual expense of keeping a horse is equal to his value. A horse at four years old would not often bring more than his cost. Two mules can be raised at less expense than one horse. The mule is fit for service earlier, and if of sufficient size, will perform as much labor as the horse; and if attended to when first put to work, his gait and habits may be formed to suit the owner."

Mr. Pomeroy, who used them near Boston for 30 years, and to such an extent as to have had more labor performed by them probably than any person in New England, says:--"I am convinced the small breed of mules will consume less in proportion to the labor they are capable of performing than the larger race, but I shall confine myself to the latter in my comparison, such as stand 14 to 16 hands, and are capable of performing any work a horse is usually put to. From repeated experiments, I have found that three mules of this description, which were constantly at work, consumed about the same quant.i.ty of hay, and only one-fourth the provender, which was given to two middling-size coach-horses, only moderately worked. I am satisfied a large-sized mule will not consume more than three-fifths to two-thirds the food to keep him in good order, that will be necessary for a horse performing the same labor. The expense of shoeing a mule the year round, does not exceed one-third that of the horse, his hoofs being harder, more h.o.r.n.y, and so slow in their growth, that shoes require no removal, and hold on till worn out; and the wear from the lightness of the animal is much less.

Mules have been lost by feeding on cut straw and corn meal; in no other instance have I known disease in them, except by inflammation of the intestines, caused by the grossest exposure to cold and wet, and excessive drinking cold water, after severe labor, and while in a high state of perspiration. It is not improbable a farmer may work the same team of mules for twenty years, without having a farrier's bill presented to him.

In my experience of thirty years, I have never found but one mule inclined to be vicious, and he might have been easily subdued while young. I have always found them truer pullers and quicker travellers, with a load, than horses. Their vision and hearing are much more accurate. I have used them in my family carriage, in a gig, and under the saddle; and have never known one to start or run from any object or noise, a fault in the horse, that continually causes the maiming and death of numerous human beings.

The mule is more steady in his draught, and less likely to waste his strength than the horse, hence more suitable to work with oxen; and as he walks faster, he will habituate them to a faster gait. In plowing among crops, his feet being small and following each other so much more in a line, he seldom treads down the ridges or crops. The facility of instructing him to obey implicitly the voice of the driver is astonishing. The best plowed tillage land I ever saw, I have had performed by two mules tandem, without lines or driver. The mule is capable of enduring labor in a temperature of heat that would be destructive to a horse.

Although a large mule will consume something over one-half the food of a horse, yet the saving in shoeing, farrying, and insurance against diseases and accidents, will amount to at least one-half. In addition, the owner may rely with tolerable certainty on the continuance of his mule capital for thirty years; whereas the horse owner must, at the end of fifteen years, look to his crops, his acres, or a bank for the renewal of his. The longevity of a mule is so proverbial, that a purchaser seldom inquires his age. Pliny mentions one 80 years old; and Dr. Rees, two in England, that reached the age of 70. I saw one performing his labor in a cane-mill in the West Indies, which the owner a.s.sured me was 40 years old. I have now a mare-mule 25 years old, that I have had in constant work for 21 years. She has often within a year taken a ton weight in a wagon to Boston, five miles, and manifests no diminution of her powers. A neighbor has one 28 years old, which he would not exchange for any horse in the country. One in Maryland, 35 years old, is now as capable of labor as at any former period."

Mr. Hood of Maryland, in the American Farmer, estimates the annual expense of a horse for 12 months, at $44, and that of a mule at $22, just half price, and his working age at more than twice that of the horse, and that too after 30 years' experience in keeping both.

A correspondent of the Baltimore Patriot, a.s.serts that "Col. John E.

Howard had a pair of mules that worked 30 years, after which they were sold to a carter in the city, and performed hard service for several years longer. Many mules 25 years old, and now in this country, perform well. Many have been at hard work for 12 or 15 years, and would now sell for $100 each. They are not subject to the colt's ailments, the glanders, heaves, yellow-water, and colic, like horses; and seldom are afflicted with spavin, ringbones, or bots; and they will not founder."

General Shelby says, "he has known mules to travel 12 miles within the hour in light harness, and has himself driven a pair 45 miles in six hours, stopping an hour by the way." Four match mules have been sold in this country for $1,000. They were of course superior animals, and made elegant coach-horses. These animals were driven 80 miles in a day without injury; and they proved a first-rate team for many years.

Mr. Ellicott, of the Patuxent Furnaces, a.s.serts that, "out of about 100 mules at the works, we have not lost on an average one in two years.

Bleeding at the mouth will cure them of nearly every disease, and by being turned out on pasture, they will recover from almost every accident. I do not recollect we have ever had a wind-broken one. They are scarcely ever defective in the hoof, and though kept shod, it is not as important as with the horse. Their skin is tougher than that of the horse, consequently they are not as much worried by flies, nor do they suffer so much with the heat of summer."

To the foregoing testimony may be added that of the late Judge Hinckley of Ma.s.sachusetts; a shrewd and close observer through a long life of 84 years. He bred mules at an early day, and always kept a team of them for his farm work, much preferring them to horses for this purpose, after an experience of 50 years. He had a pair nearly 30 years old, which, with light pasturage in summer, and with a moderate supply of hay with little grain in winter, and no grooming, performed all the drudgery, though he kept his stable full of horses besides. They outlived successive generations of horses, and though the latter were often sick and out of condition, the mules never were. One from his stock, 45 years old, was sold for the same price paid for a lot of young mules, being at that mature age perfectly able to perform his full share of labor.

For the caravans that pa.s.s over the almost inaccessible ranges which form the continuation of the Rocky Mountains, and the extensive arid plains that lie between and west of them, on the route from Santa Fe to California, mules are the only beasts of burden used in these exhausting and perilous adventures. Their value may be estimated from the comparative prices of mules and horses; for while a good horse may be bought for $10 to $20, a good mule is worth $50 to $75.

Dr. Lyman, who recently pa.s.sed through those regions, informs us that their caravan left Santa Fe with about 150 mules, 15 or 20 horses, all beasts of burden, and two choice blood-horses, which were led and treated with peculiar care. On the route, all the working-horses died from exhaustion and suffering; the two bloods that had been so carefully attended, but just survived; yet of the whole number of mules but 8 or 10 gave out. A mule 36 years of age was as strong, enduring, and performed as hard labor, as any one in the caravan. When thirst compelled them to resort for successive days to the saline waters, which are the only ones furnished by those sterile plains, the horses were at once severely, and not unfrequently fatally affected; while the mules, though suffering greatly from the change, yet seldom were so much injured as to require any remission of their labor.

The mules sent to the Mexican possessions from our western states, Missouri, Tennessee, and Kentucky, are considered of much more value than such as are bred from the native (usually wild) mares. The difference probably arises, in part, from the Mexicans using jacks so inferior to most of the stock animals used by the citizens of those states.

Mare mules are estimated in those regions at one-third more than horse mules. The reason a.s.signed for this is, that after a day's journey of excessive fatigue, there is a larger quant.i.ty of blood secreted in the bladder, which the female, owing to her larger pa.s.sage, voids at once, and without much apparent suffering, while the male does not get rid of it, frequently, till after an hour of considerable pain. The effect of this difference is seen in the loss of flesh and strength in the male to an extent far beyond that of the female.

_The method of reducing refractory mules_ in the northern Mexican possessions, is for the person to grasp them firmly by the ears, while another whips them severely on the fore-legs and belly.

_Estimated annual saving to the United States from the employment of mules in the place of horses._--To sum up the advantages of working mules over horses, we shall have as advantages: 1. They are more easily, surely, and cheaply raised. 2. They are maintained, after commencing work, for much less than the cost of keeping horses. 3. They are not subject to many of the diseases of the horse, and to others only in a mitigated degree, and even these are easily cured in the mule. 4. They attain a greater age, and their average working years are probably twice that of the horse.

In 1840, there were reported to be 4,335,669 horses and mules in the Union, no discrimination having been made between them. Suppose the total number at the present time is 4,650,000, and that of these 650,000 are mules. If we deduct one-fourth, supposed to be required for the purposes of breed, fancy-horses, &c., we shall have 3,000,000 horses, whose places may be equally well supplied by the same number of mules.

We have seen that Mr. Hood, of Maryland, estimates the expense of a working horse at $44 per annum, (not an over estimate for the Atlantic states,) while that of the mule is $22. The difference is $22, which it is proper to reduce to meet the much lower rate of keeping at the West.

If we put the difference at $10, we shall find the saving in the keep, shoeing, farriery, &c., by subst.i.tuting mules for the 3,000,000 horses that can be dispensed with, will be $30,000,000 per annum. But this is not all.

The working age of the horse will not exceed an average of eight years, while that of the mule is probably over sixteen. To the difference of keep, then, must be added the annual waste of the capital invested in the animal. A mule is more cheaply raised to working age than a horse, but allowing them to cost equally, we shall have the horse exhausting one-eighth of his capital annually for his decay, when the mule is using up but one-sixteenth; and if we allow $48 as the first cost of both animals, we shall find the horse wasting $6 annually for this item, while the mule deteriorates but $3, making an additional item of $9,000,000. This will give an aggregate of $39,000,000, as the annual saving to the United States by subst.i.tuting good mules for three-fourths of the horses now used in this country. When will our farmers have the good sense to make this change? It may be fairly answered, when they shall prefer utility, interest, and a just taste, to a diseased fancy; for though we admit the superiority in appearance of the race of horses over mules, we deny that a bad horse looks better or even as well as a good mule; and with the same keep and attention, a good mule will outwork and outlook most horses of any breed.

The comparative Economy of Horse and Ox Labor.

This is a question which has been often discussed, and when with candor, the conclusion has generally been in favor of ox-labor. The different employments, the variety of situation, the season, and the kind of stock reared on the farm, are all questions which should be fully considered in arriving at their true comparative advantages. Most farmers would find it for their interest to keep teams of each, where there is employment for more than one; or if this be not the case, the preference should be given to that which is best suited in all respects to their particular position.

If work upon the road is required, a horse team will generally be best.

Their superiority will consist princ.i.p.ally in their greater speed; for even with a heavy load, they will be able to trot occasionally, and when driven without it, they may increase their pace to nearly double the natural gait of the ox. This will amount to a large annual saving in the time of the driver when steadily employed. The same is true when removing manures or crops on the farm to remote distances, over a smooth surface, which admits of trotting with the empty wagon. Harrowing ought always to be done with a quick team, as a violent stroke of the teeth breaks the clods and pulverizes the earth much better than when slowly dragged.

But we should a.s.sume in this comparison, that oxen shall not only be well adapted to their work by their natural formation, like the Hereford, the Devon, and others equally good, but also that they be well trained, well managed, accustomed to quick movements, and as well fed and looked after as horses. We shall then find their walk equal to a quick horse team, and that in this case the horse will have no advantage over the ox in harrowing. For plowing, the teams are on a par, as a good ox team will do as much in a day in cool weather as horses.

_The situation of the farm_ may materially affect this estimate. In a warm climate, horses, and more especially mules, would be more serviceable than oxen, as they are capable of enduring much greater heat with impunity. If the farm be small and convenient to market, the labor may, in general, be best accomplished by oxen, as little travelling will be required. So, too, if the land be stony or rough, the plowing and harrowing will be more kindly and patiently done by oxen than by spirited horses. Other considerations will suggest themselves as affecting the comparative economy of this labor.

_The time of work_ is to be fully considered. If much and heavy work be required in summer, as is often the case in plowing extensive wheat farms, horses are to be preferred; yet if the ox-team be started at early dawn, and worked briskly four or five hours, and then turned out to rest with a supply of suitable food, they may again commence when the extreme heat has abated, and accomplish a day's work that few horses will exceed. During the season of muddy roads, the horse, with his broad, compact foot, and longer leg, has a decided advantage over the ox. If the ox draws by the yoke, (which on the whole is the best mode,) he is liable to a sore neck when working in wet or snowy weather, and at such times he is overmatched by his compet.i.tor.

_The kind of stock raised on the farm_ has an important bearing on this question. Some farms are devoted to rearing horses, and some exclusively to rearing cattle. These occasionally remain on hand after they are fit for market, from the want of a profitable demand. They can then be employed not only without injury, but in consequence of the thorough training thus secured, with positive benefit to their future value.

Even if intended for the shambles, the well-developed ox may advantageously be put to light work at three, after which it may be gradually increased till he is six or eight, and during all this time he will be improving. After doing an early spring's work, he may then be turned on to good pasture, and if followed with proper stall-feeding, he will in the latter part of the winter or spring yield a tender, better-flavored, and more profitable carca.s.s, than can be procured by any other mode of fattening.

The first cost of oxen is less than that of horses, and they are at all times cheaply reared on the coa.r.s.er herbage of the farm. The expense of working-gear, tackle, and shoeing, is much less than with horses. They are subject to fewer diseases, and these are more within the reach of ordinary medicines. The cost of food is also less, and while the horse is depreciating, the ox is increasing in value till eight or nine years old.

Accidents are less frequent with oxen, from their slower movements; and when they occur, the ox may be turned out to fatten, and still be worth as much for this purpose as for the yoke. A permanent injury to the horse is perhaps a total loss of the beast, with a large farrier's bill in addition, for which there is nothing to liquidate it but the hide.