124 STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. 



DISCUSSION. 



Mr. l")ay said ho had a Hat field sixty rods long with an open ditch with 

 about a foot fall and at the lower end the water would always stand above the 

 tile. He asked if such a field could be effectually drained? 



;Mr. Leonard said that his experience was that tile could be laid nearly level, 

 or with a slight descent, but that in such cases the outlet must be free. 



John Paton, of Armada, had used lumber to make drains, and asked if it 

 would not auswer fully as well as drain tile? 



C. B. Kidder replied that he knew of no material as cheap, durable and 

 effective for drainage as tile. He paid thirty-two cents a rod for the tile. To 

 make a drain with lumber in the way proposed by Mr. Patton would require 

 from twenty-four to forty-eight feet per rod. Farmers could estimate for 

 themselves the relative cost. Tile would last forever if well burned ; they were 

 porous, and could easily be taken out to permit of cleaning if it were found 

 necessary. The whole ditch need not be redug, but here and there an opening 

 made would answer every purpose of cleaning. 



K. G. Baird, in answer to Mr. Day, said the experience of William L. Web- 

 ber and others in the Saginaw Valley was that the slightest possible fall was 

 sufficient. He thought beyond all question that tile were the cheapest and 

 best material for drains. 



Mr. Gulley, of Dearborn, advocated the round or cylindrical tyle. In answer 

 to questions he said that it would pay to drain any land that held water within 

 less than four feet of the surface. It might not be so desirable to drain gravelly 

 soil, but it was beneficial to do so. A drain laid level would work effectively, 

 even if there was not a running outlet. The pressure or head of water above 

 the outlet was sufficient to clear the drain and force the water through. Tile 

 drains should be laid about four feet below the surface. It was not necessary 

 to go below four feet, and anything less than that was not so good as the 

 greater depth. Small tile were relatively better than large ones, because with 

 an equal flow they cleaned themselves better of silt. It was desirable to have 

 silt basins at proper intervals to facilitate cleaning. The flow could be made 

 useful in ditching; first the ordinary flow, and next the subsoil flow. The 

 drain should run directly up and down side hills. Oblique drains would not 

 answer. He thought Mr, Day's field could readily be drained, and would be 

 immensely improved by it, if the water at the outlet disappeared at any time 

 during the year. 



J. Webster Childs said three inches to the mile was fall sufficient, if the tile 

 were accurately laid. He preferred tile beyond all other materials, but had 

 used oak lumber, sawed five inches wide, inch and a half thick, leaving, when 

 put together, a channel two inches wide and five inches thick. He did not 

 know how long it would last, but it would at any rate last long enough to pay 

 where tile could not be procured. It was not to be regarded as equal or com- 

 parable to tile, but was a tolerable substitute for them. He agreed with Prof. 

 Gulley that four feet was the best depth for a drain, but had found good effect 

 from drains but two feet deep, or even one foot and a half, where the land 

 would not admit of making them deeper. 



President Abbot vouched for Mr. Gulley's great experience and success in 

 draining, both on his own farm and at the Agricultural College farm. 



In answer to questions Mr. Gulley said hard burned tile, laid but a short 

 distance below the surface in "cat-holes," and carrying a stream of running 

 water, would not be injured by frost. In such cases the water would not 



