June 2, 1884.] 



THE TROPICAL AGBICULTURIST. 



923 



have tried oh a large scale. An experiment of bark renewed 

 23 months = 4'20 per cent; 9 months ^=420 percent. 

 18. In the second .shaving at 12 months the analysis showed 

 an increaj-e, but the third shaving at 6 months a decrease 

 of sulphate of quinine. 



Section 5. — Coppicing, 



Question 1. At what age do you prefer to coppice and 

 in what month have you found the suckers to giow best 

 after coppicing ? 



Answer. 12. At 4 years in October. 14. At 6 years in 

 April and May. 21. At 7 years. 15. At 6 years in 

 March and April. 11. At a years in February. 19. 

 No experience except at 4 years. 20. At G at 10 years 

 in April and May. 18. September and October. 1. At 

 5 to 6 years. 13. At 4 to 6 years. January and Febru- 

 ary. Analysis of succirubra, 3, 4, 5. and 6 years old 

 coppiced in May, shows 2-33 per cent sulphate quinine ; 

 February. 2"21 sulphate quinine; 4 years -Tanuary, 2/3G sul- 

 phate quinine ; 6 years (not yet coppiced), 4'90 sulphate 

 quinine. 



Question 2. Whether you start a sucker previous to 

 coppicing or not r 



AJiswer. 14, 3. Yes if possible. 12, 8, 1. Yes. 11. 

 Prefer to do so. 18. No preference. 



Question 3. Have you any method of encouraging a 

 sucker to start ? 



Answer. 14. Beating or bruising the stumps. 12. 

 Manuring. 11. Wounding cambium. 8. Bai'ing roots. 

 20. A cross cut. 



Question 1. How many suckers do you allow to grow 

 after coppicing r" 



Answer. 14. As many as possible. 21. Three. 1.5. 

 One. 3. Two or three. 8. As many us possible, then 

 thin out to 1 or 2. 13. Thin out after two months to 

 four. 1, 11. Tliree. 20. Thiu out after 6 months to 3 or 

 4. 18. Two. 



Question 5. What proportion of coppiced trees do not 

 throw out suckers ? What do you consider the cause of 

 this? 



Answer. 14. 11, About o per cent. 6. All healthy 

 ti'ees. 1.5. Very small proportion. 3. A large proportion 

 (6) suckers being pulled off when ti-ees were younger. 13. 

 Very few. 20. Very few healthy trees. IS. None. 



Question 6. After coppicing what interval do you allow 

 before coppicing again ? 



Answer. 1, 12, 21, Three years. 20. Five to seven years. 

 18. Six years. 



Question 7. Do tliree suckers give a greater weight of 

 bark than two and two more than one. 



Answer. 1. Three suckers best. 20. Three more than 

 two and two more than one. 15. Succirubra, one officinalis 

 two or three. 



Question 8. What in your experience is the proportion 

 of bark obtained by coppicing as opposed to shaving («) 

 in one harvesting, (li) m aseriesof years P 



Answer 14. Three times as much. 15. Sixteen times 

 as much. 11. Three times as much (between 3 and 44 

 years) 20. As Sis to 2^. 4. As 4 is to 1. 18. As 8 

 is to 181. 6. 2 shaves— one coppice nearly. 



Section Q.— Curing. 



Question 1. Do 5 on prefer to dry your bark in the sun 

 immediately or slowly in the store ? 



An.swer. i?, 22, 21, 11, 7, 13, S, 20, 16, 5, 18. In the 

 sun. 6, 15, 47. Gr.-idually in the sun. 



Answer. 10. Prefer slowly in the sun. 14. One 

 day in store, next day in the sun. 12. In sun with mat- 

 ting over bark. 3. Slowly in sun. 1, 19. No pre- 

 ference. 



Question 2. Have you tried artificial drying, and with 

 what success •• Kindly give cost of any operation you refer 

 to in your answers 'i 



Answer. G. No difference by Mr. Moens' analysis. 14. 

 Tried, prefers sun. 1, 4, 5. "Tried, not successful. 16. 

 Baring roots J cents per ti-ee. 20. Shaving costs about 1 

 cent per lb. dry bark. Coppicing costs about 2 cents per 

 lb. dry bark. Uprooting 2 cents, 4 cents. Thatching 7 

 at 8 years old trees about 2 cents per tree. 6. Shaving 

 costs 4-4 cents per lb. dry bark. Grass covering 7 cents 

 per lb. dry bark. Preparing, transport and sliipping 4'7 

 cents per lb. diy bark. 11. Shaving costs 2 at 3 cents 



per lb. dry bark. 19. Shaving costs 1-16 cent per lb. dry 

 bark. Grass and covering i-h cents per lb. dry bark. 

 Branch bark 2 cents per lb. dry bark. 18. Shaving costs 

 16 cents per lb. dry bark. 1.5. Sha\-ing 3 at 4 cents per 

 lb. dry bark. Coppicing 2 cents per lb. dry bark. 



THE DATE COFFEE COMPANY. 



In the Queen's Bench Division, on the Sth ult. before 

 .Justices Denman, Manisty. and Watkin M'illiams, judgment 

 was given in the case Bellairs i'5. Tucker and others which 

 had been tried at great length before Mr. Justice Lopes and 

 a special jury (the trial taking eight days), and had then 

 been argued at great length in this court before Justice 

 Denman and Mr. Justice Manisty, who had taken time to 

 consider their judgment, which was now delivered in favour 

 of the defendants. It was an action against three persons 

 — Tucker, Henley and Haymen — to recover by way of 

 damages a sum of £95, which the plaintilf had been com- 

 pelled to pay or become liable to pay, in respect of shares 

 held by him in a Company called the French Date Coffee 

 Company (Limited), which had been projected with 50,000 

 shares at £1 each, and a prospectus of which had been issued 

 (as was alleged) by the defeudants, and on the faith of wliioh 

 the plaintiff' represented that he had applied for and 

 accepted 95 shares in the Company. The facts, so far as 

 they were material, and not in dispute, and as stated by 

 the learned judge, who delivered a written judgment, were 

 as follow : The plaintiff was a dealer in stocks and 

 shares, who had formerly been on the Stock Exchauge. 

 The defendant Haymen was chairman of a Company 

 called the " Date Coffee Company." The defendant 

 Tucker was solicitor, and Henley consulting engi- 

 neer to the same Company, the latter having ob- 

 tained a patent for manufacturing from dates a 

 substitute for coffee. That Company (an English Company) 

 was registered in December 1879 with a capital of £50,000 

 in shares of £5, and its objects were to acquire and 

 purchase or take licenses for use of that patented inven- 

 tion or other patents granted to Henley, and to form or 

 assist in forming or developing any company forthesame 

 or cognate objects. That Company proceeded to issue 

 shares and make arrangements for the sale of the material 

 which it was to manuf;ictiu:e. The three defendants 

 appear to have attended regularly at all the board meet- 

 ings, Henley having been elected a director soon after 

 the formation of the Company. At the first general 

 meeting of the Company on the 1st of March, 1880, a 

 resolution was pas=ed authorizing the directors at once 

 to purchase royalty from Henley for £30,000, wliich was 

 done, and Henley was paid within a few months. In 

 June, 1880, one Mare was sent to Kurrachee in India, 

 there to superintend the manufacture of dates into the 

 powder which was to be mixed \vith coff'ee, in order to 

 produce the date coffee. He arrived there on the 25th 

 of August, 1880, and from that time was in constant 

 correspondence with the English Company through Hay- 

 men and the secretary as to the quantity of materials which 

 it would be possible to manufacture, :iud as to the quality of 

 the ovens and other apparatus required, and it appeared from 

 his evidence that during the first 12 months, ha\'ing only two 

 ovens to work with, he sent over 10 tons of date-powder per 

 month, which was as much as the machinery would produce ;' 

 that in September 18.Sl,h.iviug six ovens, the largest amount 

 he turned out was 35 tons in a month, and that the largest 

 amount he could have turned out was 40 tons or 480 

 tons a year, though it appeared that he was in his 

 letters writing of the possibility of producing at a greater 

 rate, but he did not appear to have contemplated at any 

 time the possibility of turning out more than 20 tons 

 weekly, even with six ovens, the largest number ordered, 

 or apparently contemplated, at all events until a later 

 period, though it appeared that the directors were in- 

 sisting upon production at the rate of 40 tons a week 

 as soon as four more ovens were supplied, as they after- 

 wards were, and they were in active correspondence with 

 Mare at and after the date of the prospectus as to the 

 best mode of carrying on the manufacture at Kurrachee 

 on a large scale. It .appeared, however, that in order 

 to make a profit of £34.000 a year it would be necessary 

 that about 30 tons a week should be manufactured, and 

 the quantity actually manufactured in September, 1881 



