April 2, 1883.J 



THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 



809 



TEA AMONGST COFFEE. 



As planting tea amongst coffee is now becoming general, 

 and as plantev.s often have great difficulty in getting in 

 the tea plants regularly, at suitable distances from one 

 another, without running into the line of coffee, we publish 

 a diagram showing how this can be done. 



The only difficulty has hitherto been in the distance 

 the lines should be apart, as up the lines any distance 

 could be planted that was considered desirable. We will, 

 however, to simplify matters take 4ft. as our standard 

 up the line — this is of course for the tea. 



Under the following system, should the coffee be planted 

 6ft. X 6ft. or even 6 ft. across the row and 5ft. up, 

 the tea will fall 4ft. x 4ft. but should the coffee be 5ft. x 5ft. 

 then the tea will fall 4ft. x SJ. 



* 0* »0 * 0* *0 * 0« *0 * 0* *0 







* # # * # 

 



« » » ♦ » « 

 



■» » 

 



« * „ * » 















* ♦ » » » « 

 , 0, »0 » 0, ,0 » 0, ,0 , 0, »0 







» * » 







* ♦ 



* * * * * 







» ♦ » » » 



» 0* *0 * 0* »0 * 0* «0 * 0* *0 























[111 .^pite of the difficulty of exemplifying our method, tJie above 

 diaRram will sufficiently explain itself, the ciphers stauding for 

 coffee trees and the asterisks for tea.l 



Let us take the first case, when the coffee is 6ft. « 5ft. 

 as in the above diagram, that is 6ft. across the line, and 

 5ft. up. In the first hne of coffee rim a row of pegs 

 4ft. apart up the centre of the line. Next run a row 

 of pegs 1ft. to the ri(/ht of the next row of coffee trees 

 and another 1ft. to the left of the third row of coffee, 

 and so on ad infinitum across the field, one line of coffee 

 having a line of tea down its centre, and the ne.\t Une 

 ha^Tng two down each side. The first row of pegs run 

 up the centre of the line of coffee ivill be 3ft. from 

 the second row of coffee trees, and the secon<l row of 

 pegs 1ft. away from that, to the ri(/ht, wiU make the 

 distance the rows of pegs are apart, 4ft. the required 

 distance. Again the thli-d row of pegs being 1ft. to the 

 left of the third row of coffee is thus 4ft. from the 

 second row of pegs, the required distance. The above will 

 be of use to many we feel suie. 



[The plan of lining for tea, suggested in the above 

 article is a very good one where the coffee lines are 

 6 feet apart. But a great deal of our coffee is lined 

 5J, and even 5 feet apart. Where such is the case, I 

 would recommend that the ground he linei anew, say 

 4' by 3' in the case of good land, and 3§' by 3' in the 

 case of poor, or blown land. If this is done, it will give 

 a mucii more satisfactory field of cea, than if the Uniug 

 of the tea is made to suit that of the coffee. It is 

 of com'se rather difficult to re-line for tea, a field of 

 coffee, but it can be done, and the owner will be very 

 thank fid he ilid it, if the time conies when the Coffee 

 has to taken out. — Practical jtlayitei:} — " Ceylon Times. " 



COFFEE AND ■\\'EEDS. 



With reference to his last letter, which will be found on 

 page 683, February T.A., Mr. Kearney sends the foUoiving : — 



Dk.\r Sir, — Taking a glance from my point of view of 

 your " Ed.'* note I would desire to be clearly miderstood 

 in my object that each individual planter in his own interest 

 should ti*y iny experiment, the cost being so small R12 

 per acre. 



When general results are placed by small experiments 

 and the point satisfactorily estabUshed Government may 

 then help in suppressing *' leaf-disease." 



I feel sure to counteract the effect of this coffee crop 

 destroyer — will not be deemed an unchristianlike act — 

 nor yet be deemed the setting of the Creator at defiance — 

 contrary to it — by striWug to help ourselves we most 

 probably will obtain that help which He may consider 



us worthy of. I shall report steadily my results. — Yours 

 faithfuUy, GEO. H. KEARNEY. 



Note. — Yoiu- p. d. or my penmanship is certainly respons- 

 ible for a good many bad readings of my communication. 

 I am sending with corrections. 



The foUowiug are the corrections referred to : — 

 Line 9 for " has " read " his " 



„ 21 „ "planters" „ "planter" 

 before " quoting " insert " here " 

 delete " and " 



for "in" read "on." 



„ " so as to " „ " and so " 

 „ "any" „ "a" 



read " with all our strength and oiu- real 

 knowledge : will it " &c. 

 81 delete " then " 



for " equal " read " equally " 

 delete " and " 



42 

 51 



60 



61 



74 



79-80 



85 



91 

 107 



read " one day " 



for " in 4 days 

 delete " of ' 



" and that " 

 for " allows " read " allow ' 

 after " it " insert " should be ' 

 delete " shoidd be " 

 for " in " read " on " 



lOS 



109 



114 



115 



116 



117 



118 put " will be clear to any one " in 



parentheses. 



127 delete "but" 



128 for " in " read 



129 „ "dealt" „ 

 'if" 



' on to " 

 ' death " 

 ' If " ; delete 



"if 



place last sentence in parentheses. 



152 delete " of course " ; put parentheses 

 before " unless " and after " useless " 



153 delete " but " 



THE PEIOKLY PEAR. 



To THE Editor of "The Colonies and Int)ia." 



Sir. — I see by the last issue of Tlte Colonies and India that 

 the Colonists of New .South Wales are anxious to get rid of 

 what they call a vegetable pest, the prickly pear. To do this 

 is, as is well knoivu, no easy matter, as the more the plants 

 are cut up the greater the number of them there are, polyp- 

 like each piece, even part of a leaf forming a new plant. 



In South Africa, particiUarly in those parts skirting the 

 great Karoo plains, we have many miles of land covered with 

 this troublesome cactus; and when sheep-farming was the 

 only industry in the Colony, to hear that there was a stretch 

 of prickly pear on a farm took greatly from its value, and an 

 immense amount of labour was expended in the endeavoui' to 

 lessen the evil. I saw various methods tried, and the one 

 that, as far as my exjierience went, proved the most efficacious 

 was that of building up a substratum of loose bushes or brush- 

 wood (stones did not answer), and then stacking the prickly 

 pear on to this, and in time, not being able to take root, it 

 died. I was travelling one time at the foot of the Sneewberg 

 range, not far from Graaff Eeinet, when, in (h-iving through 

 a prickly-pear comitry, I foimd here and there a plant sin- 

 gularly affected by some kind of blight, and the farmer, on 

 whose ground this occurred, told me that every plant so 

 affected gardually withered and died. The disease was 

 evidently contagious, for I noticed that where it touched the 

 next plant became infected, whereas around an isolated plant 

 the neighbouring ones were in a perfectly healthy condition. 



AVhat the disease was, and how it came there, the farmer 

 coidd not tell me; he has very thankful that it was there, and 

 hoped it might spread, though it seemed to him very slow in 

 doing so. I suggested to him, if that were his wish, to 

 inoculate the healthy plants by placing a leaf from a diseased 

 one in each as far as he was able. He seemed amused by the 

 suggestion, but I heard afterwards that he had tried it with 

 success. 



However, at the Cape we have always ccnsiilered that 

 prickly pears have their uses; in times of severe drought their 

 great succulent leaves were lopjied off, and, after hai-ing their 

 thorns singed, are given to the cattle aiul sheep to save them 

 from starvation. Indeed, notwithstanding the fine thorns, 

 great herds of cattle feed among the prickly pears, these 

 yielding moisture and fodder when every greeu leaf and blade 



