578 



THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST* 



[January r, 1885. 



COMPARATIVE MERITS OF OLD COFFEE 



LAND AND VIRGIN FOREST FOR 



TEA CULTURE. 



2nd Jan. 1885. 



Sir, — Your correspondent, " Mr. Owen," writes a 

 well-considered If tter, (see page 5-18) that I trust may go 

 far to accomplish a pra'seworohy desire of agnin seeirg 

 the 1 il s clothed with verdant green other than weeds, 

 hoc genus omne, and " white weed " in particular, But 

 your motive in the series of letters you forecast, of 

 winch your correspondent's is the commencement, 

 especially being to give " Innocents abroad and at 

 home " the fullest and most reliable information, cor- 

 rected (I assume) if possible to date, whereby to 

 lighten their way to the most desirable investment, 

 I trust as a resident and having some experience of 

 tea planting, &c, in the lowcountry, you may permit me 

 Bpace in furtherance of fact, and that your corres- 

 pondent will not fancy I am in the least intending 

 an invidious criticism of his statements, in venturing 

 to question somewhat the more prominent favourable 

 notice he is inclined to give to diseaidcd property up- 

 country as an investment for limited capital. In fact, 

 that it is really so, that materially less money will 

 suffice to bring such property into profitable yield. 

 Whilst still further venturing to doubt (a poiut not 

 touched on) its then comparative value, —without open- 

 ing up the question of longevity (which, personally, 

 I do not doubt for tea in either case), — as judged by 

 the maiden returns ; of such especial importance to 

 the man who has his all put in, and that "all " but 

 little ! Mr. Owen makes separate reference to two 

 classes of previously cultivated property for tea ; and 

 had his letter appeared a year or so ago, as far as 

 concerns estateB still yielding crop, and many of the 

 buildings on them still given some attention to, — what 

 he says for them would possibly hold good (though even 

 here I confess I am largely doubtful 1) as regards the 

 lesser outlay needed. But now the tide has turned. 

 I may be wrong — though I hope and think not — in 

 questioning whether any such property with really 

 good buildings and trees yet bearing appreciably, or 

 cinchona in mentionable quantity, are to be had for 

 a song or much below their fair value. 



The point then rests, as far as my queries are con- 

 cerned between fully abandoned estates and a conve- 

 niently chosen block of land in the lowcountry, with 

 the reserve of wood on it so essentially desirable on 

 a tea estate. Before > drawing 3 comparison of cost, I 

 would say as to the remark made on soil to the effect 

 that the lands yet in forest are generally inferior to 

 the coffee districts. That though this may be true for 

 "coffee" the rule does not apply for "tea," and 

 that there remain miny thousands of acres as well 

 suited for the latter as any yet felltd. Mr. Owen's 

 subsequent and correct remarks relative to the nature 

 of the plant go far as an admission that in reality 

 it is more a question of " subsoil " ; and with the 

 experience before us of land in Ambagamuwa previously 

 opened or otherwise, as to what in this respect may 

 bo best for tea, and the admitted capacity of the 

 ground on lowcountry estates, I might say with- 

 out exception, to produce superabundant leaf, it seems 

 to me as far as it may be tor a guide to uninitiated 

 investors. Comparisons, here, may be better It ft out. 

 When any of the newly opened districts shew earlier 

 signs of exhaustion, in comparison to relative returns, 

 it will be time as far as soil goes to say : "friend go 

 not there — come hither ! " 



Now, as the relative absolute outlay necessary, 

 and the subsequent position under tea, as regards i he 

 two classes of investment — Older property vs. New 

 land in the low country. As for estates still in 

 cultivation, as said, I leave them out, supposing their 

 ntrinsic and selling values to be again at par ' 



Well (1) for even a totally abandoned place, in the 

 least desirable, Mr. Owen, I suppose, would not ex- 

 pect less than R20 per acre to be the price, which, 

 against for the figure of R30 he sets on unopened 

 jungle, leaves him on the former (but minus timber) 

 on 200 acres say 112,000 to the good. (2) Cost of 

 clearing and weeding. The cost of felling on heavy 

 forest may be put at R15 and weeding for the first 

 two years from felling at R1.5— say total R30 per 

 acre. Now even allowing that the mere ' smeil ' of 

 a fire-stick is sufficient .to do the "clearing," ye 

 shades of old Rozel, and ghosts of white weed, Spanish 

 needle, and grasses many— how much of the above 

 sum (R30) will remain at the end of a like interval, 

 on abandoned land under this heading ? From my own 

 experience (uot short or incomplete) the moister dis- 

 tricts to which alone, as for tea, the discussion can 

 nppiy, I am afraid I must cancel here the saving on 

 •• purchase " ! (3) Planting— item for pe^s is likely 

 to make the cost on old land preponderate inappre- 

 ciably. (4) Buildings — abundant good timber on the 

 spot and sawing at I!o to R4 only per 100 ft. shews 

 here in favor of new land, for I do not suppose Mr. 

 Owen wishes it to be understood that on totally 

 abandoned property there will be a saving here ; or 

 that if the more permaneut buildings are still stand- 

 ing they will not require usually a very large outlay 

 for repairs. The rapidity with which an untenanted 

 house goes to ruin is a proverb ; and on a coffee 

 estate in a wet district, especially true. (5) Bnadi 

 on a new clearing in the low country for 200 rcres 

 will cost, according to lay of the laud &c, say from 

 RS00 to 1500, — and supposing (a doubtful supposition 

 though) the old place has beeu as well as roaded, 

 enough may perhaps remain to meet the difference 

 above in sawn timber and pegs ! I am at a loss to 

 think of any other item in which there will be a 

 material saving on either side — except that as Mr. 

 Owen very truly says, work in the low-country is 

 generally to be cheaper done. 



Here at the end of two years, according to my 

 impression we are " as we were " as regards capital 

 outlay. But let us go a step further in comparing the 

 two investments ! Can, as regards weeding, the old 

 place then be supposed to be equally clean or as ' 

 cheaply weeded ? If so, how much of available 

 plant food has not been removed, and is it to be sup- 

 posed that this has no effect on the comparative 

 growth of the plants ? But supposing instead the 

 soil has been enriched by the return of the weeds, 

 how much is this to add to future cost of weeding ? 

 — an additional 50 cents per acre monthly represents 

 on the property R 1,200 a year ! At the end of two, 

 or even the third year from planting, lion- much 

 leaf per acre may be expected from old 1 md at the 

 higher elevath ns — c ffee-levcl ? In comparison, I 

 venture to say that a successful clearing in the low- 

 country, will by then have plucked, or be plucking 

 a first crop equal to the combined maiden efforts of 

 your old estate for it, and the next two years. In 

 one cise expenditure hy the " poor " man is still to be 

 provided ; in the other a", least some profit, with pro- 

 mise of bumper yields in the immediate future ! At 

 the higher elevation what other product is there to 

 be looked to, unless it be a separate field of carda- 

 moms ? At the lower an "insurance" that may be 

 added (with cardamoms below) arecanute and nut- 

 megs in odd corners and ravines, and interspersed 

 amongst it to an appreciable exteut without damage 

 to the tea, pepper-vines covering the boulders. I 

 can ouly conclude with saying as it strikes me 

 that an old estate at discount to be rejuvenated in 

 tea is cursorily plausible, and I don't say a snare, 

 but on comparative showing won't work out. 



YOU PAYS YOUR MONEY AND YOU 

 TAKES YOUR CHOICE. 



