October i, 18S5.] THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST, 



MS 



roBe-growing, and Queen Rosa rewards alike the 

 labours of her ardent lovers and devotees, he they 

 peers peicsajits. 



A. WHYTE, 



P. S.—Aa pointed out by one of your correspon- 

 dents lately, a number of the roses introduced 

 here an known by wring names, which is apt to 

 create great confusion. I give a few of the misnomers 

 which have come to mv notice : — 



La Fiance, beautiful large silvery white rose, is 

 often called Baroness Rothichild, also a fine large 

 light rosy pink flower. 



Oloire de Dijon, the splendid salmon-colored rambl- 

 ing rose, is often misnamed Victor Verdier, which 

 is of a warm rose color, shaded carmine, 



Madame Margottin, line jellow globular rose, is 

 known .is Gloire de Dijon. 



Souvenir de In Mahnaison, a grand large white rose, 

 is erroneously named the Hundred petal Hose 



Paul Neron, the enormous rose-colored rose, is 

 misnamed Mrs. Williams, and also I think Mrs. 

 Campbell. Devoniinsis, the sweet-scented cream- 

 coJored tearose, is known by the general term Tea 

 Sose. 



Lord Raglan, splendid but sky-dark ro?e, is mis- 

 named the '■ Black Rose." 



NipTielos, beautiful pure white rose, sometimes 

 with tinge of yellow, misnamed the Wa.v Rose. 



There are a good many more misnomers, but 

 these are all I can remember at present. 



The term Rosa centifolia is applied to or 

 includes all the varielies of the Province or Old 

 Cdlbage rose to memory so dear ! A. W. 



SUCCESSFUL HARVESTINQ OF CINCHONA 

 BARK. 



Agrapatana, 11th August 1SS5. 



Dear Sir, — The latter part of my previous reply 

 to " B. E." was certainly intended to show that 

 8ha%'ing in alternate etiiijs was quite as economical 

 as shaving all round the tree, for I saw no difficulty 

 whatever in sending down tlie bark for 10c. per lb. 

 It is quite evident that " B. E." has never tried this 

 "strip" shaving himself, while I have tried both 

 plans and hive no hesitation in saying that after 

 the tirst or second time I have had no diffieulty 

 whatever in getting quite as good, and even better 

 tasks from coolies than I did when I shaved " all 

 round " the tree, and I attribute this to the bark 

 having renewed so much better tlan it used to do. 

 My mossing only costs me about h cent per tree. 

 But even supposini; that there were a slight excess 

 in cost of harvteting the bark in this way, this 

 would liy no means prove it to be a less economical 

 plan thin the other ; for the extra yield of hark 

 which the tree most decidedly gives and its in- 

 creased value must of course be taken into consider- 

 ation, and is of far more importance than a mere 

 difference of a cent or two in the harvesting of it. 

 The analysis of some of the bark which was lately 

 shown me in Colombo, from trees which had been 

 shaved five and six times, completely bears this 

 out. The tree can be shaved the jirst time all 

 round if required, only leaving one narrow strip, 

 and this can be afterwards followed up by shaving 

 the renewed bark in strips ; the principle of which 

 I have already explained. I have just made up 

 the cost of some of the bark sent away from here, 

 and I think even " B. E." will admit that it is not 

 excessive; and that as increased quantity and quality 

 in the bark ia secured, he will see that harvest- 

 ing bark in this way is not such a bad thing after all. 



Cost of bark d-livert-d in Colombo including cost 

 of two (•-') coverings of all shaved trees and of 

 all transport from atoro to store, from trees scatt- 



ered all about and not from clearings : — 

 Xo. 1 lot 43,831 lb. stem including 1 ton of root bark 

 14,008 „ branch bark 



57,839 lb. cost E2,925-41 or say 5§c per lb. 



No. 2 38,4891b. stem (with chips from dying trees). 

 7,451 „ branch 



4.5,940 lb. cost E3,2530S or less than 7§c per lb . 



No- 3 19,930 lb. as above 



2,833 lb. cost Pa,349-82 or 6c per lb. 



22,8131b. 



Total of these 126,092 lb. cost R7,52S-31 or say 6c perlb. 



If " B. E." will come up here I will be glad to 

 prove to him the success I have had in leaving 

 the stump on coppiced tree?. I gave my reasons 

 for this in my last letter. Different conditions give 

 different results, but I have scarcely such a thing 

 as suckers dying off, and in fact very few failures 

 of any sort which cannot be aocoauted for on very 

 different grounds. 



CINCHONA. 



TEA STATISTICS OF COST OF CULTR^ATION 

 AND PRICES FOR INDIAN TEA. 

 De.\r .■^ir,— Referring to the tabular statements 

 in your issue of agth ultimo, the first thing that 

 strikes one is that it is not sufficiently compre- 

 hensive to be as reliable as might be desired. Take 

 for instance the average gross expenditure, which 

 is stated, as corrected in jour Overland issue of 

 1st instant, to bu H'oOdper lb., and the average 

 price realized Is l-33d : this shows an average 

 profit on the operations of 11 Companies of 1 SSd 

 per lb. Since then, however, we have had the reports 

 of two more Companies viz : the Tiphook and British 

 India showing results which raise the average 

 gross expenditure to ll-64d per lb. and lower the 

 average price realized to Is 0'40d per lb. and 

 consequently also the average profit to 0-76d per 

 lb. With a still larger number of concerns to 

 deal with, the average might be susceptible of further 

 modihcation ; and it must be borne in mind that 

 the figur s in the statement are only representative 

 of about 26,000 acres and 9,000.000 lb. of tea or less 

 than Jth of the total production of the neigh- 

 bouritig continent. Moreover it is evident that all 

 the i'ea Companies enumerated do not adept the 

 same sy.^tem of accounts, a sine qua non in com- 

 piling rel.able statistics of this nature. In the Home 

 and Colonial Mail of 17th July I notice a letter 

 from Messrs. P. R. Buchanan & Co. offering to 

 give i the necessary information with respect to 

 the gardens in which they are interested on certain 

 conditions ; and it is to be hoped that others simil- 

 arly situate.1 will follow their example, for the pub- 

 lication of a statistical table of all Tea Companies 

 showir.g their relative costs of production, bearing 

 areas, costs of extensions, management, agency and 

 dividends earned could not, but be of the greatest 

 value to the tea industry. 



Meanwhile, limited as your table is, it seems 

 to bear out some remarks which are to 1 e found 

 ia the Home and Colonial Mai/ (oi 10th July, which 

 are as follows : — 



Results of 1884 have been satisfactory to those who 

 made fine tea, and to those whose yield was so large 

 a."" to bring down cost to a minimum,— but it has not 

 been as profitable to those who realized only a moderate 

 yield and made only medium quality ; the reason being, 

 that prices for " medium ' liave year by year beeii 

 receding nearer to the range for " common," until 

 the difference has become very .slight ; while the 

 difference between " medium " and " fine " has become 

 wider. The conclusion is thai those who cannot con- 



