29 



rtHiuiriu^ the work of but one man, whereas the binder requires, besides 

 the driver, two or tlu'ee men to follow and set up the shocks. The use 

 of a corn shocker removes much of the hard labor of farminj;. Shock- 

 ing corn is generally considered hard work and farm hands employed 

 only for that purpose demand a good price for their services. 



In order to obtain a comparison between the merits of corn binders 

 and corn shockers for harvesting corn, the following questions w^ere 

 asked numerous users of corn shockers: 



1. How mauy acres per ten-hour day can be harvested with a corn shocker? 



2. What docs it cost per acre to harvest corn with a corn shocker? (a) Cost of 

 machine ; (6) cost of man and team ; (c) cost of twine . 



From the replies to these questions and from personal knowledge 

 acciuired in the field, it has been learned that the corn shocker seems 

 to be the machine that meets the recinirements of owners of small 

 farms who do most of their own work. It requires a man of more abil- 

 ity to run a corn shocker than is required in operating a corn binder, 

 on account of the numerous movements that the operator has to go 

 thru, all at the proper time, in removing the shock from the 

 machine. The time of five minutes is about the average retiuired for 

 making the shock, half of this time being occupied in stopping the 

 team, tying the top, lifting the shock, swinging the crane, releasing the 

 core from the shock, and returning it to the table. 



Recently patents have been issued for a horsepower lifting attach- 

 ment for shockers, which consists of a folding tongue, to the top 

 portion of which the whiffletrees are attached. To these is attached 

 a cable, wliich is w-ound around a drum, the other end being attached 

 to the lifting device. When the shock is ready to be lifted, a spring 

 catch is released and the horses started forward. The machine 

 remains stationary, but the forward movement of the horses lifts the 

 shock by means of the cable, from the table. When the core has 

 been returned to the table the horses are backed up to their former 

 position, and the spring catch fastens the tongue in place ready for 

 the forward movement of the machine. The addition of such a 

 device will greatly reduce the work of the operator. 



In the replies to the questions it is found that the average number 

 of acres of corn which can be cut per day with a corn shocker, tln-ee 

 horses, and one man, is 4.7 acres. The life of the corn shocker, in 

 years and acres cut, has not been ascertained, but as the wear and 

 tear is less than on a corn binder, the life of the machine ought to 

 be greater. Assuming that the allow^ance for first cost, life of machine, 

 and interest on investment is the same as that for the corn binder— 

 i. e., 29 cents per acre; allomng $3.55 per day for driver and team, 

 or 75 cents per acre; and estimating that the twine required per acre 

 cut with the shocker wall not cost over 2 cents, we have a total cost 

 of harvesting corn with a corn shocker of $1.06 per acre. This com- 



