THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



>13 



]6-hoi'9e engine; that in a third, they could cultivate or pluugli 

 proportionately less with an iatenucdiate power. The 

 award of the society went forth to the world, declaring that 

 A., B., or C. had produced tlie best cultivating apparatus, 

 and that was all the world knew. That was clearly a defective 

 method of procedure, and did not tend to guide the farmer 

 83 to the particular apparatus which he ought to buy for 

 his own use (Hear, hear.) lie thought there sliould be 

 short explanatory reports setting forth that A, 15. and C. 

 used an engine of sucli a power, ploughed a certain deptli, 

 burnt so much fuel, and tluit the cost of cultivation was 

 so much per acre (Hear, hear.) The farming community 

 would then be far more likely to arrive at an accurate esti- 

 mate of the. merits of the several machines, and be able to 

 judge which was the best for their own particular rcquii'e- 

 ments. 



Mr. Bn.uisn.vw ( Knowle, Guildford ) said, no practical far- 

 mer having yet risen since JNIr. Hobbs introduced the 

 subject, he wished to say one or two words. Some four- 

 teen years ago, when he commenced farming, wishing to 

 do everything in the best possible manner, he ordered 

 half-a-dozeu carts on the recommendation of the first prize 

 of the Royal Agricultural Society in that department. He 

 was satisfied with those carts, with one exception, namely, 

 the chest of the vehicles. He found that in working the carts 

 a man had about eight inches of unnecessary elevation every 

 time he lifted a spadeful of manure from the ground. He had 

 unfortunately been burdened with those carts ever since 

 (Laughter.) He had been bitten on one or two occasions 

 since (A laugh.) He had been led to purchase Hussey's 

 reaping machine. He did not know exactly what he paid 

 for it, but any one might have it for ^£5. He had, he 

 admitted, purchased another reaping-machine lately ; but, 

 then, in that case, he paid little regard to the awards of the 

 Eoyal Agricultm'al Society, preferring to make careful in- 

 quiries of practical men connected with that Club. Ho 

 thought that whether a man wanted a plough or a grubber, 

 or any other machine, whether he cultivated a light soil or 

 a heavy soil, or whatever might be his position, ho ought 

 to be enabled to place some dependence on the implements 

 recommended by the Eoyal Agricultural Society which he 

 ordered for his farm (Hear, hear.) Such was his own ex- 

 perience, however, in this matter, that having ordered mcderu 

 ploughs some years ago, he had since been compelled to 

 revert to the 45s. plough of his own village. 



Mr. A. Ceosskill (Beverley) thought that after the re- 

 marks which had been made it might be taken for granted 

 that there was no public confidence whatever in awards 

 made in consequence of trials of implements carried on as 

 they had been hitherto. The discussion seemed now to 

 turn entirely on the question how far trials could be im- 

 proved, and tlie improvement suggested had so far been 

 limited to the providing for adjourned trials. That was in 

 fact the only thing mentioned in Mr. Hobbs's paper as 

 likely to lead to improvement, and he would now make 

 one or two remarks on that point. He had himself been 

 engaged at all the adjourned trials of the Eoyal Agricultural 

 Society, and more particularly at the trial held at Boxted 

 Lodge under the presidency of Mr. Hobbs, who showed 

 the most earnest zeal and generous hospitality in adopting 

 every means to secure if possible a useful result from the 

 trials, as well as to provide for the personal comfort of 

 judges, exliibitors, visitors, and spectators ; but the con- 

 clusion to which he had been led was, that adjourned trials 

 would prove just as ineffectual and just as futile regarded 

 as a means of gaining public confidence, as the trials 



hiilierto conducted in the show-yard. As had often 

 been said, an ounce of practice was worth a ton of theory. 

 He appealed to past verdicts of the Eoyal Agricultural 

 Society in support of his view. Four times had that society 

 had adjourned trials of the reapuig machines, and in every 

 case after the first, the award was in direct contradiction 

 to those made previously (Hear, hear,) He had, therefore, 

 most reluctantly come to the conclusion that it was im- 

 possible so far to improve the trials as to render them of 

 real practical benefit to the agriculturist. The advocates 

 of trials thought they ought to be continued, chiefly for two 

 reasons: first, because they pointed out to agriculturists 

 the best machines for them to buy ; and secondly, because 

 the competition which trials excited led to great improve- 

 ments in agricultural machinery — improvements which 

 without trials would not be made. Now, he held that 

 these notions were great fallacies (Hear, hear-.) As to 

 agricultinistb basing their purchases on the reeulls 

 of trials at agricultural shows, he was confident 

 that that was a state of things which was rapidly 

 passing away. He believed that the fai-mers of Eng- 

 land were as capable as any other body of men of forming 

 a correct judgment as to their own business and interests. 

 They did not want engineers or amateurs in mechanical 

 science to be judges for them as to what implements 

 they required for their farming operations, As re- 

 garded itib second reason urged tor the continu- 

 ance of trials, namely, that they were the cause of 

 the improvements in agricultural machinery, it was 

 contrary to common sense to suppose that any man could 

 get his living by making such machinery and not be con- 

 tinually improving it (Hear, hear.') Competition produced 

 the same results in that branch of trade as in every other, 

 and every manufacturer would for his own sake malce as 

 good machines as he could, whether the Eoyal or any other 

 Agricultural Society put its stamp on them or not. To show 

 that this view of the matter was being adopted more 

 and more by the public, he begged to refer 

 to an article which appeared only a few days ago in tho 

 Times. On the 15th of October that journal said, " The 

 societies might give prizes for a reaper or a plough, or for 

 the best samples of produce ; but private interest would be 

 at all limes a more powerful incentive to calling these into 

 existence." He believed that to be the true state of the 

 case. Entertaining the greatest respect generally for the 

 opinions of Mr. Hobbs, he entirely diflered from him on 

 this question. He believed there was a growing feeling in 

 the public mind that it was not necessary to liave such 

 trials, to enable farmers to know what they ought to buy ; 

 and common-sense would tell every one that such trials 

 were not necessary to ensure improvements in agiicultm-al 

 machinei7. 



Mr. Bennett (Cambridge) thought the discussion had 

 borne more or less with unmerited severity on the judges 

 appointed of late years by the Royal Society, at their 

 annual meetings. [Mr. Howard: No, no!] He (Mr. 

 Bennett) must insist that the discussion had unhappily 

 taken that turn. He fully, however, acquitted the 

 gentleman who opened the discussion, and gave him 

 credit for the ability he had displayed. It had, how- 

 ever, been complained of, that the present trials were 

 insufficient, because if a man exhibited an excellent ma- 

 chine, and the strap perchance flew oflf, or a cog started 

 from its position, the machine, however good, was discarded ; 

 such a circumstance would, truly enough, be unlucky for the 

 exhibitor; and certainly if another machine performed 



