THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



:^01 



Three firms entered Howard's two-horso harrow, and, 

 as there could bo no best, the prize was divided amongst 

 them ; two sent the three-liorsc, and of course with a 

 similar division. Tiie iron plough awards were also in 

 favour of the Messrs. Howard, whose implements were 

 exhibited by Mr. Foord. Although the land was rather 

 too light and friable for show work, the performance 

 was pronounced to be veiy good. On the other hand, 

 nothing could bo worse than tliat of the Kent plough ^ 

 in which some recent improvements have been effected. 

 It really looked more as if some of the Dorkings Iiad 

 been turned on the land the day before, and carefully 

 scratched it over. However, the fore-carriage of the 

 jilough has been amended, the straight beam has been 

 nicely arched, and the draught has been considerably 

 lightened. And all to this purpose — that never, as the 

 men of Kent themselves admitted, was there such un- 

 sightly \vork. Well may the county want one good 

 meeting, now and then, if this be a specimen of what 

 they are doing there in the nineteenth century. 



Lord Darnley, the President of the Society, clearly 

 takes a real interest in the proceedings, and he put 

 the different points on his list with much good sense 

 and earnest intention. Moreover his lordship asked 

 others to follow his example, and begged the several 

 speakers at the dinner not to deal in empty compliment, 

 but to speak out. Messrs. Rigden and Gillett, for the 

 Judges, answered to the call in two admirably practical 

 addresses, in which they found but little to compli- 

 ment the meeting. In fact, it would have been im- 



possible to have done so. Our own opinion is, that the 

 Kent farmers themselves did not do the occasion jus- 

 tice. Whether their general co-operation had been 

 duly sought, we cannot say ; but until the Society can 

 command more competition and more general interest 

 from the county, it docs not promise to make much 

 way. Wo heard both on the ground and at the dinner the 

 frequent remark that " I have a umeli l)etter" mare or 

 sheep or bull at home. As a rule, we do not attach much 

 import to such an observation; I)ut, in this instance, 

 it was really quite possible; and if so, the committee, 

 of course, should look up such entries. Compe- 

 tition, in short, is the very life-blood of these meet- 

 ings; and we must let Mr. Rigden put this well 

 home, as he did, in his own speech, with an anec- 

 dote in point. At the Derby Meeting of the Royal 

 Agricultural Society he exhibited a Southdown for 

 the first time. He sent his ram with the notion 

 that he was a very good one ; but he was " nowhere" 

 on the day; and a friend-— one of the successful ex- 

 hibitors — kindly gave him this piece of advice: — "Just 

 take your ram out of the yard. Master Rigden, tie him 

 tightly round your neck, and then throw yourselves 

 into the first bit of deep water you come to !" Strange 

 to say, Master Rigden did not do so, but took his ram 

 home again, carefully studied his defects, and in three 

 years' time lived to beat his adviser I 



Our Kent friends may profit in all sorts of ways by 

 this story, although we don't go to the length of tlie 

 deep water. 



THE STEAM PLOUGH. 



Wehaveno wish to fight the battle of the steam-plough 

 inventors ; but while combatants wax hot or get sorely 

 bruised, bystanders may sometimes profit by the strug- 

 gle. It matters not, just now, whether a dignified 

 competition for an implement prize admits of "testi- 

 monials " and lists of customers being proffered to in- 

 fluence the opinion of the judges; whether a judge is 

 worth having, who condescends to form his judgment 

 upon heai'say, or decides by other evidence than the 

 work and machinery before him — of course taking a 

 comprehensive view of the subject in all its bearings 

 and applicatious, by means of his own knowledge of his 

 business; or, again, whether a judge should receive 

 after-explanations as to the cost price of apparatus, or 

 adhere to the statements of his " catalogue " and " in- 

 structions." We reserve our opinion on these and simi- 

 lar points, though we believe that a discrepancy can 

 be explained without imputing to any man unworthy 

 motives. As we said at starting, the rivals shall 

 assert their own claim to priority of invention — or, if 

 they have not that, to the most successful practical 

 working-out of a principle. As they boast of priority 

 in steam-ploughing, however, we cannot help thinking 

 that the Marquis of Tweeddale or Lord Willoughby de 

 Eresby could tell them a story ; that Messrs. Fisken 

 can rufei' to their early expcrinienis; that ?«rr. Uslinv 



does not forget his trials of the rotary cultivator ; that 

 Mr. M'Rae ploughed by steam-engine and pulley on 

 an estate near Glasgow, in 1840; and that our great 

 drainage friend, Mr. Josiah Parkes, had field-days 

 "ivith Heathcote's steam-plough on the gi-eat moss near 

 Manchester, and also at Dumfries, more than twenty 

 years ago. 



But in Mr. Smith's letter of August 13th there are 

 conclusions from which we greatly differ — leading the 

 farmer, as they do, to estimate the value of a steam- 

 cultivator from a wrong point of view. Mr. Smith re- 

 presents the Chester trial as a race, in which that 

 machine ought to win which performs with most 

 economy, as compared with the horse-power required 

 to produce a similar effect — the condition as to turning 

 over the soil being of course complied with. Calculat- 

 ing from the judges' figures, taking the price of Mr. 

 Fowler's plough at the larger sum, which is its actual 

 cost, and charging equal wear and tear for both ma- 

 chines in question, Mr, Smith brings out the result 

 that his machine worked more economically than Mr. 

 Fowler's, as well as economically compared with horses' 

 work. Then, as the judges stated that " the trials of 

 Messrs. Howards' (Smith's) machine also prove that 

 the soil can be inverted in an efficient manner," the 

 logical deduction, \w. thinks, is tliat his apparatus 



y 



