THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



509 



loi- abiding by our own statoiuents, and venturing to 

 criticise his. He gives " the assumed estimate" of 

 work at seven acres per day, stating that " the time of 

 continuous ploughing was not tested. This is to be 

 under consideration to-day, on the farm of Saughton 

 Mains, near Edinburgh." We linow that at this ad- 

 journed trial the machine was to try how mucli ground 

 could possibly be plouglied in one day ; but still there 

 was a trial against time on tlie heavy land at Stewart- 

 hall. And as we could not peep into the note-book of 

 the judges, we trusted the oral testimony of 

 competent witnesses that, in three hours, the im- 

 plement made 27 jouineys of 330 yai'ds each, turning 

 four 10-inch furrows, at once; which, without a 

 " ready-reckoner," we find amounts to a trifle over 

 2 acres, equivalent ='to G acres 34- roods, in ten hours. 

 But this was on a stiff clover lea, as the North British 

 says, " a clay (carse) of more than medium tenacity," 

 and considered by the farmers of the district to be 3- 

 liorse work, worth 15s. an acre. Yet our contemporary 

 takes only " 7 acres in ten hours," as the quantity 

 which the machine will plough of average land, where 

 8s. per acre is " the ordinary estimate" for horse- 

 ploughing. On the wheat stubble, a soil of " deep 

 friable clay loam," where the " ordinary ploughing" 

 was done" at a depth of 6 to 7 inches," a much larger 

 area was turned over. He admits that the " speed 

 generally exceeded 3 miles per hour," and that " from 

 the facility with which the implement was entered at 

 the ends, little time was lost." Well, we can inform 

 him that the implement made nineteen journeys per 

 hour, of 220 to 236 yards each ; that is, at the pace of 

 about 2.J miles an hour, including the changings at each 

 end ; and as the four furrows took 40 inches' breadth, 

 the extent of ground ploughed was 1 acre per hour 

 nearly, so that an assumption of 10 acres a-day would 

 have been nearer the truth than 7 ; but say the 

 quantity was equivalent to 9 acres in ten hours. Our 

 contemporary is willing to allow 10s. per aci'e for the 

 ■work, and thus we have work performed daily to the 

 value of £4, lOs. instead of £3 10s., as his smaller and 

 incorrect quantity makes it. Granting that" ploughing 

 can be carried on 150 days during the year," we have 

 then ^""675 instead of only £525 (which he arrives at), 

 as the value of the work done annually. He is still 

 worse in his estimate of expenses. We will allow his 

 £140 per annum for interest and tear and wear; but 

 must object to the computation of the daily expenses. 

 He says, '' seven or eight men and one horse appear to 

 be engaged in keeping the machinery in operation — 

 this may be estimated at, say 30s. per day." Now, the 

 labour required is that of one man on the plough, one 

 man at the windlass, one man generally assisting, two 

 boys removing the rope-porters, one man and horse 

 water-carting, and the engine-driver, or a total of five 

 men, two boys, and one horse; and it is not fair to add 

 Mr. Fowler's foreman or superintendents, who were 

 present in the field at the public trial, to direct pro- 

 ceedings, and afford information. And then, why put 

 the cost of the " seven or eight men and one horse" at 

 30s. per day, seeing that the salaries and travelling 



expenses of these particular men form no guide for 

 the payment of a farmer's engineer and labourers ? 

 Twenty shillings is quite sufHcient for the labour 

 really needed in practice. Our contemporary 

 reckons the consumption of coal, oil, &c., at ^1 per 

 day : a most excessive estimate. For, even supposing 

 the ten-horse engine to have been worked up to four- 

 teen-horse power ; this, with slovenly firing, burning 

 7 lbs. per horse-power per hour, would amount only to 

 10 cwt. Fuel is cheap in the district; but still we may 

 say 10s. for coal and oil. We thus get 30s. daily ex- 

 penses ; which in the Tiines report was taken at 353* 

 Multiplying the daily expense by the 150 days worked, 

 and addmg the £140 for tear and wear, the annual cost 

 is found to be ^3(55; whereas by our contemporary's 

 figures it is no less than £'515. By thus understating 

 the quantity of work done, and over-estimating the 

 expenses, he brings out " the relative expenditure of 

 horse and steam ploughing at what may be considered 

 an equality." He goes on, however, with other items 

 in th3 account, which turn the balance of economy 

 against the latter ; saying, " But no allowance has been 

 made for incidental expenses; and, as the data we have 

 taken are moderate (!), a sum not less than £50 must 

 be added. Besides, the wages of the engineer and the 

 men generally required for the working of the plough, 

 when not so engaged, must also bs taken into consi- 

 deration. The engine, when not engaged in ploughing, 

 may be perhaps advantageously turned to other uses, 

 such as moving the thrashing-machine, &c." We do 

 not agree to this £50 for " incidental expenses," be- 

 acuse we think the £140, which is something like 20 

 per cent, on the first outlay, will cover all ; but we will 

 allow it as the cost of shifting the machinery and tackle 

 from field to field, which for 150 days' ploughing, in 

 averaged-sized inclosures, will require to be done about 

 seventy-five times, occupying — say, half-a-day each 

 time. Curiously enough, our contemporary has for- 

 gotten all about this item in the calculation ; which 

 would have enabled him to show an actual pecuniary 

 loss fi'om employing the steam-plough instead of the 

 horse-plough. But, according to our own figures, 

 adding this £50 to the annual working-expenses al- 

 ready stated, we have a total cost of £415 for work 

 valued at £675; that is, there is a saving of about 40 

 per cent, upon the cost of ploughing by horse-labour — 

 the machine having ploughed 1,350 acres in 150 days 

 (or 187 days with the removals), at 6s. 2d., instead of 

 10s. per acre. Suppose stoppages do sometimes occur; 

 and let the value of the ploughing be taken at only 8s., 

 when the usual price in the district was there stated to 

 be 10s. or 12s., and every farmer in the tiial-ficld con- 

 sidered the expedition and extra pulverization and 

 absent trampling made it worth much more — and still 

 the facts show a margin of economy in favour of steam. 

 Money-saving however, is, not the sole advantage, 

 or so important as thepower of striking-ofTa great deal 

 of work in a very little time ; and being thus able to 

 accomplish the ploughing of our whole "wheat- 

 seeding," or give a furrow for mangold or turnips, all 

 in a few days. The prime cost of the Stirling Steam- 



