THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



329 



If by hia syatcra of feeding 14 lbs. per week of meat aud 

 3 lbs. of internal fat can be gained by each full-sized animal 

 (and I am sure this can be done as au average), I know of no 

 other system which will exceed it in result, or equal it iu 

 economy. 



The consumption of straw, in the way here suggested, would 

 produce a very great increase of meat, manure, and corn. 



If supplies of this warm food were conveyed to sheep in our 

 fields in cold and miserable weather, many losses would be 

 avoided, and our turuipa would make more mutton. 



In order to provoke a discussion and examination of this 

 subject, I send this commuuicatioii to several papers, aud 

 shall probably enlarge upon it in some future papers. 



Tiptree Hall, Kdvedon, Esse.v, J. J. Mechi. 



Feb. 28, 1859. 



By Mr. IForsfall's mode of feeding you may get the manure 



without cost, and a handsome price for your straw and roott. 



Tlie followiiig/rtc/«, deduced from Mr. Horsfall's paper, will 



show that 1,000 lbs. of Swedish turnips, or 100 lbs. dry are 



worth Is. fli^d. fls 7«an«re, whilst s. d. 



lOOlbs. of hay are worth I 2i 



100 lbs. of straw 5 



100 lbs. of bean meal 2 6 



100 lbs. of oilcake 3 1| 



100 lbs. of Indian meal 1 l| 



100 lbs. of locust beans 5 



Here is an instructive and interesting comparison with a 



vengeance ! A ton of Swedish turnips are worth, as manure, 



48. per ton, or nearly half the manurial value of a ton of straw 



or locust beans. 



Oilcake or rapecake are worth, as manure, £3 3s. per ton, 



AGRICULTURAL IxMPLEMENTS, AND THE PRIZE SYSTEM. 



It is the effect of agricultural prizes to draw immediate at- 

 tention to any new invention. If they were discontinued, how 

 could a new implement or a real improvement be so well 

 brought into notice ? A prize at the Royal Agricultural So- 

 ciety's meetings at once attracts the eyes of all England to the 

 new implement, and it certainly adds new honour to an old 

 and tried one. If it were not so, why do makers run to such 

 lengths to secure reward, aud go to such cost in advet- 

 tising and placarding the prizes they profess to disdain, and 

 which some of them say " do them more harm than good" ? 

 It may be very natural that men who have arrived at the top 

 of the tree by means of the prize ladder should wiah to see that 

 ladder removed. All honour to their skill and perseverance. 

 But other makers, little men, are treading on their heels, aud 

 now aud then surpass them. The prize system gives these 

 small makers a chance ; and if they can produce anything that 

 is really useful as well as novel, a little prize card from the 

 Royal Agricultural Society is the best and cheapest adver- 

 tisement they can possibly have. 



Notwithstanding that some able men contend that imple- 

 ments are better tried on the farms of spirited agriculturists 

 than by any of these trials, we think there are few farmers who 

 have the money or the inclination to buy all the new and un- 

 tried implements as they come out, Aud, moreover, when 

 machines are so proved toht good ones, it by no means follows 

 that they are the best in the kingdom, because there is no 

 chance of comparing their merits with others; whereas, at the 

 competitive trials of the Royal Agricultural Society all the 

 well-known makers compete side by side, and there is every 

 chance for a fair comparison on equal grounds. 



When certain stipulations and restrictions are pushed too 

 far, mistakes will follow. The Society's endeavour to reduce 

 the quantity of coals consumed by steam-engines had the ef- 

 fect of producing " racing engines," with a multiplicity of thin 

 tubes for more easily generating steam. There was a great cry 

 raised against the Carlisle award; and yet, under totally differ- 

 ent specifications, the same firm again bore away the first 

 prize at Chester. 



It has been urged against the old system that many new 

 implements were invented long before prizes were offered for 

 them, and that some have been brought to their present per- 

 fection without competitive trials. All this is very likely : it 

 is by no means desirable to restrict the limits of inventive 

 genius, and it is extremely difficult to direct it into beaten 

 paths; but atill, all the newly-established implements have 



certainly been encouraged aud brought into notice by thia 

 system of prizes. It is not the mechanics, so much as the 

 practical farmers, who are the inventors of the last few years ; 

 and the manufacturers of the old machines acknowledge with 

 pleasure that their chief improvements are based on the sug- 

 gestions of some plodding agriculturist. Chambers's water 

 drop drill, Chandler's liquid manure drill, Huckvale's turnip 

 thinner, Martin's revolving hoe, Phillip's root pulper, Cham, 

 bers's manure distributor, Nalder's screen, Phillips's poppy 

 extirpator, and a host of other implements, including the chain 

 harrow, were all invented by practical farmers. For most of 

 these prizes were offered by the Royal Agricultural Society 

 before the invention was made public. The want was felt by 

 the agricultural world ; intelligent farmers taxed their ingenuity 

 to supply the need, and the Society tested the merits of the 

 inventions, and published their success. 



If our competitive trials were abolished, we believe that 

 those who thrive on puff and humbug would be great gainers. 

 Farmers have plenty of those to contend against now a-days, 

 but then they would be at a higher premium ; as the man who 

 could tell the best tale, make the grandest display, and attract 

 the most notice, would be the best salesman at agricultural 

 exhibitions. '■ The most attractive part of the show at Chelms- 

 ford," observes Mr. Howard, " was the machinery set in 

 motion by the manufacturers, for which no prizes were offered.'* 

 The most attractive, no doubt ; but is that the end for which 

 such meetings were established ? The best-worded advertise- 

 ment, the greatest noise, the busiest scene, the largest placard, 

 the most elaborate self-praise, and the most energetic depreci- 

 ation of anothei's goods, cannot be better teats of an imple- 

 ment's efficiency than the present censured system of competi- 

 tive tria's. 



Yet there are many points urged by the implement makers 

 and their Association of Agricultural Engineers with which we 

 heartily agree. Trials at county shows must be a farce ; local 

 societies have not and cannot afford the means for properly 

 testing machinery, and, if they offer implement prizes at all^ 

 they should be like those of the Norfolk Society, for the best 

 collection, not for individual implements. Such prizes may 

 contribute towards securing a good show, and cannot clash 

 with awards formed on much better data than such associa- 

 tions can command. The only societies which should pretend 

 to award special implement prizes are— The Royal, the Bath 

 and West of England, the Yorkshire, and, of course, the High- 

 land Society of Scotland, and the Royal Irish of the Emerald 



z2 



