(luring the lad Four Yearfi. 187 



flat, horizontal position, whereas all the swing-ploughs leant more or 

 less to the land-side, cutting to a less depth on the right than on the 

 left hand side. Consequently, the furrow-bottoms left by the wheel- 

 ploughs were more even than those excavated by the swing-ploughs." 



On this occasion, a wheel-ploug:!! by Messrs. Barrett, of Read- 

 ings was the lightest, marking 22 stones ; Hart's the next, 24 

 stones ; a Scotch and a Northampton swing-plough the heaviest, 

 standing each at 40 stones. I cannot but remark how little our 

 mechanists yet know of the draught of their ploughs, when imple- 

 ments could be brought forward to compete for a prize at a great 

 public meeting, some of Avhich gave as much work nearly for 

 four horses as others for two. 



The latest published record of trials* is a very careful set of 

 experiments by Mr. Hannam, of Dorchester, in Oxfordshire. 

 Here again, as in Wales and in Berkshire, the lightest plough 

 stood at 13 stones, the old Oxfordshire plough at 22 stones, the 

 Scotch swing-plough at 20 stones. The lightest plough in this 

 instance was Messrs. Barrett's. 



There only remains the interesting report of our judges on the 

 ploughs which competed at our Bristol meeting. There again, it 

 will be seen that the lightest plough was a wheeled one, Mr. 

 Howard's of Bedford, which stood at 22 ; the heaviest, a Scotch 

 swing-plough, which marked 44 ; the next heaviest, another Scotch 

 swing-plough, which marked 36 ; and, in the words of our judges, 

 "it is worthy of note that the resistance of Mr. Howard's two- 

 wheel was less by 4 stones than that of his swing-plough." 



From these repeated trials, which have arisen out of Lord 

 Spencer's remark, we may now come to the conclusion that wheel - 

 ploughs, as he suspected, are superior to swing-ploughs, in ease 

 for the cattle, and are also superior in the work they perform ; that 

 the Scotch swing-plough in particular is very severe for the cattle ; 

 that, since in three country trials the draught of the ploughs was 

 found to differ as two to three — that is, as two horses to three — 

 more attention is required on the part of our ploughwrights to the 

 easiness of their draught ; and lastly, that, since in our two public 

 competitions at Liverpool, and again at Bristol, the draught of some 

 competing ploughs doubled that of the winning plough, as if at 

 Epsom one horse had only run half the course when another was 

 winning the Derby, it appears very clearly that our plough- 

 makers, as a body, are not thoroughly acquainted with the qualities 

 of their own implements, otherwise the race could not be so un- 

 equal. It may not be useless to them, therefore, that we should 

 nquire what it is in ploughing which constitutes the work of the 

 horses? Some makers appear to think that if their plough is 



* Journal, iii. p. 9. 



o2 



