Report on the Trials of Implements at Bedford. G73 



■be obtained. The horse required to travel somewhat slowly, in order to perform 

 the work well. The knives will also either require to be frequently sliarpened 

 or replaced, for the whole work depends on the sharpness of the knives, and 

 it is improbable that these would remain sharp many hours when working on 

 hard, brashy land, such as we had at Oakley. This implement was invented 

 by Mr. Eaton of Troywell, near Thrapston, some thirty years ago. It is a 

 ■double-row thinner. Its price is 8?. 10s. 



No. 735. By the same maker, simjtly differs from the last by being a single- 

 row thinner (see Figs. 14 and 15), The implement was more easily guided, 

 but of course did only one-half the amount of work of the former, and seeing 

 that the difference in price is only 21, the first is decidedly the preferable 

 implement. 



No. 734 is also a single-row thinner of similar construction, by the same 

 maker as the last two. Price 67. 10s. 



No. 3830. Holmes and Son, of Norwich. — The plants were bunched by 

 means of rectangular hoes, worked at right angles through the rows by a crank 

 motion, in imitation of hand-hoeing. Two hoes alternately chopped out the in- 

 tervening plants. The work was fair, especially on the ridge. There was a 

 little diificulty in guiding the implement between the rows of turnips on the 

 •flat ; but between those on the ridge it was easily guided, because two small 

 wheels preceded the hoes, one running on each side of the ridge. This inven- 

 tion is a clever one ; but the implement must be made less complicated in 

 construction, and to do its work more regularly. The price, 12L, is also higher 

 than Smith's implement. 



No. 3832. Holmes and Son. — The plants were thinned out by means of 

 revolving scoops moving on the top of the rows at right angles. The im- 

 plement takes two rows at one time, and may be converted into a corn hoe ; 

 cuts out the plants fairly, but throws them, as well as a good deal of soil, on 

 to the adjoining row. It moves too much soil. Price 111. 10s. 



No. 3443. liansomes, Sims,and Head, of Ipswich. — This implement bunches 

 the plants by means of hoes placed horizontally, and working in an eccentric 

 motion vertically. It may easily be converted into a corn hoe, but the me- 

 chanism is somewhat complicated. It made good work in the field of turnips 

 on the flat at Elstowe, where the soil was loose ; but on the hardened brashy 

 soil at Oakley the work was unsatisfactory. Price IIZ. 10s. 



No. 3847. Thoiruis Chambers, of Colkirk Hall, Fakenham. — This consists of 

 a corn hoe frame bearing two small wheels, which revolve on the top of the 

 row at right angles, and chop out the j^lants by means of small spuds placed 

 obliquely on the circumference of the wheels ; chopping first before and then 

 behind the plants to be left. By an ingenious mechanism the hoes may be 

 reversed in turning at the head of a field, so that the implement may work 

 regularly across the field and leave all the plants on the same side of the rows. 

 The gearing is complicated and placed too near to the ground. It chops out 

 the plants pretty regularly, but covers the adjoining row with soil and plants. 

 Price 121. 12s. 



No. 689. Thomas Hunter, of Mayhole. — In this implement the thinning is 

 performed by means of hoes attached longitudinally to the projecting spokes 

 of a wheel, which revolves on the top of the rows at right angles. This wheel 

 is geared with the axle of the driving wheels by a bevel gearing. The depth 

 may be regulated while the implement is at work. This implement cuts out 

 the plants regularly, but throws them about, and, as in many of the others, 

 ••covers up the adjoining row. 



No. 3013. Kennan and Sons, of Dublin. — This implement consists of a 



wooden frame with sliders attached below, and is jolted across the ridges, thus 



cutting out the intervening plants. As previously stated, it is only adapted 



for the ridge, and was therefore only tried at Oakley, where the work was not 



VOL. X. — S. S. 2 X 



