at the Norwich Meeting, 1849. 567 



however, we think that this machine would accomplish it. Price 

 25Z. 



" The other machine, made by Messrs. Barrett, Exall, and 

 Andrewes (Stand 58, Article 9), did not perform its work quite so 

 well as Mr, Burrell's, the exhibitors not having used any extra 

 weight of pressure, but it did a much larger quantity, namely, at the 

 rate of nearly 9 cwt. per hour — the power required being, as nearly 

 as we could judge, about that of 3 horses. This machine did its 

 work pretty well, although the gorse was too old, there being a 

 great many old dry twigs which it was impossible, with any rea- 

 sonable power, to bruise sufficiently ; and with two-year old gorse 

 we think it would do its work sufficiently well. It also got 

 through three times as much work as the last-mentioned imple- 

 ment, so that we felt justified in awarding it the prize. 



" We are of opinion that a smaller machine than either of the 

 above would be more generally useful, as many farmers have a 

 limited quantity of land that might be profitably employed in 

 growing gorse, but the great expense of a machine for bruising it 

 acts as a barrier to its cultivation, even under favourable circum- 

 stances." 



Oilcake -breakers (Judges' Report). — " In this class there was 

 great competition. Mr. Hornsby*s (Stand 65, Article 14) was a 

 most efficient machine, doing its work exceedingly well, and 

 working easily. 



" Mr. Maynard's (Stand 88, Article 3) was a very good ma- 

 chine, having a decided improvement in the means of conveying 

 the motion to the rollers. This also worked exceedingly well. 



" Messrs. Ransome and May's (Stand 116, Article 47) is also 

 a capital machine, doing its work exceedingly well. 



" Mr. Nicholson's (Stand 113, Article 4) was powerfully made, 

 worked easily and well, and was calculated to do a great quantity 

 of work. 



" We decided to try only those machines possessing merit as 

 breakers for both cattle and sheep, considering them best calcu- 

 lated to supply the wants of farmers in general. We accordingly 

 selected seven possessing the greatest merit, one of which was 

 withdrawn, and one — namely, Mr. Hornsby's — was not tried, 

 owing to his being taken up in the field, and not able to attend 

 to its working. This we were sorry for, as we had a high opinion 

 of his machine. 



" We have given the result of our trial in the following tabular 

 form : — 



2 p2 



