112 THE YEAR-BOOK OF AGRICULTURE. 



cut with shears, and performed good work, having an adjustable beam, and so arranged as 

 to have little or no side draught. 



At the trial instituted by the State Agricultural Society of New Jersey, at Newark, July, 

 1855, Ketchum's, Allen's, Whitenack's, Manny's, Forbush's, and Deitz & Dunham's machines 

 were used, and all worked well, though each had their favorites. 



The machine called Whitenack's seemed to be the favorite with the largest number. Mr. 

 Dunn, a large farmer of Hunterdon county, says he used one of these machines all last sum- 

 mer without grinding the knives ; that it will cut from six to eight acres a day of grass, 

 without worrying man or horse ; that it ruiio light and is easily handled, and does not get 

 out of repair. He cut ten acres of oats a day, quitting at five o'clock. The cost of this 

 machine was $130 as a mower, and $150 as a reaper. 



The lightest machine is that of Dietz & Dunham, weighing five hundred and seventy-five 

 pounds, complete. This is a new machine, and runs with a different motion from the others, 

 the movement of the knives being operated by a cam-wheel instead of a crank. 



At the trial of mowing machines in competition for the premium of $600 offered by the 

 State Agricultural Board of Massachusetts, the result seemed to be in favor of Manny's ma- 

 chine, in competition with Ketchum's, Russel's, and Allen's. The horses of both the latter 

 appeared to labor much harder than with the other machines, and the report says 



" There was a necessity for an additional heavy man to assist in managing Allen's ma- 

 chine, which was looked upon as a great drawback. The second mode of trial was by allow- 

 ing each competitor to cut a single swath through the field and back again, and then 

 examining the ground, after the hay was removed by a horse-rake. In this trial, the ma- 

 chine of Manny showed a closer-cut swath, and evidently was considered by the spectators 

 generally as the best machine." 



At a trial of mowing machines, instituted by the Hampden (Massachusetts) County Agriciil- 

 tural Society, June 29th, 1865, four different machines were entered Hovey's, Russell, 

 Manny's, and Ketchum's. 



In the trial, Hovey's machine failed, after a short time, from an accident, and was with- 

 drawn. Russel's machine finished its work in good time, but in an unsatisfactory manner. 

 In relation to its performance, the committee state: " It is not requisite for us ' to point out 1 

 the reasons of the failure ; but several farmers expressed the opinion that raking after such 

 mowing would ' extract teeth' too fast to be either easy or profitable. The fault may have 

 been in an inexperienced team or in inexperienced driving, and not at all in the machine. Wo 

 can only say that the opinion of most seemed to be that if we must have such mowing by 

 horse-power, farmers would better put their fist to the 'thole,' and drive the 'heel wedges' a 

 little longer." 



The comparison, then, was narrowed down to two machines Manny's and Ketchum's. Of 

 these the committee report as follows: "It would, perhaps, be difficult to say which did its 

 work best. If difference there were, most of the committee thought it in favor of 

 Ketchum's mower. The work done by the latter certainly had a most elegant appearance ; 

 but it should be remarked that the lot that fell to this machine was the more feasible, as 

 Manny's lot was marred by a fence and also by a random swath of its rival ; the horses, 

 also, attached to Ketchum's patent were said to be more accustomed to the work, a considera- 

 tion of no small importance. Whether, after these considerations are duly weighed, a 

 verdict of better work should be given in favor of this machine, is perhaps a matter of 

 doubt. But distinctions without a difference are needless. They both did well. If all our 

 meadows could be shorn of their velvet covering as handsomely as either of these lots, the 

 age of ' whetstones' might, without regret, be suffered to pass away ; they would have 

 4 shown their grit' long enough. 



" Thus much upon the work of the two; but there are other considerations of importance. 

 Ketchum's machine seems much more simple; Manny's invention seems complex, at least to one 

 whose knowledge of mechanics extends not much beyond the hoe-handle and flail. Some 

 of the committee expressed a doubt whether they were deep enough in gudgeons and screws 

 to put such an apparatus in working order, even if it were sent to them. It is an obvious 

 remark that the greater the complexity, the greater the danger of getting out of repair, and 



