v^ 



i^ ) 112 THE GENESEE FARMER 



:^ 



BRITISH AND AMERICAN AGRICULTURE. 



(Continued from Page 82.) 



B. You promised to give me any iuformation I might desire on under-draining. From all I can 

 learn on the subject, it appears to me there can be but little doubt that it ■will amply pay to undcr- 

 drain, even though it does cost $30 per acre. Mr. Johnston, of Seneca county, saj's the increaaed 

 yield on the drained land in two years pays the entire cost of the drains. I intend to underdrain 

 a few acres, this spring and sunimcr, on the clover lot that 1 shall summer fallow for wheat. It is 

 good, strong, heavy soil, and though it brings but little at present, I think by under-draining it may 

 be made to produce very heavy wheat crops. I intend cutting a ditch three feet deep through the 

 low land in the lot adjoining it, and shall therefore have a good discharge for the water. 



A. I should cut the ditch at least five feet deep. In all our attempts at draining we miss it in 

 nothing so much as cutting shallow ditches. If we have a quantity of low land to drain, we cut a 

 ditch two feet deep, and think forsooth, that that will be sufBcient to drain perfectly all the land 

 within a hundred rods of it. It will do no such thing. It may drain the land a little better than 

 if there was no ditch at all, and the water was allowed to find the lowest land, and so pass off 

 naturally ; but as for its draining the land perfectly, there cannot be a greater mistake. What is 

 wanted is not swrfrtce-draining, but under-draining ; or, so to speak, sub-soil draining. We want 

 the land dry three feet deep. A ditch two feet deep carries off a good deal of the surface water, 

 especially if furrows from the adjoining lands are run into it ; but at the same time the soil six or 

 eight inches deep is as full of water as it will hold, and needs under-draining just as much as ever. 

 Cut the ditch you speak of five feet deep, and you will then and not till then, have accomplished 

 the first step in under-draining your farm. In England I do not recollect a single farm, except 

 those resting on chalk, on which there was not ditches, or, as they call them, water courses, some 

 five or six feet deep. These are cleansed at least once a year, and kept free from all impediments, 

 for they have found by experience that it is impossible to dr^in land so long as there is stagnant 

 water in the open ditches. 



B. Enough ; I will do as you say. So, having cut the ditch five feet deep, what shall I do next! 



A. I should cut a main drain some four feet deep from the ditch right along the lowest part oj" 

 the field to be drained. This main drain should be laid with large tile, say four inches in diameter. 

 I should then cut drains from this main drain, up and down, or lengthwise of the natural slope of 

 the land. In the field you mention, I would not have them further apart than forty feet. The 

 deeper the drains, within certain limits, the further apart you may make them. It is important 

 that the drain may be made with a gradual fall, and not have some places deeper than others, for 

 thoucrh if the mouth of the drain be lower than the summit, the water will run off, yet it is found 

 by experience that if in any part of the drain the tiles are full of water, the land in the immediate 

 neighborhood is not drained at all. I had this fact pointed out to me several times while in 

 En<i-land. If the drains are made in the spring or fall, there will be plenty of water in the drain 

 at the time of throwing out the last inch or two of soil, so that nothing is easier than to make the 

 di-ain so that the water will just run from you, and will not lie in any place. 



B. Wliat is the cost of digging these drains, say three feet deep? I have some thoughts of let- 

 ting the job. 



A. In England, the nverago price paid per rod for digging a drain, laying the tilo, and filling in, 

 all complete, is eiriht cenis per rod But as we pay our help just twice as much per day as do Eng- 

 lish farmers, it will probably cost you at least sixteen cents per rod, exclusive of tile. 



B. Which kind of tile do you prefer, the round pipe or the horse-shoe tile? 



A. In England there is much difference of opinion on this subject. The "new lights," as they 

 ai-o derisively called, think and prove that the 1 i inch pipe is just as good as the horse-shoo tile, 

 while they cost much less, and the drains from being narrowed are dug with much less labor. The 

 old farmers, however, are slowcoaches; they stick, with a pertinacity truly refreshing in these 

 days of change, to tlie good old horse-shoe tiles, laid, not lengthwise of the fall, but across it. They 

 maintain, in spite of theory and demonstration, that this is the best method of draining. They cer- 

 tainly, many of them, drain land well in this way ; but I think the pipes altogether the best, consid- 

 ering their relative cost. 



B. I see accounts in some of the papers of a new machine that cuts the drains and deposits the I 

 pipe at the proper depth without removing any of tlie soU. J 



^^ ' ^5 / 



