M KRIEK NARRATIVE OF THE 



uroduce a Reaping Machine, possessin<^ power and simplicity and dur- 

 ability; most of them were complicated, and proved too fragile. 



Soon after the arrival of your Machine, I tried its power and 

 became readily familiar with the manner of using it; the result of my 

 experience will appear from the following facts: 



The Wheat Crop of this farm covered 104 acres, producing 2,540 

 shocks, 30,480 sheaves, as counted on the ground, and again when 

 housed in the Grain barn and sheds. 



The whole crop was cut by your Reaping Machine, in eight days, 

 using one team, a boy to drive, and a man to manage the machine. 



The average quantity cut per day was 13 acres. 



The largest quantity cut on any one day, was 17 acres. 



The longest period for working the machine on any one day was 

 nine hours. 



Seven men were stationed on the field to bind the sheaves. 



The cost of ciitti)ig the wheat with }'our machine is ticcnty-five cents 

 per acre. 



The total cost for cutting, raking, binding and shocking, is scventy- 

 eight cc?its,^.nd a fraction per acre. 



The cost may be stated as follows, viz: 

 A man and team for 8 days at 51.50 per day, $12 



A boy to drive for 8 days at 50 cts. per day, 4 



Interest on cost of Machine and for wear and tear, say at 



10 per cent. 10 



$26 



Which is equal to 25 cents per acre on 104 acres. The seven men 

 employed to rake and bind, received each ^i per day for eight days, 

 say $56 — which sum added to the cost for cutting or reaping, gives a 

 total cost of $82 — or 78 88-100 cents per acre. 



I have compared this cost, with the cost j^aid by my neighboring 

 farmers this season, and find it vastly in favor of your machine. The 

 individual in this town who harvested with the most economy, paid 

 Si 13-100 per acre— other farmers have paid from $1 25-100 to $2 per 

 acre. 



Since the wheat harvest, the machine has cut with signal advantage 

 about twenty acres of oats. 



The wheat and oats were cut with such neatness and precision that 

 the gleanings were not sufficient to pay the labor of raking. 



The machine remains in perfect order; and did not fail to perform 

 all you promised. 



I deem it one of the best labor-saving machines exer offered for 

 the advantage of the farmer; its effectiveness, simple and durable con- 

 struction, have been witnessed with satisfaction by a large number of 

 my neighbor farmers. Respectfully yours, 



J. Delafield. 



The machine alluded to in the above letter is the low priced one 

 at Si 00. 



For 1846, '47 and '48, we copy from the Richmond Planter and 



