1861. 



NEW ENGLAND FARMER. 



197 



■work better than we do, as it was done on the 

 English plan. 



We have capital enough, said the speaker, but 

 the great object was to show that it can be made 

 to pay to invest it in agriculture, and to show 

 how this is done in Europe, he spoke of the 

 pumping out of Haarlem lake in 1852, and in 

 1855 there were families living on the bottom of 

 the lake, by which 40,000 acres of land, worth 

 more than double the land around it, and capa- 

 ble of supporting 70,000 people, was obtained at 

 a cost of only $80 per acre. He also gave a 

 very interesting account of the draining of the 

 Lincolnshire fens in England, and closed bv in- 

 viting the members to take part in the discussion. 



Dr. Geo. B. Loring, of Salem, being called on, 

 said that the question of drainage was not gener- 

 ally understood by the farmers of this country. 

 Two or three weeks ago he had been invited to 

 address the Milford Farmers' Club, and had taken 

 for his subject "How to manage a Farm." He 

 there told them that no farmer should undertake 

 to cultivate a piece of land without first getting 

 the water out of it. In swamp lands where rivers 

 flowed near them, and in bogs and lands where 

 there were large springs, he advised them to use 

 tile drains, as they were better than stone. — 

 After the address, he was told that another mem- 

 ber of the Board of Agriculture had been there a 

 short time before, and he had told them that if 

 they wanted to ruin their land, and themselves 

 with it, they would use tiles in their soil. Thus, 

 said the speaker, we must now consider which is 

 the most economical methodof draining our land. 

 He said that, 30 or 40 years ago, a man in his sec- 

 tion, who had all the advantages that a knowledge 

 of the English and Scotch system then gave him, 

 drained 20 or 30 acres of wet meadow with stone 

 drain, and he also had the advantage of surface 

 drainage besides, yet with all this, after he had 

 drained the land awhile, the drain choked up, 

 and water grass covered every foot of the land. I 

 advised him, said Dr. Loring, to take up the stone 

 drain and put in tiles, because I knew these 

 would never be liable to choke up, and the re- 

 sult is, the land is now in fine order. Peat bog, 

 said he, must of course be drained by open drains, 

 but moist, clayey land will only do with tile drain. 

 If it is drained by stone drain, the soil and clay 

 will work through, and finally, without there is a 

 great fall, the drain will fill up. Tiles, said the 

 speaker, are in the end the cheapest. He advised 

 every farmer to commence with stone draining if 

 he could not afford tiles, and when he got a re- 

 turn for his crops, to invest it in tiles instead of 

 stocks. It was impossible, he said, to fill up a 

 tile drain, as the hydraulic pressure would draw 

 the water through the pores of the tile, and thus 

 no sand or clay could get inside the pipe. 



Judge French said that the English Parliament 

 had loaned $40,000,000 to land drainage compa- 

 nies, and Mr. Denton, an eminent agricultural en- 

 gineer in England, said that, in 1855, 1,250,000 

 acres had been drained. There is no such thing 

 as stone drains there, all being done with tiles. 

 The land, said the speaker, is owned by the mem- 

 bers of Parliament, and they consider this the 

 best investment they can make. 



Mr. NoURSE, of Orrington, Maine, was next 

 called up. He said there was no question to 

 any one who had had experience of the advantage 

 of tile drains. He had two miles of stone drain, 

 and five of tile, and when tiles can be had for $15 

 per 1000, he said he would rather have them than 

 the stone if it was given to him. It is safe, said 

 he, with a very great fall, to use stone drains, as 

 then there is no fear of their filling up, but tiles 

 were good anywhere. He said some farmers 

 stated that they could not afford to get tiles, but 

 his experience told him that they could not afford 

 to do without them. If a man had a piece of land 

 that would be fertile if drained, and said he could 

 not afford to drain it, he would advise him im- 

 mediately to sell half of it, and drain the other half 

 with the proceeds. In the matter of manure, the 

 speaker said that if land on which it was put was 

 properly drained, all the rains that fell would 

 carry the manure into the ground, while if the 

 land was not drained, it would be washed off, and 

 the land would lose more than half the good of it. 



Mr. FiSK, of Shelburne, said that his experi- 

 ence was altogether in favor of stone draining, 

 and he thought that in the consideration of this 

 subject, the lay of the land was of the utmost im- 

 portance. He should rather refuse tiles if offered 

 him than stone for drains. In the western part 

 of the State there were lands that were hilly, and 

 they had come to the conclusion that water would 

 run down hill, and so were in favor of stone drains, 

 from the fact that they had the stone on their 

 lands, and did not know what to do with them. 

 England, said he, has no stone to speak of, and 

 thus they use tiles which are cheaper, while we 

 use stones to get them out of the way. Thirty 

 years ago he stated that he laid a stone drain, and 

 to-day it works to perfection, and even better 

 than tile drains belonging to his neighbors near 

 it. In his part of the State it was the practice to 

 use pebbles for their drains. They were under 

 the necessity of draining more every year, and 

 he was confident it would pay well, and the lands 

 improved thereby were the best we have in the 

 State. 



The Chairman said his preference for tiles was 

 because of the little trouble necessary to excavate 

 to lay them, but if they could not be got he recom- 

 mended the use of other materials which were 

 most eligible. He spoke of the trouble from 



