XXX^T INTRODUCTION. 



bad been issued for macbiDery to be used against tbe Cotton Worm, but 

 more particularly sucb as was actually in use in tbe field.* A summary 

 of tbe results was given in Bulletin 3 of the Commission. Tbe variety 

 of these inventions by Southern i^lanters and tbe ingenuity displayed 

 in many of them compared very favorably with what had been done in 

 similar directions in other parts of the country, and two important facts 

 were obvious and are worthy of emphasis : 



First. Though there is every reason to believe that the ravages of the 

 worm were proportionally as great before as they have been since the 

 late war, yet all the more important inventions post-date that period. 

 Prior thereto only the more primitive and ineffective means of destruc- 

 tion, such as hand-picking and the use of fires and lights m the fields at 

 nighty were j^esorted to. 



Secondly. By far the greater number of the machines have been in- 

 vented in Texas, and this is doubtless due to the circumstance that the 

 worm occurs more regular] 3" and more disastrously there than in other 

 Stares. Both facts are indicative of the more healthy development of 

 the South under free as compared with slave labor. 



The more satisfactory machines in vogue were those which distributed 

 the liquid poison in broadcast spray or sprinkle over the surface of the 

 plants from some wheeled vehicle containing a reservoir for the liquid, 

 which was either distributed automatically or by means of force-pumj)s. 

 We soon became convinced that whatever improvements were possible 

 must be, as indicated in our later instructions to agents, in the direction 

 of spraying the under surfaces of the leaves and of reducing to a mini- 

 mum the quantity of poison necessary to an acre, as also the labor 

 necessary to apply it. 



The more important of these aims was first foreseen by Mr. W. J. 

 Daughtrey, of Selma, Ala., who, in February, 1878, in his letters patent 

 (see pp. 258-9), fully realized the advantage of fine spray on the under 

 side of the leaves. Although the very ingenious machine contrived by 

 bim and described in these chapters did not work as successfully as be 

 bad hoped, and was too elaborate, heavy, and expensive to prove prac- 

 tically successful, yet too much praise cannot be given Mr. Daugh- 

 trej^ for the clear manner in which he saw what was required and the 

 skill with which he endeavored to put the i)rinciple to practice. It has 

 been our aim in this part of the work to develop simpler means, that 

 may be available to tbe average planter for attaining the same object, 

 and we would more particularly call attention to the underspraying ar- 

 rangements described on pp. 288-293 and supplemented in Note 52. 

 In order to accomplish anything of vabie in this field of machinery, it 

 was necessary that some competent person should be able to devote his 

 entire time to carrying out our ideas and to such experimentation as 

 the objects in view suggested or required. Experience had shown that 

 a professional engineer was not best fitted for the work, and we were 

 finally fortunate in securing, in the summer of of 1880, the services of 



