Febrcary, 1919 



THE GARDEN MAGAZINE 



29 



where the push belongs. So difficult is it to 

 explain this slight but highly important difference 

 that the manufacturers themselves are reluctant 

 to make it a talking point. Yet, in the final 

 analysis, this is the only fundamental difference 

 between the two best known standards in wheel 

 cultivators to-day. 



It is rather significant that the difference in 

 the handles of the cultivators seems to be con- 

 sidered of more vital importance of late by the 

 makers of the tools than those parts of the cul- 

 tivators that really do the work. The realiza- 

 tion that the comfort of "the man behind the 

 hoe" deserves more consideration than what 

 the hoe may do, seems responsible for a gradual 

 drifting away from the pair of handles to the 

 crossbar handle of the kind we associate with 

 the lawnmower. 



Perhaps the application of this type of handle 

 may cause some otherwise very meritorious 

 but little known tools to become more popular. 

 Take the Norcross All Metal Cutivator for 

 instance. In its present shape, being all metal, 

 with two heavy metal handles attached to two 

 heavy metal arms, the machine is distinctly 

 top heavy — too heavy for comfortable pro- 

 pelling when the sun registers ninety in the shade. 

 It takes a man to do it and it tires a man in a 

 couple of hours. Yet, the machine has a few 

 unique attachments that do splendid work. If 

 the single handle idea with crossbar handle could 

 be grafted to this tool, it might become as popular 

 as its sturdy construction deserves. 



T^HERE is no question but that different 

 •*• soils require different tools in order to do 

 the kind of cultivation that benefits plant life 

 most. Gardeners in different parts of the 

 country are confronted by widely differing soil 

 conditions, and their wishes for helpful tools 

 have been responsible for the creation of quite 

 a variety of tools designed to meet their needs. 

 As I recall the experiments of the past season, 

 two utterly different types of cultivators stand 

 out clearly in my memory. One is the "Per- 

 fection" Cultivator, a combination of weed 

 cutter and pulverizing discs. The other is the 

 Barker Mulcher and Cultivator, a combination 

 weed cutter, tooth cultivator and soil pulverizer. 

 Both have lawnmower handles. Both have 

 the same type of horizontal weed cutter. Yet, 

 both are designed for two distinctly different 

 kinds of soil and they will do the best work where 

 they meet the soil conditions that called them 

 into existence. 



The Perfection Cultivator was conceived in 



the big onion plantations of central Illinois 

 where a light muck soil encourages quick growths 

 of myriads of weeds. These quick growing 

 weeds have to be checked by frequent cultivation. 



The fiat horizontal weed 

 cutters are part of every 

 combination cultivator to- 

 day (Planet Jr. style shown) 



Very sturdy but almost too 

 heavy for all round use is the 

 All Metal Norcross tool. It 

 will stand the roughest kind 

 of handling 



require first mowing with a scythe and then 

 hoeing or wheelhoeing. s The pulverizing feature 

 of the Barker consists of a drum with six slanting 

 knives which revolve, like lawnmower knives, 

 as the tool is pushed. ' These knives will pul- 

 verize the heaviest soil. Turning from wheelhoes 

 to hand cultivators, we find no radical departure 

 other than that the horizontal weed cutter has 

 been attached to a ldng handle and comes now as 

 a loosely hung rocker hoe known as the Gilson 

 Weeder. This I found to be the safest tool 

 for the whole family for all hoeing and weeding 

 jobs. It proves just as effective 

 and safe in the .hands of the 

 boys and girls as in those of the 

 grown-ups. 



The Pull-Easy which has 

 been featured repeatedly in these 

 columns, is an adaptation of the 

 rake to the cultivator idea. It 

 is still the standard hand culti- 

 vator for light work and was 

 the first departure from the origi- 

 nal prong cultivator known as 

 the Norcross. For heavier soils 

 offering greater resistance to cul- 

 tivating efforts, the Liberty Hand 

 Cultivator Weeder will be found 

 quite effective. As already men- 

 tioned under wheel cultivators, 

 its scientifically shaped teeth liter- 

 ally draw it into the soil and 

 while they do not cover more 

 than eight inches at a time, they 

 surely do a thorough job. 



A 



A heavy tool is neither necessary nor desirable, 

 because it would exhaust the gardener. There- 

 fore the "Perfection" is the lightest, yet most 

 flexible cultivator available to-day and particu- 

 larly adapted to light soil. 



The Barker Weeder and Mulcher I like to 

 consider the heavy artillery in the garden. It 

 surely is the most powerful piece of weed-destroy- 

 ing machinery yet evolved. I do not know what 

 type of soil they have out in Nebraska where 

 this tool comes from, but I venture to guess that 

 it is clay. For on heavy clay soil this implement 

 stands out head and shoulders as the most 

 efficient three-in-one cultivator in the amount 

 and quality of the work that one may do with it. 

 The horizontal weed cutter is so heavy that it 

 will cut a clean path through a thick weed growth, 

 six to eight inches tall. Ordinarily this would 



HINT in conclusion to the 

 men who make garden tools. 

 Do they recall the first time they looked at 

 a new motor or the machinery of a submarine 

 or any other complicated mechanism? Do 

 they recall how seemingly utter helplessness 

 stole over them at the thought of how to put 

 the thing together? Well that's exactly the 

 way ninety out of every hundred home gardeners 

 feel as they unpack a "knocked down" cultivator. 

 The helplessness of the average man when it 

 comes to bolts and screws, to leaf lifters, and 

 disc attachments is proverbial. The directions 

 given for putting the tools together are as strange 

 to read as at first, the tools are to look at. By 

 all means, furnish simply drawn directions for 

 the gardener's guidance; how to put the wheel 

 to the frame, etc., etc. This will go a lot further 

 than ten pages of written instructions, and would 

 help the sales. At least I think so! 



Can I Use a Tractor? 



FRANK E. GOODWIN 



A Question That Cannot be Answered Unequivocally; Much Depends on the Point of View — Conclusions of Experienced Workers, 



and All Round Adaptability to Other Service About the Place 



A MILLION garden areas in the United 

 States, all suited for the profitable 

 use of tractors and power operated 

 equipment, are awaiting their owner's 

 decisions to buy, or not to buy. Some of the 

 owners are convinced that a tractor would fit 

 into their plan of operations successfully, but: 

 have yet to decide what type and make is best 

 fitted for their peculiar conditions. A consider- 

 able majority of owners however are "all at sea" 

 as to the desirability of partially motorizing their 

 acres. 



Before deciding whether, or not, a tractor 

 should be added to the equipment, the owner 

 might well jot down a number of vital and per- 

 tinent questions, and then take considerable 

 time in answering them. Some of these queries 

 1 — yes, many of them — must be settled by the 



owner himself. The most important of these 

 questions are: 



i. Do 1 7ieed a tractor? 



2. If so, what should be its capacity? 



3. What type will be best suited to my 



needs? 



4. How can it be best employed to make it 



most profitable? 



The first question is, naturally, the most 

 important, and should demand the most careful 

 consideration from all angles before a decision 

 is arrived at. 



At the very beginning let me suggest that, 

 broadly speaking, the "horseless era" is as 

 yet but a fantastic dream. It may, sometime, 

 be realized, but not until a new type of tractor 

 has been perfected and agriculture is so balanced 

 as to make all of the operations of plowing, 



seeding, cultivation and the harvest subject to 

 mechanical power. 



So for the present, at least, the ninety and 

 nine must plan to retain horses to perform the 

 work that the tractor is not able to do profitably, 

 or not at all. 



So at the outset let us determine, "Do I need 

 a tractor?" Close coupled and interwoven with 

 this query is the second: "If so, what should be 

 its capacity?" 



The actual number of acres under cultivation 

 is the factor to consider— not the size of the 

 property. For example the stock raiser with 

 75 acres in crops does not need a tractor at all 

 unless he plans to greatly reduce his herds, and 

 increase his crop production materially. The 

 grower who seeds and harvests 75 acres of one 

 crop like wheat can much more profitably use a 



