May, 1910.1 



446 



Miscellaneous. 



Cost of working per day :— 



Per day. 

 Rs. A. 



1 mistri at Rs. 60 per month = 2 



2 coolies ., 10 „ 12 



2 12 



Cost of fuel per day (13 acres) 15 8 



18 4 



Cost of working by bullocks : — 

 1 man and pair of bullocks = 



i acre per day, 

 1 man at ... As. 6 

 1 pair of bullocks ,, 6 



12 per day. 

 To plough 13 acres per day would re- 

 quire 26 ploughs. 



26x12=312, i.e., Cost per day = Rs. 19.8. 

 Capital Outlay :— Rs. 

 Oil Tractor and ploughs ... 9,000 

 Bullocks and ploughs ... 3,000 



"Accordingly, without considering ini- 

 tial outlay, where ploughmen can be 

 got at 4 annas and less per day, it is 

 cheaper per unit to plough by means of 

 bullocks. 



"The Oil Tractor will not suit small 

 holdings or paddy cultivation, but where 

 large holdings of high land cultivation 

 are concerned, and where labour is scarce 

 and dear, the Oil Tractor is an economi- 

 cal motive power for ploughing. 



" There is no doubt about the utility 

 of this Oil Tractor. In addition to 

 ploughing, threshing, pumping, sugar- 

 cane crushing and carting, etc., can be 

 done, but in Bengal unless the holding 

 is compact and 200 to 300 acres in extent, 

 high land cultivation is concerned, and 

 ordinary labour costs Re. I per head per 

 day, it will be found there is no advant- 

 age in changing the ordinary system 

 of cultivation now in vogue in the 

 Presidency,"— (Editor). 



DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCE IN 

 HORTICULTURE. 



(Prom the Experiment Station Record, 

 Vol. XXI., No. 5, October, 1909.) 

 Investigation of horticulture was the 

 main topic of consideration at the recent 

 meeting of the Society of Horticultural 

 Science. The need of it was the key- 

 note of the meeting, and there was 

 frank admission on the part of many 

 that little more than a beginning has 

 yet been made. It was made clear that 

 in organisation for teaching and for 

 experimentation horticulture has not 



kept pace with the advancement of the 

 times, and that this fact has restricted 

 its efficiency in both directions. 



Horticulture as a separate subject 

 was one of the first to be organised in 

 the agricultural colleges. It was recog- 

 nised as one of the grand divisions of 

 agricultural education, and in point of 

 equipment was developed quite as early 

 as agriculture. It was popular, and the 

 practical usefulness of its courses was 

 realised early in the history of these 

 instructions. It was looked upon as a 

 department unto itself, and the distinc- 

 tions between it and other departments 

 of instruction were carefully guarded. 



Horticultural instruction in this coun- 

 try has had a higher aim than that 

 in Europe. The English and continental 

 gardeners are largely men of the ap- 

 prentice-school type, whose training has 

 been centered on learning to do things— 

 on developing skill and good judgment. 

 The object of the agricultural colleges 

 of this country is to make educated 

 men, as well as men with practical 

 training. The effort in horticulture has 

 been to teach not only the art but the 

 principles, so far as they are known, 

 and to reduce horticulture to a peda- 

 gogic basis. But in this the subject 

 has not kept pace with other branches 

 of agriculture of late. The attempt to 

 hold it intact and to itself has retarded 

 the development of its organisation, 

 and prevented its keeping pace with 

 the differentiation and specialisation 

 which have been going on in agriculture. 

 The mode of organisation has now be- 

 come traditional and unsuited to present 

 conditions. The units are far too large, 

 and do not develop specialisation either 

 in teachers or students. 



Horticulture is at present a highly 

 developed art. The art has developed 

 far beyond the understanding of the 

 science, and skill drawn from experience 

 is depended upon rather than a know- 

 ledge of principles. The work of horti- 

 culturists has dealt largely with the 

 art — with the commercial and eesthetic 

 side of the subject. This has predomin- 

 ated to such a degree as often, and 

 perhaps usually, to give the student an 

 imperfect conception of the field, and 

 a biased view as to the needs on the 

 experimental side. 



At no stage has there been the at- 

 tempt to correlate horticultural prac- 

 tice and problems with the sciences 

 that there has been in some branches 

 of agriculture proper. The fundamen- 

 tals of horticulture have not been 

 sufficiently developed to meet the de- 

 mands of scientific training, and graduate 

 work in that subject has not been so 



