562 Report of the Trials of Ploughs, Harroics, Sfc, at Hall. 
Class 10. — Best Arkangement of Subsoiler attached to 
A Double-furrow Plough, for ploughing and subsoil- 
ING AT ONE Operation. 
In this Class were three competitors, Messrs. Ball, Murray, 
and Corbett ; the first two were double entries, varying according 
to strength, »Scc. — indeed representing the two forms of double 
ploughs, those under and over a given weight. The stronger 
frame being, however, best adapted to resist the strain of the 
subsoil tine, we shall direct attention to the heavier implements. 
We believe Corbett and Peele were the first to combine and 
patent the arrangement of a subsoiler in front of a single-furrow 
plough, and having omitted to include double-furrows in their 
specifications, the notion was made use of first by Murray and 
Co., and afterwards by Ball and Son. There is this advantage 
in the double-furrow over the single-furrow arrangement, viz. 
that hy displacing the first plough and substituting for it the 
subsoiling tine, the balance of the implement is not seriously 
affected, and one is sure of good work, inasmuch as the broken- 
up subsoil is at once covered over by the second plough ; but it 
is generally admitted that the chief advantage of the double- 
furrow system is for light soils, where three horses yoked abreast 
can do the work of two pairs in single ploughs, and on such 
land subsoiling is seldom necessary, and would often be in- 
jurious. However, the ability to apply such an apparatus at a 
reasonable cost is a point of merit that deserves recognition, and 
even if it is only very occasionally that we require to disturb 
the bottom, it will be found very convenient to be able to do so 
in so simple a manner, and so efficiently, as was done by all the 
competitors. 
Corhett and Peele. No. 2847. — The beams are strengthened by a cross-brace, 
■which can be applied in this plough, because the beams do not expand, as in 
most others. A third wheel is introduced, which, running close to the furrow- 
slice in front of the subsoiler, increases steadiness of work. As in the other 
ploughs shown by this firm, some slight mechanical aid is afforded in turning 
by the alteration of the laud-side wheel. The draught was reasonable. The 
depth of work was noted during each trial with the following results : — 
(1.) Ploughing, 52 inches; subsoiler, 6i inches. (2.) Ploughing, 6 inches; 
subsoiler, 4f inches. (3.) Ploughing, 6 inches ; subsoiler, 51 inches. 
The price appears comjiaratively reasonable, viz. 9/. 17s. 6(Z., which is appor- 
tioned as follows : as double-furrow plough, similar to the one which competed 
in Class 6, 8?. 10s. ; subsoiling-apparatus, 11. Is. 6d. 
In the first illustration (Fig. 44) the plough is shown with the subsoil-tine 
out of the ground, and the land-side wheel in a vertical position, to facilitate 
turning at the headlands. 
In Fig. 45 the plough is shown in the same condition, but inclined, in 
order to show the connecting-rod working conjointly with the lever for 
raising and depressing the subsoil-tine and land-wheel. At the same time it 
