at the Lincoln Meeting, 1854. 
365 
better work was never seen since the Society lias been in existence ; but tiiat 
we f'ouiui infinitely easier than to decide upon the ploughs themselves. We 
laid this down as the test — to (jive the prize to the plough that, running upright 
and steadih) on the furrow-sole, without j)itching, tilting, or swerving from 
such upright pmsition, should cut and turn its work in the best manner, and la>/ 
it up in the best form with the lightest draught ; the plough itself to be simple 
in its construction, free from complication, can be kept in order at the least 
expense, and the original cost fair and moderate — on these and some minor 
points rested our decision. Fifteen jjloiighs entered for competition in the 
heavy-land field. The work was trying in the e.xtremo ; it was soon per- 
ceptible that the wood ploughs, good as they undoubtedly were, had but 
little chance in such a trial with the firmly-constructed iron ones; and how- 
ever well qualified they might be for light-land ploughing, it was evident to 
us that here tiiey had but little chance. However, such was the excellency of 
the work performed by Cook's plough, that it was ordered to the light land 
\\\th those belonging to Messrs. Halls, Ransome, Barker, Downs, Howard, 
Busby, and Williams, in ail eight. The work on the heavy land was per- 
formed with four horses at a depth of not less than 7 inches, and some good 
work was achieved. We would honourably mention the work done by the 
ploughs of Messrs. Howard. Ransome, Busby, Downs, and Cook, nujre par- 
'ticularly; and of Williams, 13arker, and Balls as the next in our estimation. 
The plough of White and Harris is a good specimen of a wood plough. 
Archer's is a good iron plough, the work rather flat. 
Our next trial was on the light-land field (seeds). Here the soil was about 
7 inches in average depth, mingled with stone, and in some places the stone 
nearly cropped out to the surface, but not fixed, the ploughs with some diffi- 
culty passing throngh it. The plots being chosen by lot, the ploughs started, 
and the performance of the eleven workmen made the task of decision tenfold 
more difficult. Still there were difl'erences, but not the difference of bad 
implements against good ones. All were good — proved to be good — our task 
to decide as to the best amongst so many good ones ; we were ultimately 
enabled to satisfy ourselves that the palm lay between the ploughs of Messrs. 
Howard and Ransome. These we resolved to put to a further test, and to 
give justly-earned commendations to Busby's, Balls', and Williams's ploughs 
respectively. The reaping-machines having cleared suflicient space in the 
rye-field, vve resolved to try them on the loose work of the old ploughed land. 
Again the work was so excellent, and so evenly did these two ploughs perform 
their work in everg particular and under everi/ circumstance of obstruction or 
difficulty, as to render it impossible to decide between the merits of the two. 
No work was ever better done, and even the adjudging of the ploughing alone 
would have been diflScult ; but the ploughs themselves we decided to leave to 
the indications of the d3'namometer, for so evenly in our estimation were their 
respective merits balanced, that we thoroughly agreed in opinion that to 
recommend one at the expense of the other would be doing the other an 
injustice. A dynamometer of acknowledged repute was obtained from 
Messrs. Cottam and Hallen, and by its aid, on the following morning, we were 
enabled to discover that the ])lough of Messrs. Ransome and Sims had a slight 
advantage (and it was but slight) over the plough of the Messrs. Howard. 
We then gave them a further trial in the seed-land upon which they had pre- 
viously worked. We then changed Ransome's to Howard's land, which was 
on one side of the field, and Howard's to Ransome's, which was on the other 
side of the field, strictly and most carefully guarding against giving an advantage 
or disadvantage in ground to either plough. In each case the result was about 
the same ; consequently we awarded the prize of 5/. to Ransome and Sims' 
plough. Price 41. lOs. 
R. W. Baker. 
J. Clarke. 
VOL. x\'. 2 B 
