512 Beport on the Exhibition and Trial of Impkmentu 
machines exhibited by Messrs Burgess and Key, No. 81 in the catalogue ; by 
Robert Cutlibert and Co., No. 792 ; aud by W.Dray and Co., No. 3299 ; those 
having been the only machines selected in July last for future trial by the 
Judges. 
The implements were set to work in a piece of wheat — an average crop for 
the season — which was laid at places in two or three directions by a roller, 
and the}^ were afterwards taken to a light piece of barley in which there was 
a strong ]ilaut of clover. 
During a short ^ireliminary trial Dray's machine nipped olT some of the 
wheat ears, and left them in small lumps, about two rods apart; this defect was 
caused by a screen on the platform in front of the man who delivered the cut 
corn, and as it could not be remedied in the field, the Judges required Mr. Dray 
to retire from the contest. 
The other two reapers cut the wheat remarkably well, except where badly 
laid ; in this respect they were considered to be equal in merit ; furrows aud 
bottom rubbish appeared to offer no impediment to the progi-ess of the 
machines. 
The Judges were unanimously of opinion that, in doing a certain quantitj' of 
work in a given time. Burgess and Key's machine had the advantage in the 
proportion of 10 to 7, and that the delivery of the crop, when cut, was better 
effected by their machine in the proportion of 6 to 4. 
That in lightness of draught Cuthbert's machine had the advantage in the 
proportion of 14 to 9, and that in the cost of cutting and binding up the corn, 
Cuthbert's machine had the advantage in the proportion of 6 to 4. 
That in simplicity of arrangement, in the strength aud durability of the 
working parts of the machines, Cuthbert's appeared to have the advantage in 
the proportion of 6 to 4. 
That in compactness, handiness in transit and management, and in price, 
Cuthbert's machine had the advantage in the proportion of 4 to 2. 
The Judges were placed in some difficulty on account of one of the competing 
machines being provided with a self-acting side-delivery, by which the crop, 
when cut, was laid in a continuous swathe ; the other machine being adapted 
for the delivery of the crop by manual labour at the side, at intervals, in a fit 
state for binding up. 
The Judges considered that, in heavy crops of corn, the self-acting delivery 
would give Messrs. Burgess and Key's machine a considerable advantage over 
Cuthbert's, and that the excess in draught in Messrs. Burgess and Key's 
machine may, to some extent, be attributed to the power requisite to keep the 
self-delivering apparatus in operation, but they have some doubt whether the 
weight of the larger machine would not be found objectionable on retentive 
soils in wet seasons. 
The Judges were of opinion that, with crops of an average length and hulk 
of straw, the cut corn could be delivered at the side from Cuthbert's machine 
in a fit state for binding up, by manual labour, without further exertion than 
is usual in the extra hard work of harvest operations ; and that for light crops, 
or where the corn is laid or scrawled, Cuthbert's machine is preferable to 
Burgess and Key's. 
The prize of 101. was unanimously awarded to Mr. Cuthbert's machine, 
No. 792, and Messrs, Burgess and Key's machine was highly commended. 
p. s. punnett. 
Thos. Rammell. 
H. G. Austin. 
Fbedk. Mubton. 
Sept. 21, 1860. Thos. Abbott. 
