244 On the Failure of Deep Draining 
prevailing character of the aluminous soils of North Britain may 
result from so large a portion of the land Ijing upon the primitive 
rocks, the materials supplied from the disintegration of which are 
not of a very cohesive kind, in comparison to some others. It is 
stated, nevertheless, in the Encyclopaedia of Agriculture, " that" 
(in Scotland) " it was formerly the practice to go 4 feet deep, 
but that it is now found that a shallower depth and closer drains 
do much more good." 
What said the late S. D. Sterling, of Glenbervie, near Falkirk, 
who, after trying all kinds of draining for years most extensively, 
writes to me in 1846, and says — " I do not believe on such land " 
(the strong clays) that any increased depth will compensate for 
a greater distance between the drains." 
Extracts from a meeting of the Highland Society. 
Mr. Dixon, of Saughton Mains, at a discussion held at the Museum of 
the Highland Agricultural Society, Edinburgh, on Wednesday the 15th of 
March, 1848, quite agrees with me on the impossibility of fixing on any 
depth or distance for drains, and although he knew the importance of deep 
draining on some soils, yet he mentions its failure on others, and says — 
" After going 3 feet the soil changed to gravel and sand, mucli water was 
found, and deep draining answered perfectly at wide intervals ; yet in the 
same county an experiment of the same kind was tried with the ojiposite 
result, the subsoil being a very retentive clay; here one lialf a field was 
drained at the depth of 4 feet and 36 feet apart, and the other half at the 
depth of 2^ feet and 18 feet apart, and the result was most decidedly in 
favour of the shallow drains, with an interval of 18 feet between them ; the 
other portion of the field appears only to be half drained." \V here instances 
are quoted of deep drains in clay at wide intervals being successful, we 
must remember they are only of recent date. I have never been able to 
find a single instance of a field drained 4 feet deep and 40 feet apart, that 
had been done for ten years, successful on the strong clay subsoils. 
What says Mr. Scott, of Craiglock ? — "We are told that on all soils, 
whether muiiland, till, or stift'clay, dry clay, sand, gravel, or moss, a mini- 
mum depth of 4 feet is stipulated for, and a minimimi distance of 36 feet 
apart." Upon hard impervious clays I have not been able to thoroughly 
dry the land with drains at 36 or even 30 feet apart. I have seen the at- 
tempt made with drains 4 feet deep, 36, 32, and 30 feet apart ; but in all 
these cases the result was unsatisfactory. In all these instances a great 
quantity of water was carried off' by the drains, and the land was much be- 
nefited ; but still the soil was not brought into that state in which the 
greatest fertility could be called into operation. 
What says Mr. Tinnie, of Swanston ? — " Where the subsoil is uniformly 
retentive I make my drains 18 feet apart and 3 feet deep, and were 1 to 
drain the same ground over again I should follow the same course." 
Smith of Deanston also instances two failures, one on the property of 
Sir Ralph Anstruther in Fifeshire, and another on an estate at (Joltness, 
made three years ago, in Lanarkshire: and also says — " I have never seen 
an instance of thorough draining by deep and distant drains, whilst all 
over the country you may see land perfectly dried with drains 30 inches 
deep and 18 to 20 feet apart." Also an experiment had been made by 
Mr. Hope, of Teulin Barnes, in East Lothian, which went to show that 
better crops had been raised over the shallower than deep drains. At the 
