312 
On  Draining  Clay  Soils  too  deep. 
feet  drains  at  moderate  distances  are  much  more  effectual  than 
the  deeper  at  wide  intervals.  The  following  letter  from  Mr. 
Easton  himself,  the  present  agent,  will  confirm  what  I say  : — 
“ Strathfieldsaye,  22nd  May,  1850. 
“ Dear  Sir, — I intended  calling  on  you  yesterday,  but  was  prevented.  In 
reply  to  your  letter  of  the  18th  instant,  relative  to  draining,  I beg  to  state 
that  the  system  I am  pursuing  on  strong  retentive  soils  is  cutting  a 
common  channel  3 feet  deep  from  20  to  30  feet  distance  from  each  other, 
putting  in  a 2-inch  piper  on  which  a quantity  of  heath  or  brambles  are 
placed  before  replacing  the  soil.  In  porous  land  I cut  the  trenches 
deeper  and  further  apart,  according  to  the  nature  of  the  soil,  and  fill  it  as. 
before  stated.  I never  allow'  a pipe  of  less  than  2-inch  bore  to  be  used. 
The  deep  draining,  wide  apart  (say  00  feet),  does  not  answer  so  well  in 
the  clay  or  retentive  soils  as  the  system  we  are  adopting  here,  and  I find 
I shall  be  obliged  to  put  a drain  between  each  of  those  put  in  deep  and 
wide  apart.  I am  sorry  I was  not  at  home  when  you  called. 
“ I am,  &c. 
“ W.  B.  Webster,  Esq.”  “ Geo.  Easton. 
You  must  remember  that  I am  only  opposed  to  deep  drains  at 
wide  intervals  on  certain  strong  clay  subsoils,  such  as  the  Weald 
clay,  the  Oxford  clay,  and  other  extensive  clays  in  the  south  of 
England.  On  these  I contend  that  drains  at  3 feet  deep,  and  closer- 
together,  are  usually  better  than  4 feet  drains  at  wide  intervals. 
Now  if  any  one  will  take  the  trouble  to  go  to  the  tenant  farmers 
on  the  estates  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  and  others  in  that  neigh- 
bourhood, they  will  find  that  the  deep  drains  that  answer  there 
are  in  what  is  called  clay  in  that  country,  but  is  on  the  red 
sandstone  formation,  and  not  to  be  compared  in  stiffness  with  the 
clays  1 have  mentioned. 
In  bringing  this  before  the  Society  I do  so  not  with  the 
slightest  wish  to  check  the  progress  of  deep  drainage  on  the 
majority  of  soils,  but  only  to  show  that  there  are  retentive  clays 
that  it  will  not  answer  upon. 
I am,  &c. 
9,  Spring  Gardens , Wm.  B.  Webster. 
Dublin , June  25,  1850. 
( Note .) 
It  must  be  now  regarded,  not  as  a wholesome  caution,  but  as  an 
established  fact,  that  there  are  certain  clay  formations  in  the 
south  of  England  on  which  deep  draining  is  not  unlikely  to  fail. 
In  porous  subsoils  drains  can  hardly  be  too  deep,  and,  as  I have 
said  before,  will  sometimes,  if  cut  round  or  through  a field,  lay  it 
dry  without  any  under-draining  at  all,  exhausting  wells  a quarter 
of  a mile  distant.  But  clay  is  a merely  relative  term  in  agri- 
culture. A clay  in  Scotland  would  be  a loam  in  the  south  of 
England.  In  the  south  we  should  call  no  land  a strong  clay  on 
