November i, 1889.] THF TROPiCAL 
AGRICULTURIST. 
as our correspondent supposes. We call attention to 
the figures, not as indicating the exact quantity of 
tea likely to be obtained by tine and medium plucking, 
but to show that the Souchong leaf was plucked with 
very little cost indeed to the estate. Granted that 
the difference in quantities plucked is not really so 
great as was shown uy the figures we quoted, there 
still would be a difference, and a very considerable 
one, too, seeing that our coi respondent reckons the 
falling-off in quantity brought about by the abandon- 
ment of medium for line plucking at " between 60 to 
80 per cent " ! A gang of trained coolies plucking 
tine would go over a larger area possibly in a day 
than a gang plucking medium. They would bring in 
very much less leaf, and they would go round the 
estate, say, four times a month, instead of, say, five 
times iu two months. We are well aware of this, of 
course, but it does not affect our contention in the 
slightest. Another point, and a very important one, is 
the effect on the trees caused by a long continued 
course of line plucking. Our correspondent ridicules 
the idea that it has anything like such deleterious 
effects as are supposed. Experience alone will prove 
whether this is so or not, but the result must depend 
ou varying conditions — such as the altitude of the es- 
tate, the age of the tree, etc. — and there is a very 
great consensus of opinion that tine plucking — if con- 
tinued long— has a deteriineutal effect upon the trees. 
However that may be, the case for medium 
plucking does not rest on the settlement of this point 
solely. Even were it indisputably proved that the 
tree is no more affected by one system than the other, 
we should yet require those who advocate a departure 
from customary methods to show us how it would 
be advantageous to do so. It should be remembered 
that it is not we who are proposing auy novelty. In face 
of falling prices, and after a careful examination of the 
pros, and cons, of the case, we sa_, that we do not seehow 
it will benefit us to change the existing methods of 
plucking. If we are mistaken, it is surely the duty 
of tnosj who differ from us and who a ivocate a com- 
plete change of system throughout the island, to prove 
to us that it would be advantageous to do so. As yet 
we have not seen any figures ten ling to support this 
view, although we have published many which go to 
controvert it. Of course everything, as we have re- 
peatedly pointed out, depends upon the falling-off iu 
yield which fi ,e plucking urines about, an I the in- 
crease in price obtained for the tea. Our correspondent 
"iSigi.iya" put the foilowiug-off in quantity at from 
60 to 80 per cent., which is very much higher thau 
we estimated it, but he does not give lis his idea as 
to wtiat increase iu price may be expected. With so 
enormous a falling-off iu quautity, however, it is 
oovious that a very large increase in price is looked 
for. Let us then allow for it fully, applying it to 
the tigures already published by us, which have this 
advantage, that they are not hypothetical, but are 
those of an average estate at a medium altitude. 
This estate gives 300 lb. an acre, gets an average of 
55 cts. for its tea, and makes a protit of 25 cts. ou every 
lb. of it, which as things go nowadays is very good. 
Assuming, therefore, that the falling-off in quantity 
by tine pfucking would be 70 per cent, and that the 
price realized all rouud for the tea is as high as 
HI per lb., the following is the result : — 
Medium Plucking. — 200 acres @ 300 lb. 
60,000 lb. tea @ 55 ct. 
Costing @ 30 ct. 
Profit 
R33,000 
R18,000 
15,000 
Fine Plucking. — 200 acres at 90 lb. an acre. 
18,000 lb. tea @ Rl R18,000 
(Jost @ 60 ct. R10.800 
Profit • 7,200 
Difference in favor of medium plucking 7,800 
"Sigiriya" would say that as much as Rl'25 per lb. 
might be couuted from such tine plucking, given a good 
jat of tea and careful manufacture, but even if we grant 
that for the sake of argument, we still tiud that the 
protit made is less than by the old system of medium 
dlucking. We again give the figures tor comparison ;— 
Medium Plucking. — 200 acres at 300 lb. 
60,001 lb. tea @ 55 ct. R33,OO0 
Costing @ 30 ct. R18,0x0 
Profit 15,000 
Fine Plucking. — 200 acres at 90 lb. 
18,000 lb. tea @ Rl'25 R22.5U0 
Costing @ 60 ct. R10,d00 
Protit 11,700 
Difference in favor of medium plucking 3,300 
Now does anybo >y suppose that with a yield of 
90 lb. per acre the cost of production could ue kept 
down as low as 60 cts. per lb '{ The fixed charges on 
an estate, including the superintendence, weeding, 
plucking, etc., would come to quite K36 per acre, 
equivale.it to 40 cts. per lb. of made tea at 90 lb. 
the acre, while manutacture a id transport to Uoiombo 
would cost more than 3l> cts., so that the total cost 
of a lb. of tea at this rate would be over 70 cts. a 
lb., and this would still furtner increase the difference 
in favor of medium plucking. 
In this matter we are onty anxious to arrive at a 
just conclusion, and to ascertain the best course for 
the community as a whole to pursue ; and if we have 
omitted to tak e into consideraciou auy facts which 
would upset ou r calculation, then we should be very 
glad to have them poiuted oat. Iu reference, how 
ever, to the hypothetical case of fine plucking we 
have quoted above, we think it will be admitted that 
we have placed it iu as favourable a light as possible. 
We can hardly believe that as much as Rl'25 Cnuld 
be reckoned on eveu for the finest plucking coupled 
with the most careful manufacture, except in an ex- 
ceptional instance, and cercamly it could not be cal- 
culated on if the generality of estates took to pluckiug 
fine, for then such teas would be plentiful and prices 
would fall. Of course, there are exceptional cases when 
it pays to pluck fine. 
(To the Editor of the " Times of Ceylon.") 
Sie, — !So many of your correspondents have attacked 
fine pluckiug so vigorously while you yourself seem to 
have fully arrived at the co .ciusiou that the system is 
altogether iudefeusiule, that I propose to hold aloof 
from the discussion as to the relative merits of fine 
aud medium pluckiug. 
1 would merely uraw your atteutiou to one or two 
points. One of your correspondents put on two gangs 
of coolies of equal number — one with orders to pluck 
as' usual, the otner to pluck tine — and drew from the 
result the wonderful conclusion that his usual pluck- 
ing paid best. Now, does he really believe that the 
test was a fair one, or has he, together with yourself, 
overlooked the fact that the winning gang were pluck- 
iug as usual and the losing gang were quite new to 
their work '? 
Having some experience in the education of coolies 
to pluck fine, I may state that I find as a rule coolies 
new to the system plucmng about 50 per cent, less 
on the first day, and that they take a full mo..th or 
even more to get into the swiug with the regular 
pluckers. Even supposing your correspondeut's test 
to have been a fair one, the value of tea manufactured 
from the fine leaf is fully 25 per cent, too low for 
properly manufacturel tea. 
1 do tuiuk, in tue interests of all concerned, who 
desire a souud knowledge as to the ineriis of ihe 
varijus systems, that ad such unreliable tests should oe 
discarded ; and it certainly surprised mo to see suen a 
worthless test made the oasis of so much construction 
in favor of coaroe or medium piUjkiug. 
How many nave taken it upon themselves to state 
as a fact that fins plucniug is ruinous to the tea bushes, 
1 shouid be afraid to say, out 1 have seen this statement 
male over and over again, accompanied with no small 
measure of ridicule. (Sucn random statements are no 
duubt easy to make, and give the maker a certain air 
of importance as au autuority on the suujeci, and 
niorever they are difficult to controvert; but tuose wno 
really wish to arrive at the trutu would like to see 
such statements supported by something mjre than 
mere ridicule. 
Tea plucked fine for over 3 years should, I suppose, 
be ou tlie verge of dissolution ; it would be loliy to 
attempt auy proof to the ooatrary ; but you, Mr. Editor, 
