January 2, 1888.] THE TROPICAL 
AGRICULTURIST. 
491 
with the improved machines for which I helieve wo are 
indebted to Mr. Howard, senior, of Bedford) the father 
of the members composing the firm of that name. 
Messrs. Howard say that " Before the first meeting of 
the Koyal Agricultural Society of England] held nearly 
half a contury ago, iron ploughs with wheels had not 
been made in England, wood ploughs being in general 
use." I never joined in the wholesale condemnation of 
the native plough, which some with more humour than 
truth describe as a pointed stick with an iron tip, 
Used for scratching up the ground. Though its work is 
not perfect, it answers to a great extent the require- 
ments of a plough. There is an old adage that we must 
learn to walk before we attempt to run. Therefore I say 
the attempt to at once wean the natives from tho use of 
their primitive ploughs, held sacred by them as having 
answered the requirements of their ancestors, and to 
familiarize them with the perfect machines of European 
agriculture, renders necessary a revolution too violent for 
a notoriously conservative people who cling with feel- 
ings of reverence to customs having the sanctity of 
age. Educate them gradually, I say, to an improve- 
ment on their primitive machines, and gradually lead 
thorn on to tho use of the improved ploughs for 
winch wo are indebted to Mr. Green's public spirit. 
One of tho objoctions I have hoard repeatedly made 
to the nativo ploughs, is that it does not plough deep 
enough. This is an objection made by peoplo who 
are, it is only too evident, ignorant of agriculture. 
Those practically engaged in agriculture have a whole- 
some oread of bringing to the surface, subsoil which 
in many cases is sour and poisonous but in every case 
poorer than the surfaco soil. Those engaged iu plant- 
ing upcountry know by experience the disastrous 
effocts that sometimes follow the spreading on the 
surfaco the soil removed in cutting drains, while 
thoso in the lowcountry know that in verv many 
cases even the ubiquitous and not choice-feeding 
ra8ses refuse to grow on soils brought to tho surfaco 
y cutting trenches. By one, whom ic is hard to 
convince that subsoil is generally poor stuff, and who 
in his public writings spoke of "tho rich and unex- 
hausted subsoil," a row of very healthy coconut plants 
growing on the road boundary of Mr. J. P. Drieberg's 
estate at Jaela, on soil thrown up by the cutting of 
a boundary ditch, is pointed out as proof that sub- 
Boila aro not poor. But there are soils and Bubsoils, 
and everything under a certain given depth cannot 
be rightly callod subsoil. We speak of deep and 
shallow soils ill regard to soils that havo an admix- 
ture of vegetable matter to an appreciable depth or 
on tho surface merely. The particular soil in ques- 
tion has been formed by tho decay in successive periods 
of vegetation growing in what originally must have 
been a bog. The soil therefore must bo almost 
ontiroly composed of vegetable matter. It is perfetcly 
friable and is of the porosity of sponge. We know that 
011 such soils roots roam unrestricted and that such soil 
aro very absorbent. Because vegetation thrives on such 
Soils, we are not justified in saying that all subsoils 
an- rich and can be beneficially brought to the surface, 
Before we resort to deep ploughing wo must study 
tho composition of our soil. If we have a tenacious 
clay which is invariably sour, or sand which is always 
poor, for our subsoil, it will be wise not to bring either 
to the Burface, for the former " would render the 
surface soil unproductive till physical and chemical 
agencies had again restored it to a condition fit for the 
growth of crops," while tho objection to ploughing 
deep in sand is that "it will bring to the Surface a 
soil which is poorer than the surface soil." 
During tho recent discussion on the merits of plough--, 
I'roli ssor Wallace was quoted agaii st the use of iron 
ploughs M tending to bring to tho surface a good deal 
of soil that was deli terious. It was also stated on his 
authority that as paddy was a surface fcedor, two inches 
of soil wcro quite sufficient for the roots to feed on. 
Mo in not alone in this opinion. Professor Sanbourno 
ol tlir Missouri Agricultural College says that as com 
ill a SUrfMe feeder it is a mistake to plough deep 
and that a layer of undisturbed soil ought to exist 
between the ploughed soil on tho top and the dampioil 
nt the bottom. It is but too apparent he speak" ol dry 
cultivation, but bis objection" to dfltp ploughing are 
worthy of note. Tho field I work is sandy and in 
my last I mentioned that those portions which have 
not a stratum of mould on them, present a very 
sorry appearance. I lately in conversation mentioned 
to a gentleman that with the iron plough I never 
went below three or four inches, yet with iheso bad 
patches staring him iu the face, he was of opinion 
that I might with advantage plough deeper. I pointed 
out that that would bring the sand to the surfaco and 
that the whole field will bo like the bad patches. 
" Oh, but soil improves by being brought to the sur- 
face," was the reply. His evident belief was that 
this was almost instantaneous, while those practically 
engaged in cultivation know that it is a matter of 
time. The ideas some people hold on the benefits of 
deep ploughing arise from their confounding deep 
ploughing with deep cultivation, and their being 
under the imjiression that they are one and the same 
thing, which they are not. In European agriculture 
a plough is used to turn up the soil and prepare it 
to the necessary depth, and a subsoiler to stir or loosen 
the soil below it, without bringing it to the surface 
so as to increase the tilth. The subsoil being thus 
loosened allows of a free passage of air and water 
into it and it is gradually quickened into a " live 
soil." As time rolls on this is brought to the surface 
by deeper ploughing. This is a work of time. Agri- 
culture in Europe haviog assumed the jiosition of a 
science this can be carried on with precision, while 
with the rough and ready methods in vo«ue here, 
one incurs a certain responsibility iu recommending 
deep ploughin t . One advantage of the native plough 
is that you can work it deep without much fear, 
for from its construction it cannot bring to the 
surface the subsoil. Like a subsoiler it simply breaks 
up and loosens the soil. On a loamy or clayey soil 
you can with advantage work the native plough deep, 
not so on sandy soils where the aim of the cultiv- 
ator should be to superimpose loam on the sand. 
As bearing on this subject I may mention that I have 
iu my employ people from the village where an 
Agricultural Instructor is stationed. I asked a mau 
whether he had seen the field cultivated by the 
Instructor. " Yes," he said, " but it was a huge 
failure. The paddy is not coming up as well as that 
in our fields cultivated according to our methods." 
" How so ?" I naturally enquired. " It is a mistake to 
use the iron plough iu our sandy fields. It brings to 
tho surface all the sand, aud the field is permanently 
injured." So you see, sir, that the goyiya of whom 
we are too prone to speak sneeringly is not deserving 
of sneers. In conversation with villagers, I was struck 
with tho amount of the knowledge of agricultural 
chemistry possessed by them as a result of intelligent 
observation. What this goyiya told me may be true, 
or may be the result of prejudice. The crop results 
when published in time will show this ; but this 
much is plain that they know what they are about, aud 
their prejudices cannot be pushed aside with a con- 
temptuous wave of the hand.* 
The usual manure for paddy is bones, which pos- 
Be8ses a h'gh value as a crop producer. I havo 
lu ard it Stated that the elfect of fish manure is 
better. One feels inclinod to attribute this to the 
phosphorous (phosphates) fish admittedly contains, 
but, according to Hughes, fine bone dust contains 
three times as much phosphoric acid as the 
best fish manure he analyzed at tho request of the 
Planters' Association ; over three times as much of 
lime, and about the same quantity of alkaline salts; 
but about half the quantity of nitrogen. From this 
analysis it is but too apparent tbat bones are a 
bettor crop producer than fish, while the Utter will 
perhaps be found a less stimulating manure than 
bones for the cultivation of perennials, owing to it 
containing more organic matter and nitrogen than 
bones and owing to tho disparity between nitrogenous 
and phosphatic compounds not being as great as in bones. 
In other words, beOSUSe the bnance between leaf-form- 
ing anil fruit -forming constituents is proierlv main- 
• Sinco writing the above Mr. (ireen s letter firing 
the results of the use of the iron plough at Minuwau- 
goda proves that my informant was prejudiced. 
