THE TKOPICAIi 
AGRICULTURIST. [AUG. 1, 1902. 
GREVILLEAS (THEIR VALUE AS TIMBER) 
AND WHAT THEY ARE SUFFERING 
FROM. 
Maskeliya, June 16. 
{To the Editor, '* Tropical Agriculturist.") 
Sib,— I enclose copy of a letter I wrote to 
Mr. Carruthers about the Grevillea tree which 
may or may not be of use to you.— Yours 
faithfully, 
R. MACLURE. 
{Copy.) Maskeliya, June 9, 1902. 
Dear Mr. Carruthek,s,— I am sendicg one 
my young Grevillea trees with the symptoms 
(rustiness of the foliage) which are so common 
amongst them here. I shall be glad to know if 
this tree has any canker or fungus, or whether 
you think it is merely a case of uncongenial sur- 
roundings. I have isolated pronounced cases of 
cankeramong my oldertrees. Thereis no mistaking 
them. I suppose it is tetter, when they are very 
far gone, to uproot these trees to prevent tlie 
spread of the canker. You said you came to our 
meeting the other day to get information. I am 
afraid you did not get much, but I Ai^ill try and 
give you all the information, such as it is, I pos- 
sess about the tree. A good many men think it is 
not worth growing, or taking any steps to com- 
bat disease. On some places, in this district and 
elsewhere, the growth is certainly poor, but even 
in such cases I think a good deal can be done by 
cultivation. Here they have been a source of 
great profit to the estate. I have sawn up over 
30,000 feet of planking out of the oldertrees, and 
hope to saw at least 20,000 feet more in the next 
two years. The planking makes excellent wither- 
ing tats, and, if planed and polished, the wood 
makes beautiful furniture. I reckon a Grevillea 
tree at 15 years old is worth R3*40 in ordinary soil, 
less in poorer soil, and much more in richer soil, such 
as they have in some parts of Dimbula. I arrive 
at this valuation as follows :— 
Value of planking which a tree of 15 vears 
will give, 60 feet at E8 per 100 feet, 
advertised price E4'80 
Less cost of sawing at R4 per 100 feet 
outside rate E2'40 
E2-40 
Value of balance of tree as firewood, ^ cubic 
yard at E2 per cubic yard El-00 
E3-40 
There is then the v-alue of the Grevillea tree : 
1. For timber and' firewood. 
2. To improve the soil it takes from the sub- 
soil and adds to the surface soil by tiie deposit 
of leaves. 
3. This deposit not only adds to the soil but 
prevents wash and the growth of weeds. 
4. As a windbelt in exposed pl.aces. 
5. To diversify^he cultivation. We were told, 
when leaf disease attacked and ruined our cof- 
fee, that — in planting it up, as wc (li<l, in one un- 
broken sheet, with no trees or belts of timber 
interspersed, — we transgressed the laws of 
nature, and suffered in consequence. We were 
careful to avoid this mistake wlien planting Tea. 
My idea is that, although canker is certainly 
prevalent, and perhaps increasing, with the great 
majority of the trees with this " shuck " appear- 
ance, it is simply a case of the '| surviye(.l of the 
fittest." The tea, as it is getting older, is taking 
more from the soil at the expense of the Gre- 
villeas. In some places the latter are far too 
chick, a judicious thinning out of the weaker trees 
wouli improve matters. Where a Grevillea tree 
is being crowded out by the tea growing too 
close for its comfort, I would rmt hesitate to 
sacrifice the tea. A tea bush is worth at tlie out- 
side 4 cents. Then a little application of catile 
manure or artificial manure, or even silt from the 
drains, forked in, would help the tree«. 
I do not know whether all this will be of any 
value to you ; it does not bear much on disease, 
but my idea was more to try and demonstrate 
that Grevilleas are worth some care aud atten- 
tion and notto be despised. — Yours very truly, &c. 
R. MACLURE. 
"THE ALLEYN SYSTEM OF 
PLUCKING," 
July 1. 
Sib,— "Old Harry '"s letter does not call 
for an answer on my part, for your foot- 
note is already quite a sufficient refutation 
of his somewhat confused ideas. Yet at the 
same time I cannot refrain from protesting 
against his insinuation that a saving of 
thirty per cent in cost of plucking, as corn- 
pared with neighbouring estates, is explain- 
able by a casual reference to superior 
management or to over-manuring. 
The first statement is decidedly uncalled-for 
and is, I consider, in the worst possible taste. 
It reflects not only on the planters of this 
district, but also on the general planting 
community, and would imply that, unless 
a superintendent can pluck at the Merria 
Cotta rates, he is incnmpetout to manage an 
estate. For on a property of average size 
the difference in the majority of cases varies 
from R3,000 to R6,000 on the year's working ; 
and if by better management it is possible 
to show a saving such as this, the sooner 
a change in the superintendence is made 
the better for all concerned. 
It might surely have occurred even to " Old 
Harry" that such a theory as the above is 
much more difficult to credit than the simple 
and actual explanation, viz., that the system 
of plucking advertised is "per se " novel, 
and a great improvemeyit on existing methods. 
As regards the second statement, that the 
results obtained are due to over-manuring, 
it may be mentioned that a considerable 
proportion of Merria Cotta has not so far 
been treated. Further it is worthy of notice 
that some of the neighbouring estates in the 
district spend over 6^ cents per lb. of made 
tea in cultivation. Yet the cost of their 
plucking varies from 8^ to 9i cents or more. 
Our actual increased expenditure on artificial 
manure for the past two seasons averages 
under R13 per acre per annum, excluding 
cost of experimental work. 
That such experimental work will prove 
itself not only of benefit to our Company, 
but also of advantage to the tea industry in 
general, I have no hesitation in affirming. 
Later on, when certain arrangements are 
completed, your readers will have full oy>- 
portuiiity to judge of the truth of this 
statei^aeut. 
