462 
[December i, i8go. 
THE tropical agriculturist. 
quantity of the volatile oil as the chief factors in 
producing a difference in the flavour and bouquet. 
It is in reference to these two constituents I 
submit that more extended information is still 
required, and with these few remarks I commend 
the lecture to the careful perusal of the readers of 
the Tropical Ayriculturist . — Yours faithfully, 
JOHN HUGHES. 
PADDY (RICE) CULTIVATION IN CEYLON 
MR. ELLIOTT IN REPLY. 
Batticaloa, Nov. 18th. 
Deab Sib, — I have read “A.” ’s letter on paddy 
cultivation with pleasure ; he is evidently a worker 
in the same field as I am and a professor of the 
same belief as 1 hold, viz., that “ paddy does pay ” 
and no mistake. He has most opportunely pub- 
lished a very able resume of what may be called 
the circumstantial evidence on the subject. The 
facts he sets out seem to my mind to be consistent 
with the conclusion he draws and inconsistent with 
any other rational conclusion. He thus fulfils the 
requirements legally required of such evidence, but 
forgets “ there are people who are not ready to 
lend an academic faith to a narration of facts 
which do not strictly accord with preconceived 
opinions, mistaken for knowledge. In all ranks 
and conditions of life, persona of this stamp 
abound and the errors to which their habits of 
distrust expose them are at times ridiculous.” 
So says an eminent authority, and it is because I 
have found the circumstantial evidence not generally 
accepted that I have endeavoured to go a step further 
and see what direct evidence on the point could 
be brought forward. But “A.” (and others) have mis- 
understood the scope of my subsequent action and 
the object I have in view in securing the publica- 
tion of the results of the experimental cultivation 
I have had opportunities of undertaking. I there- 
fore address you in my own name to set myself 
right with the public and, I trust, show that my 
experiences have a more important bearing on the 
subject than is recognized by your correspondent. 
For years the dictum of Sir Charles Layard 
had been accepted as almost settling the question 
that paddy did not pay, and this view was sup- 
ported by the particulars of the cost of production 
published in a book by the late Mr. Leopold 
Ludovici and adopted (if my memory serves me 
right) by “Speculum” who nowin another sphere 
emphasizes the erroneous views he early adopted on 
an imperfect investigation of the matter, Over 
twenty years ago, I had reason to arrive at a very 
opposite conclusion, and as my enquiries showed the 
data heretofore made public were defective and mis- 
leading I ventured to work up the information I had 
gradually gathered into the paper I read before the 
Ceylon Branch of the Asiatic Society in 1885. I 
have every reason for believing that my paper was the 
first intimation a large number of the community 
had received that there was something to be said 
on the other side and that Paddy Cultivation was 
not the miserable speculation it had been so long 
represented. 
The results then published were founded on en- 
quiries made from native sources and based on 
eetiimleis of working expenses, Since that I have 
had opportunities of actually cultivating paddy and 
have published the results of my experience. I do 
not say that these are on all fours with native 
modes of cultivation : on the contrary I have always 
admitted that ccterfs paribiw the “ dry ploughing” 
system introduced by Mr. Green gives a larger crop 
than the best ordinary native mode of working, and 
of course the primary object of the experiments 
has been to “ show the way” to our native cultiva- 
tors. Here and there we have succeeded in influen- 
cing a few, and by hammering away we may induce 
more imitation in time ; at present the excuse is 
“ Oh I we cannot afford to work so expensively as 
you do,” and when we point to the larger return 
as compensating for the additional outlay, the reply 
still is “ Oh I it will not pay us.” 
The first fact, therefore, established by my ex- 
periments is that I am working far more expensively 
than does any native in the country including all 
the so-called extortionate rates of interest (which 
are not so heavy as they appear on paper I may 
add). The next point I have established is that 
working on a ready money basis and paying for all 
services, an outlay of R16 to R17 is the outside 
limit of the actual expenses of cultivation of an 
acre of land. 
With these two points established, we are able 
to absolutely deny the correctness of the es- 
timates of the expenses in excess of these figures 
we sea put forward continually; such, for instance, as 
that given by Mr. Panabokka to the Grain Com- 
mittee when the cost of cultivating two acres 
of land at Ratnapura is given at R10796. 
Another point on which our experiments throw 
light is that it is possible with the expenditure 
stated to secure in irrigated land a profit over 
working expenses of about R20 an acre, to cover 
interest on the capital outlay, superior supervision 
and other expenses attendant on extended cultiva- 
tion. There is no room to doubt that it is quite 
possible to cultivate the same land twice a year 
if the water supply is assured. 
Such are the facts which I think the experien'ee 
I have gained actually establishes; and they are I 
think useful factors in the discussion of the ques- 
tion whether paddy pays. I am also not without 
hopes that the information I have given may not be 
without its influence in encouraging capitalists to 
seriously undertake the extended cultivation of paddy 
on a money payment basis. I regret I cannot for 
their sake add from personal experience the cost of 
converting jungle land into paddy fields, but I may 
state that my enquiries go to show that a capital 
outlay of E40 would be sufficient including the pur- 
chase from Government at ordinary upset price. 
1 could write much more as to my views on Paddy 
Cultivation, but this lies outside the intention of this 
letter, and so I shall add no more at present, — 
Yours faithfully, E. ELLIOTT. 
IS FOREING OR DIGGING ABOUT TEA 
ADVISABLE ? 
THE HESULT3 OF PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE ASKED FOR, 
Central Province, Nov. 25th. 
Sir, — As perhaps you are aware, there is very 
great diversity of opinion on the benefit or other- 
wise of forking or digging tea. It could not but 
prove very valuable information, if some of the 
many planters who have forked fields of tea 
would communicate the results. 
My own experience has proved (1) that it is a 
sure way of checking flush for a good three months, 
if resorted to when the tea is six to eight months 
from pruning (e y. in full flush) ; (2) that there 
has been no marked improvement at any sub- 
sequent period. 
Theoretically, forking is a permanent improve- 
ment to the soil ; but from my own experience of 
the result, I shall not again have recourse to it 
except in every other line, say three weeks before 
pruning (given favourable weather). 
