HuppUmpnt  to  the  ‘ Trojiir.al  Agriculturist  ” 
[Fkb.  1,  1896, 
.i76 
KAINFALL  TAKKN  AT  TIIK  SCHOOL 
AGRICULTURE 
DURING 
THE  MONTH 
OF 
JANUARY, 
1896. 
1 
Wednesday 
•10 
19 
Sunday 
Nil 
2 
Thursday 
•18 
20 
Monday 
Nil 
3 
Friday 
•01 
21 
Tuesday 
Nil 
4 
Saturday 
Nil 
22 
Wednesday  . . 
Nil 
o 
Sunday 
Nil 
23 
Thursday 
Nil 
6 
Monday 
Nil 
24 
Friday 
Nil 
7 
Tuesday 
Nil 
25 
Saturday 
Nil 
8 
Wednesday 
•40 
26 
Sunday 
Nil 
9 
'I'll  ursday 
1-46 
27 
Alonday 
Nil 
10 
Friday 
Nil 
28 
Tuesday 
Nil 
11 
Saturday 
Nil 
29 
Wednesday  . . 
•01 
12 
Suiidav 
. Nil 
30 
'riuirsday  . . 
Nil 
13 
Monday 
. Nil* 
31 
Friday 
Nil 
14 
Tuesday 
. Nil 
1 
Saturday 
Nil 
15 
Wednesday 
. -08 
16 
Tuesday 
Nil 
Total . . 
208 
17 
Friday 
. '21 
— 
— 
18 
Saturday 
Nil 
Alean.  . 
■Oti 
tiiviitest  amount  of  rainfall  in  any  :14  hours  on 
the  9th  instant,  1‘4()  inches. 
Kecmde.l  hy  .1.  D.  S.  -Iavawikrama. 
ORANGES. 
The  fruit-growing  industry  which  has  been 
so  long  neglected  in  Ceylon  is  at  last  beginning  to 
be  thought  of  seriously,  and  a pioneer  in  systematic 
fruit-farming  has  already  appeared  in  Mr.  A.  J. 
Pearson.  Mr.  Pearson  is  not  a stranger  to  Ceylon, 
where  he  had  been  a resident  for  some  years  in  the 
planting  districts  before  leaving  for  .Australia. 
There  he  seems  to  have  gained  invaluable  e.x- 
perience  in  the  matter  of  fruit  cultivation,  and 
he  has  now  returned  with  a strong  determi- 
nation to  grow  oranges  and  lemons  successfully 
and  remuneratively  in  Ceylon.  Mr.  Pear.soii  will 
probably  choose  Uva  as  the  scene  of  his  opera- 
tions, and  intends  bringing  over  grafted  trees  from 
Australia  and  planting  at  the  rate  of  a hundred  to 
the  acre.  To  a contemporary’s  interviewer  he  is 
reported  to  have  said  : “ As  to  the  profits  to  be 
derived  from  orange-growing,  1 consider  that 
.CoO  net  profit  i>er  acre  is  a very  moderate 
estimate — in  fact,  under  the  mark.” 
Mr.  Pearson  speaks  of  introducing  three  varieties 
of  the  orange,  viz.,  the  4Vashington  Navel,  the 
Mediterranean  Sweet,  and  the  Ilomosas.sa  orange. 
The  three  varieties  mentioned  below  (two  of  which 
have  been  chosen  by  Mr.  Pearson  for  Ceylon) 
are,  we  believe,  the  most  higlily  thought  of  in 
(’alifornia : — 
“The  Washington  Navel  is  the  most  poi)ular 
and  undoubtedly  the  best  orange  grown  at  this 
time  in  California.  It  matures  at  a season  wlieji 
the  fruit  is  mo^t  acceptable.  Being  seedless,  it 
is  desirable  to  the  old  and  young.  At  its  l)est 
it  is  a haj)j)y  blending  of  sweetness  and  citrous 
qualities.  It  is  a strong  and  rajiid  grower  when 
young,  and  fruits  evenly  and  regularly.  It  ships 
"well,  liaving  good  protective  qualities.  It  can 
be  marketed  early,  and  is  well  advertised. 
“The  Paper  Rind  St.  Michael  is  a late  variety. 
It  outranks  the  Navel  in  thinness  of  rind,  in 
acidity  and  the  albuminoids;  ranhs  well  in  sweet- 
uess,  is  of  good  tlavour,  and  has  seeds  galore. 
The  tree,  like  the  Navel,  i-s  a strong,  rapid  grower, 
and  requires  about  the  same  treatment  in  culture 
OF  and  fertilization.  It  succeed.^  best  under  the  same 
climatic  conditioms  as  the  Navel.  Tlie  albuminoids 
are  more  largely  distributeil  in  the  llesli  of  the 
St.  Michael  than  in  other  varieties.  It  is  rich 
in  sweetne.ss  and  is  winning  its  way  to  popular 
favour  upon  its  intrinsic  merit. 
“The  Mediterranean  Sweet  is  an  orange  ne.arly 
seedless,  its  form  is  oval  and  grows  to  an  even 
size.  It  is  good  in  sugar  and  citrous  qualities. 
The  tree  is  less  vigorous  in  growth  than  either 
of  the  other  varieties,  both  in  root  and  leaf. 
The  position  of  the  leaves  and  short  internodial 
spaces  cluster  the  fruit  which  is  usually  evenly 
distributed  over  tlie  tree.  It  ripens  before  tlie 
St.  Michael  and  after  the  Washington  Navels." 
[Tliese  notes  are  taken  from  a paper  by  Air. 
M'.  C.  Fuller  of  Califonia.] 
We  most  heartily  wish  Air.  I’ear.^on  success  in 
his  new  enterprize. 
AN  IMPORTA.NT  DKCLSION  IN  AGRl- 
CULTCKAL  LAW. 
The  u.se  of  Land  “AIai.a  Fide." 
The  Hou.se  of  Lords  has  recently  decided  a case 
of  great  importance  in  regulating  the  riglits  of  a 
landowner.  Contrary  to  the  rule  of  Scotch  law,  it 
has  been  held  that  in  England  there  is  no  ground 
for  redress  in  law  against  a landowner  who  uses  his 
legal  rights  over  his  own  land  with  intent  to 
injure  a neighbour.  A landowner,  in  other  word.s, 
in  England  may  dig  pits  in  his  land  for  no  object 
e. vcept  to  intercept  the  Row  of  the  subterranean 
water,  and  so  to  drive  a neighbouring  proprietor 
of  water  works  to  purchase  his  land  from  him  at 
his  own  price.  The  facts  ot  the  case,  which  has 
now  been  finally  decided  by  the  House  of  Lords,  are 
these  : — I'he  Corporation  of  Bradford  as  owners 
of  waterworks,  are  entitled  to  take  water  from 
certain  springs.  The  defender,  who  is  an  owner 
of  adjacent  lands,  proceeded  to  make  a tunnel  for 
the  alleged  purpose  of  draining  beds  of  building 
stone  under  his  lands,  but  with  the  real  purpose 
(as  was  alleged  bj'  the  Corporation)  of  compelling 
the  Corporation  to  buy  his  land  ; for  the  effect 
of  these  tunnels  was  to  cut  off  the  undergiound 
stream  of  water  which  supplied  the  Corporation 
waterworks.  Air.  Justice  North  held  that  the 
charge  against  the  defendant  was  well  founded, 
and  tliat  his  operations  were  intended  for  the 
drainage  of  his  stone — not  in  order  that  he 
might  be  able  to  work  it,  but  in  order  that  the 
jRaintiffs  might  be  driven  to  pay  him  not  to  svork 
it.  That  being  so,  he  lield  that,  though  the  defen- 
dant’s act  was  lawful  in  itself,  it  was  illegal,  since 
done  with  the  malicious  intent  of  injuring  a 
neighbour.  .Accordingly,  Air.  .Fustice  .Northgranted 
an  injunction  against  the  defendant  from  proceed- 
ing further  with  his  tunnelling.  The  Court  of 
Api>eal  reversed  this  decision,  ami  refused 
f, o  prohibit  the  deleudant  from  exercising  his 
legnl  rights.  'I'hey  held  that,  since  what  the 
defeudaiit  proj)os(;d  to  do  did  not  exceed  his 
rights  of  the  law  of  England,  his  motives  were 
immaterial.  The  House  of  Lords,  in  an  elaborate 
judgment,  bave  upheld  tho  decision  of  the  Court 
of  Appeal.  They  held  that  the  landowner  had  a 
riglit  to  do  what  he  had  done  wdiaiever  his  object 
or  purpose  might  be,  and  although  the  purpu.se 
might  be  altogether  unconnected  with  his  enjoy- 
