April  i,  1897.]  THE  TROPICAL 
(2)  It  may  he  that  mannring  lias  caused  some 
little  deterioration  ; but  1 doubt  it,  as  manuring 
has  certainly  not  been  generally  overdone  and  it 
gives  a vigoious  husli,  and  a vigorous  hush  gives 
tea  with  quality. 
(8)  I am  certain  that  “severe  |)runing,” — hut 
I do  not  say  that  the  severe  pruning  may  not 
in  most  cases  he  necessary, — has  everything  to 
do  with  this  fall,  except  what  is  accounted  for 
by  your  7th  heading  and,  perhaps,  under  your 
6tli  heading,  by  competition  with  increased  prices 
in  plucking  in  India. 
(4)  I believe  that  as  much  care  is  used  in 
the  manufacture  as  formerly  with  more  knowledge 
and  better  machinery. 
I fear  there  is  nothing  to  he  done  hrre  except 
to  make  the  host  of  a still  very  passably  good  job. 
Tea  must  sooner  or  later  he  heavily  pruned 
and  afteiwvards  the  results  are  never  quite  so 
good  in  quality  as  previously.  11. 
No.  X. 
Dimhula,  l'’eh.  1.'), 
1.  Coaise  riucking  will  undoubtedly  lower  the 
quality  of  tea  ; hut  careful  plucking  is  now  the 
rule  and  the  hud  and  two  leaves  plucked. 
2.  Having  no  experience  in  manuring,  I cannot 
say  if  quality  is  affected  by  it  or  not. 
8.  Cutting  hushes  too  far  down  may  affect 
quality  for  a long  time  as  even  after  tiie  usual 
pruning  leaving  2 or  8 inches  of  young  wood 
above  last  pruning,  it  takes  six  months  before 
quality  and  strength  are  in  the  leaf. 
4.  I am  of  opinion  that  preparation  in  the 
Factory  is  more  careful  now  than  it  used  to  he, 
ow'ing  to  increased  withering  accommodation  and 
more  machinery.  Certainly  you  must  have  good 
leaf  to  work  upon,  and  the  best  leaf  may  easily  be 
spoiled  by  carelessness  or  want  of  withering 
space  and  machinery. 
5.  Shortness  of  labour  soon  tells  on  quality 
and  quantity.  Kegular  and  .systematic  plucking 
gives  the  best  tea,  and  if  from  want  of  labour 
your  8 to  10  day  round  takes  15  to  20  days,  the 
quality  of  leaf  soon  is  spoiled  and  the  quantity 
is  lessened. 
6.  Perhaps  a too  general  publication  of  the 
cost  of  production  of  tea  may  tend  to  keep 
down  prices.  JAY. 
No.  XT. 
High  District,  Feb.  15. 
Dear  Sir, — Formerly  the  hulk  of  our  tea 
came  from  old  coffee  estates  at  above  2,500 
feet;  but,  of  late,  a very  large  proportion  of 
low  country  tea  at  low'  pi  ices  has  reduced 
the  average.  Large  yields  of  coarse  leaf,  where 
quality  is  not  obtainable,  of  course,  gluts  the 
market  with  low'-priccd  trash.  Factory  supervi- 
sion is  of  more  importance  than  field  supervi- 
sion as  the  former  checks  the  latter  as  far  as 
lucking  is  concerned.  Where  shortness  of  la- 
our  means  borrowing  from  neighbours  and  Sunday 
plucking,  the  quality  is  hound  to  suffer. — Yours 
faithfully,  N.  C.  D. 
No.  XII. 
High  District. 
Factory  has  acconimodation  for  million  lb. 
1895  318,000  lb.  sold  tor  Is  Ogd 
1896  340,000  „ „ „ Is  l£d 
No  change  in  system  of  plucking. 
(1)  This  can  be  ascertained  by  a comparison  of 
grades. 
(2  & 3)  Does  not  affect  quality  as  far  as  I know. 
AGRICULTURIST,  703 
(4)  Preparation  in  the  Factory  is  MOST  im- 
portant and  I scarcely  know  of  a building  which 
has  always  sutlicient  withering  space  and  machinery. 
(5)  Overstocked  with  coolies. 
(0)  Starvation  wages  paid  to  Superintendents 
and  the  mistiikeu  idea  that  anyone  can  make  tea. 
B, 
o-  - — 
THE  J'LLCKING,  ITIUNING  AND 
PBEPABATION  OF  TEA: 
llEVIEW  OF  LETTERS  1 TO  XII. 
If  the  questions  contained  in  the  first  circular 
we  sent  out,  hearing  on  our  great  staple,  may 
he  s,aid  to  he  suggestive  of  the  dictum,  that 
good  tea  is  made  in  the  held,  the  second  .set 
of  (piestions  cinnilated  by  us  may  he  inter- 
jireted  to  favour  the  tlieory  llmt  the  factory 
is  responsible  for  the  (|iialiiy  of  the  tea  that 
liears  the  estate  mark.  We  nmst  di.sclaim 
either  theory  .as  uur  cioed,  as  also  all  inten- 
tion of  drawing  a shaip  line  between  cultiva- 
tion and  manufacture.  Indeed,  the  remark 
between  parentheses  in  our  second  circular,  be- 
tween questions  4 and  5,  would  indicate  our 
recognition  of  the  interdependence  of  field  and 
factory  work  ; while,  it  will  be  observed,  that 
more  than  one  question  in  the  second  circular 
has  reference  to  field  operations.  The  fact  is 
that  neither  Held  nor  factory  alone  can  pro- 
duce good  tea,  and  our  chief  concern  is  with 
the  tea  industry  as  a whole,  and  the  object 
of  our  inquiries  is  to  elicit  information  which 
will  be  helpful  to  planters  in  their  endeavours, 
while  securing  from  their  estates  the  highest 
possible  yield  without  injury  to  the  bu.sh,  to 
maintain  a high  level  of  excellence  for  the  tea 
they  ju'oduce — in  other  words,  to  obtain  the 
best  po.ssible  price.s.  'I’he  effect  of  the  mass  of 
interesting  m itter  which  the  iir.st  circular 
brought  to  a focus,  from  districts  varying  in 
every  possible  way— in  soil,  climate,  elevation 
and  fertility — is  to  establish  that  the  outturn 
of  the  acreage  already  planted  can  he  appreci- 
ably increased— say  to  the  extent  of  25  per  cent 
at  least— by  liberal  cultivation  and  manuring, 
and  without  any  injury  to  the  quality  of 
our  teas— always  assuming  there  is  labour 
enough  to  apply  the  maunre,  to  pick  the  in- 
creased crops  and  to  carry  on  the  manufacture. 
The  case  for  quantity  has  thus  been  made  clear. 
We  have  to  deal  now  in  the  letters  before  us 
principally  with  quality  and  price,  as  influenced 
by  a variety  of  considerations.  The  second  set 
of  questions  is,  if  anything,  more  searching  than 
the  first,  and  the  answers  to  them  are  even  more 
interesting  than  those  which  the  first  circular 
produceil. 
As  will  have  been  seen  from  the  letter  of 
“ Arboreal  ” the  need  for  the  second  circular  was 
recognised  even  before  it  was  issued,  as  prunino'  is 
rightly  considered  a very  important  factor  in'tea 
production,  influencing,  as  it  does,  both  quantity 
and  quality.  It  is  curious  that,  while,  at  the  outset 
of  the  Tea  enterprise.  Planters  Avere  half-afraid  to 
prune  tlieir  hushes  stud  erred  generally  on  the  side 
of  under  pruning  until  .Mr.  William  Cameron 
(?  Campliell)  about  15  years  ago  brought  his  ludirn 
experience  to  hear  on  the  numerous  estates  lie 
was  asked  to  supervise,  the  error  now  seems  to 
he  in  the  dircclioii  of  over-iiruuing — hacking 
almost  down  to  the  collar.  Ot  course  this  is  done 
--where  it  is  done— at  long  intervals  of  five  to 
six  j^ears ; hut  we  know,  as  a matter  of  fact. 
