7o8 
THE  TROPICAL  AGRICULTURIST. 
[April  i,  1897. 
pruning,  but  prunes  once  a year  ; ami  tliougli 
tlie  estate  is  old  and  tlie  soil  poor,  there  is  no 
falliug-oli'  in  the  teas,  while  the  jiiucking 
average  reinains  satist'aetory.  How  is  it  tlien 
prices  have  gone  down?  nvcr-productiou  is 
hinted  at  as  the  main  cause  ; l>ut  our 
correspondent  recognises  the  need  of  aiii[ile 
withering  space  ; and  Ids  one  trouble  has  been 
with  delay  in  withering.  That  only  a half-truth 
IS  e.xpressed,  in  the.  Icc'end  that  “good  tea  is 
made  in  the  held,”  is  very  forcibly  and  clearly 
pointed  out.  “X.  Kays"’  takes  a dilleient  view 
on  plucking,  and  holds  that  the  race  for  big 
yields  has  studieil  (juantity  at  the  e.vj)ense  of 
quality;  while  on  uianuiing  he  dilfers  yet  more 
Irom  Hantane,”  holding  it  responsible  to  the 
extent  of  Id  a lb.  in  the  fall,  as  inducing  a 
fibrous  leaf  and  one  which  yields  less  dry  tea. 
Xow  these  are  points  whicu  science  and  ex- 
perience combined  should  help  to  elucidate  ; for 
one  would  think  that  if  the  bush  is  used  u]) 
and  the  leaf  is  destitute  of  sap,  it  is  manure 
which  should  rtstore  vigour  to  the  bush  and 
juice  to  the  leaf — the  “ mucilage,’'  which  Mr. 
Crole  says,  gives  thickness  and  cream  which  Tea 
tasters  value  so  highly,  to  the  liquor.  “ Yearly 
pruning,  well  cut  down,”  is  the  prc.scription  for 
maintaining  both  (piality  and  (juantity  ; and 
he  combines  belief  in  greater  care  in  jn-eiiaration 
than  of  old  with  the  conviction  that  bad  tea 
is  made  in  the  field,  good  tea  in  the  bactory. 
His  reason  for  this  last  proirosilion  is  rather 
unsatisfying  ; for  he  admits  that  with  bad  leaf 
"ood  tea  is  imjiossible,  while  the  best  of  leaf  may 
be  spoilt  in  the  Factory.  True  ; but  when  good 
tea  is  made  out  of  “ the  best  of  leaf,”  why 
should  not  the  field  share  the  credit  for  it  ? 
'I'hough  the  better  jats  <rive  higher  yields,  a 
mixture  of  jats  is  desiderated  for  a better  (juality 
of  made  tea ; but  big  yields,  manuring  and 
coarse  jilucking  have  increased  exjmrts  at  the  cost 
of  price. 
“ Gustos  panperis  Iwrti”  cannot  j>lead  ])Overty  of 
ideas,  nor  can  his  “ wattie”  be  a paiticularly  poor 
place,  if  his  Hush  runs  ahead,  and  his  coarser 
ilucking  be  due  to  that  cause.  While  absolving 
'manuring  of  all  blame,  he  is  strongly  of  ojunion 
that  unscientific,  savage  pruning  is  responsible 
for  the  d terioration  of  tea.  J here  can  be  no 
question  that  the  jn-uning  of  collee  is  not  com- 
jiarable  for  severity  with  tcaja'iining  ; while  the 
inanncr  of  harvesting  croj)— divesting  a bush  of 
its  tender  leaves  as  lln^y  ajipear— must  be  injurious 
to  its  vigour  and  even  its  very  life,  were  it  not  that 
tea  is  one  of  the  hardiest  of  shrubs.  To  carry 
methods  which  are  inevitably  harsh  and  urn 
natural  to  their  extremes,  and  over-pluck  and  over- 
prune, must,  therefore,  be  suicidal  ; and  our  corres- 
pondent expresses  his  condemnation  of  these 
excesses  in  terms  which  will,  we  tiust,  leave  a 
deep  imjiression.  He  notes  the  same  I'Cndency, 
to  overdoing  in  the  Factory,  where  heavier 
rollim'  (oftener  and  more  prolonged)  heats  the 
leaf,  induces ea:  ly  fermentation,  and  allects  quality. 
■“Work  must  be  good  all  round— in  jirmiing,  in 
jilucking,  in  the  Factory — to  make  tea.”  That  is 
a truth"worth  remembering  by  th.ose  who  think 
that  tlie  manager’s  absence  Irom  his  charge  at 
frequent  intervals,  cannot  tell  ; and  these  jno- 
cesses  arc,  of  course,  allected  by  short  laliour, 
which  is  held  to  account  for  the  loss  of  Id  in 
the  lb.  “W.  1.  H.”  desires  coarser  plucidng 
thinks  manuring  good  land  merely  to  increase 
the  yield  a mistake,  notes  less  .severity  in  pruning 
HOW',  and  greater  care  in  manufacture— though 
lack'  of  witlmring  sjiacc  is  a hindrance,  as  also 
insnfiicient  rolling  power.  These  last,  and  short 
labour  (leading  to  coarse  .and  careless  plucking, 
coujded  with  the  ab.sence  of  a wintering  season) 
explain  the  deterioration.  “Incog,”  from  a 
medium  elevation  district,  denies  coarser  pluck- 
ing ; and  herein  he  differs  from  J.  A.  O.  of 
Udapu.ssellawa,  wdio  holds  that  manuring,  by 
hastening  flush,  is  responsible  for  coarse  leaf,  as 
also  from  G.  H.  G.  from  the  Uvaside,  and  T.  from 
Matale  West — all  of  wdioni  admit  coarse  pluck- 
ing and  explain  it  by  the  larger  profits  it  yields. 
Incog,  finds  that  manuring  one-third  of  the 
estate  each  year  does  not  affect  the  quality  of 
the  yield  as  a whole  ; while  the  heavy  pruning, 
which  is  occasionally  necessary,  does.  The  grow- 
ing quantity  turned  out  of  the  Factory  renders 
clo.se  supervision  diflicult,  if  not  impossible, 
and  with  a scanty  labour  supply  which  delays 
plucking,  quality  suffers.  J.  A.  0.  generally 
agrees  with  these  views,  and  holds  short  labour 
and  crowded  Factories  specially  responsible  for 
mischief.  G.  H.  G.’s  dictum  that  artificial 
manures  destroy  flavour  will  find  smaller  support 
than  his  suggestion  that  inquiry  should  be 
instituted  as  to  what  manures  affect  flavour,  and 
how'.  It  is  probable  that  too  forcing  a manure 
makes  the  tea  weak,  while  the  other  reflections 
on  excessive  jnuning,  the  need  of  all  round 
attention,  short  labour,  .and  greedy  plucking, 
merit  attention.  T’.s.  demonstration  of  the  greater 
remunerativene.ss  of  co.arse  plucking  will  be 
generally  accejHed,  and  the  conclusion  is  obvious, 
that  over-jiroduction  must  generally  follow  the 
methods  which  rather  tell  on  quality.  The  fall 
is  then  only  natural  ! 
(Letters  Continued. 
No.  XXL 
Madulkelle,  Feb.  16. 
Hkar  Sir,— 111  reply  to  your  circular  of  12tli 
inst.,  I beg  fo  state  that 
1.  Better  leaf  is  now  plucked  in  Ceylon  than 
ever  before,  in  fact  as  far  as  I can  see,  every  year 
sees  more  careful  plucking  the  rule. 
2.  Manuring,  I .am  inclined  to  think,  has  cer- 
tainly a slight  prejudicial  effect  on  quality,  but  not 
nearly  so  much  as  some  jieople  aver.  The  reason  for 
poorer  (juality  and  prices  will,  I think,  be  found  in 
fl.  'J  he  severe  pruning  now  more  or  less  pre- 
valent  in  the  tea  districts.  The  call  for  quan- 
tity from  agents  and  owners  as  well  as  the  en- 
deavour to  put  our  teas  f.  o.  b.  for  the  lowest 
ligure  jiossible,  and  which  can  only  be  achieved 
by  securing  (juantity,  is  forcing  Superintendents 
much  against  their  will  sometimes,  to  prune 
oftener  and  severer  than  they  otherwise  might. 
4.  Good  tea  is  made  in  the  held.  Your  paren- 
thetical remark  goes  without  saying. 
."i.  Not  as  yet  has  shortness  of  labour  done 
any  harm.  Fora  month  or  so  I may  be  forced  to 
jiluck  a little  coarser,  but  that  should  onij  affect 
the  jirices  of  a break  or  so. 
6.  I would  place  the  re.asons  for  reduced  prices 
in  order  of  merit  so  : — 
fl.  Manuring — jiossibly. 
2.  Heavy  and  frequent  ju lining — probably. 
1 . Over-jiroduction — undoubtedly. 
NORTH  OF  KANDY. 
No.  XX  n. 
1.  “Coarser  iflueking’  has  nothing  to  do  with 
it.  It  is  the  endeavour  of  every  Superintendent, 
who  takes  an  interest  in  his  work,  to  harvest 
fair  leaf  all  the  year  round  ; but  the  style  of 
plucking  is  ruled  liy  the  weather  and  state  of 
