t 
98 
COMPARATIVE ECONOMY OF 
DIFFERENT METHODS OF HARVESTING 
CORN CROPS. 
The general conclusion that economy has been effected by 
each improvement in harvest appliances requires no detailed 
proof. It is demonstrated by the general adoption of machinery 
in place of hand labour, and by the successive abandonment 
of the sickle for the scythe ; the scythe for the back delivery 
reaper ; the back delivery for the side delivery ; the continuous 
swathe for the sheaf deliverer ; and, lastly, the reaper for the 
binder. When I was requested by the Editor to write a short 
article on the comparative cost of harvesting by means of 
sickles and scythes, reaping machines and self-binders, I felt 
that mere estimates of comparative cost must in some degree be 
abortive, owing to the great range of circumstances involved. 
There is, in the first place, the difficulty of fixing the money 
value of horse labour, for to many farmers the employment 
of horses for cutting grass and corn is in .itself a serious 
objection. It was, for example, thought good management 
forty years ago to plough up clover land for wheat during 
harvest, and much stress was laid upon the advantage of a long 
interval between ploughing the land and drilling. Again, there 
is always a great deal of work on large farms in connection 
with horse-hoeing and putting in late roots, as well as in 
completing summer fallows, which require horse labour ; and 
some of these operations are more than likely to be partially 
neglected if the horses are cutting grass and corn. Whatever 
disadvantage there may be in postponing the above descrip- 
tions of work must, in some measure at least, be charged against 
any system of harvesting which monopolizes the horses. The 
absorption of horse labour is considerable on farms where, in 
order to keep pace with the maturing of grass and corn crops, 
two mowing machines and two binders, or more, are required. 
To cut 150 acres of grass and 300 acres of corn must 
mean, even under favourable circumstances, forty working 
days, or close upon seven weeks, including Sundays, for either 
four or six horses. It is in some cases possible to work a team 
of two or three horses a full day upon a self-binder, but when 
the work is carried on ceaselessly during the whole day, and 
the men in attendance relieve each other at the dinner hour 
and other stopping times, the horses must be changed. It is 
unreasonable to expect a team to work at the requisite speed 
from six in the morning till seven at night, even with intervals 
of rest ; but when the rule is to keep the machines going with 
