JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
552 
[ December 15, 1881. 
ment. One of the chief reasons for our taking up the subject is, 
if possible, to show the home farmer the benefit of such inventions 
as may be occasionally offered to his notice. Having not pre¬ 
viously given our attention to the use of waggons and carts for 
general farm work in these columns we now propose dealing with 
it. It has frequently in times past been discussed by farmers 
under the heading of “Carts versus Waggons,” and the discussion 
amongst farmers and implement makers has contributed in a 
wonderful degree to the practical application of the various 
points, for it has removed many old prejudices and preconceived 
opinions. Reform is required in certain farm implements, ren¬ 
dered imperative by the use of steam power in so many of our 
farm operations, and it is necessary to consider how far the 
various suggestions connected with labour-saving machinery has 
tended towards changes never previously contemplated as regards 
economy. 
Steam power connected with agricultural operations has made 
such rapid strides, and has enabled the farmers to do so much, 
that the necessity has arisen to consider the best mode of gather¬ 
ing the crops—whether carts or waggons are the best for this 
purpose, which is the least expensive and the quickest way of 
gathering and stacking the various crops. Expedition is cer¬ 
tainly a leading point, especially when in a harvest like 1881 and 
some previous years, in which but short periods of fine weather only 
occurred, and are circumstances which will not be soon forgotten. 
In consequence, any reform which can under the head of economy 
be introduced will be sure to command the attention of the home 
farmer, and in order to effect the necessary changes in the con¬ 
structions of our carts and waggons we must enlist the attention 
and co-operation of the implement makers. We shall first address 
ourselves to the policy of employing carts or waggons under 
particular circumstances, and defer our suggestions of the alter¬ 
ations required for a short time. 
The advocates of the use of carts in preference to waggons are 
yearly increasing, and numbers can be found who employ only 
carts upon their farms, and we are therefore bound to listen with 
attention to their reasons for this practice. In fact, their argu¬ 
ments in favour of two-wheeled carriages for farm work are all 
based upon one word—economy, both as regards the first outlay 
as well as the saving in manual and horse labour. The kind of 
cart we recommend will be stated further on ; but it has been 
found upon a farm of between 400 and 500 acres that six carts 
with frames complete and strongly made, in consequence of being 
convertible from light to heavy framework, have been sufficient 
to do the whole work. This contrasts favourably with the use of 
waggons, not only in the first cost but also in the question of 
repairs. It is found in practice when waggons are used that 
manure carts are required also for laying out and distributing 
either yard dung, chalk, clay, and other heavy materials. The 
saving of manual and horse labour is the next poin*‘, and both 
experienced and practical men make the assertion that more 
work can be done with the same amount of manual labour with 
carts than with waggons, and give an instance in their proceed¬ 
ings, stating when it is desired to carry a field of corn it would, 
supposing the corn to be stacked in the field, require three 
waggons and five horses to work a double fork, and the two 
pitchers would work together. On the other hand, if five carts 
and five horses were used the pitchers would be separate, and 
boys would lead the horses. It is an accepted fact amongst 
practical farmers that two men pitching separately will do more 
work than two working together, so that the same horses and men 
will certainly carry more corn with carts than with waggons. 
There is an article on “ The Advantages of One-horse Carts ” in 
the sixth volume of the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society 
of England, which states—“When working on the double-hand 
system the waggon must be set, as well as may be, to accommo¬ 
date both pitchers, and if the man on one side has the wind or 
the higher ground in his favour the man on the other side must 
have a corresponding disadvantage ; but the single man pitching 
up to a cart may turn it about as may be most convenient to him¬ 
self, taking the benefit of the wind or the higher ground as he 
pleases.” Many people object to the use of carts on the ground 
of their being more unsafe upon hilly land, and the great likelihood 
of getting the horses hung up. On the other hand, the evidence 
of numbers of practical men states that they have met with no 
accidents of this nature, although no farms could be much more 
hilly, with some of the most inconvenient gateways, than those 
whereon the carts were in constant use. With regard to the 
saving in horse labour, which we consider a great item, for a 
horse in a cart carries part of his load. This, by the amount of 
steadiness it gives, enables him to draw the remainder of his 
load with the greater ease. On the other hand, picture two 
horses between the shafts and two at length drawing a waggon ; 
which, we ask, would appear to the greater advantage ? We are 
quite aware that the opinions upon this subject will meet with 
many objectors, for we suppose that at the present time, even 
after the numerous improvements which have been made in both 
carts and waggons lately, that a large number of farmers would 
prefer the waggon. This circumstance shows the necessity of our 
giving the information we possess to the home farmer without 
favour or prejudice. Still, it is not presumed for a moment that 
anyone having a number of waggons can be expected to burn 
them or sell them at a very low price ; but it seems important for 
a young farmer on entering a farm to consider whether it is not 
of advantage to lay out his money on carts which would accom¬ 
plish all the purposes of farm work, instead of on carts and 
waggons as well. 
The question is not so much between carts and waggons as 
whether carts alone could be used instead of both waggons and 
carts. One great advantage of carts is that they require a less 
outlay at first; then, from being low, they could be loaded with 
much greater facility ; next, a single horse could no doubt draw 
a load better with some portion of the load on his back, and with 
less labour on two wheels than on four, on four wheels there being 
of course greater friction at the axletrees and a greater draught 
for the horses to overcome. Some years ago some farmers were in 
favour of Ciosskill’s carts, but after a trial of some time they 
found that the advantages were in favour of two-horse waggons, 
which demanded less care in loading ; for farm labourers are not 
so careful as they formerly were, in consequence of which it is 
not unfrequently the case that in the middle of haymaking a load 
has fallen oil the carts, an inconvenience which in a busy time is 
very considerable. It might very properly be urged, perhaps, 
that this was not the best description of cart—that is, with a small 
and narrow bed and extending forward and backward above it, 
which causes the load to press too much on the horse’s back in 
coming down hill, and in going up hill to become tail-heavy. 
Various inconveniences named would be obviated by the use of 
what are called the Scotch carts or frames, which have a long low 
bed and nearly, or may be made quite, as extensive as that of a 
waggon both as to length and breadth. These have been in use 
for many years, and numerous good practical farmers assert tl at 
they would not use waggons again on any consideration. It is, 
however, pointed out by the advocates of the previously Darned 
carts with frames that there is a disadvantage in the use of the 
Scotch framed cart—that it was necessary to have small dung 
carts in addition, and by their use farmers did not save so much 
as by making one cart answer both purposes. 
The question still remains, Which on ordinary farms is the best 
to be adopted ? Before this can be answered we must refer to a 
cart which has been exhibited, having a long and low bed and an 
apparatus for shifting the weight of a load backwards and for¬ 
wards, thus easing the weight on the horse’s back in going down 
hill, or the contrary in going up an incline. This contrivance is 
good for the purpose and also very simple, for by screwing the 
cart backwards or forwards in a horizontal direction the object is 
easily obtained of regulating the draught when in the haying or 
haivest time, or when loaded with sacks of corn and travelling on 
the high roads. We have also seen a very neat and cheap cart 
exhibited, the only disadvantage of which, if it can be so called, 
is the exceedingly low wheels and the consequent additional 
draught and labour necessary. It is, however, a choice of two 
evils. With low wheels there is additional strength to the vehicle. 
It was, however, constructed at much less cost, and a moderate¬ 
sized horse could draw a ton weight, and the further advantage 
of low wheels is to allow dur.g or farm produce to be thrown over 
the side with greater facility. 
(To be continued.) 
