AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST. 
he lowest place. Care should be taken to have 
the top of the well-drain below the reach of the 
plow; and to keep the cavities between the stones 
well secured from becoming choked up. Where 
there is a large quantity of water, it is better to 
build the stones up in the form of a well or vault 
leaving an opening in the center, and cover over 
the surface with a flat stone. We had just such 
a case as this in our experience, in the western 
part ofthis State. A few rods from our dwelling, 
was situated a valley, which received the water 
from a large space around. In the center of this 
hollow we dug down a large opening, some six 
by ten feet, till we reached a very open soil below, 
perhaps eight feet from the surface. Still below this 
we found a large seam in the limestone rock, 
forming a natural water passage to—we know not 
where. The opening was then walled up leaving 
a cistern-like vault in the center, which was cov¬ 
ered over with plank, stone and soil. This served 
not only to speedily discharge the water collect¬ 
ing in tfie hollow, but we afterwards conducted 
into it the drains from our cellar, pump and cis¬ 
tern ; and for sixteen years it has continued to 
effectually carry away all water, from whatever 
source. Generally these well-drains may be 
made very small and at a trifling expense, and 
often a whole field may be drained by sinking these 
wells in the center of local wet spots. An exami¬ 
nation of the under soil, or the trial of an open 
well, is generally the only means of ascertaining 
where such drains will be effected. It is but lit¬ 
tle work to sink down an open hole a few feet 
deep in a wet spot, and allow it to remain open 
awhile to ascertain whether it will hold water or 
discharge it downward. 
Wood Drains.— There are so many methods 
of constructing wood drains,.that it would far ex¬ 
ceed our limits to enumerate and describe them; 
and furthermore no method of filling with wood, 
drains which should be permanent, can be re¬ 
commended except in rare cases. The decay of 
wood in most moist situations is rapid, and this 
decay itself furnishes the materials for filling up 
and spoiling such drains. One plan is to fill the 
ditch with willows, pine branches, or other 
kinds of brush, and then cover them over with 
earth. Another method is to construct a kmd of 
tubes, by nailing together plank pierced at short 
intervals with small augur holes. These are so 
much more expensive than tile drains, which 
answer a better purpose, that we will not stop 
to describe them. 
Another plan, which has in one instance at 
least been for the time successful, is to dig the 
ditch two or three feet deep into a solid clay, 
making the bottom 12 or 14 inches wide Logs 
eight or ten inches in diameter are split into 
halves, and one of these halves is laid lengthwise 
upon each side of the bottom, the round side 
being placed downwards ; the joinings of these 
should break joints opposite to each other Short 
boards 13 or 14 inches long are then placed 
across these and covered with turf, leaves, shav¬ 
ings, or straw, and the ditch is then filled up with 
the original soil. In very moist soils such a 
drain would be improved by first putting in a lay¬ 
er of cross boards at the bottom, then upon these 
the split logs or string pieces and over these the 
boards. Instead of boards, thick rived staves or 
shingles might be used to advantage. With a 
cross-cut saw, logs can be cut up into blocks of 
the required length, and these are easily split into 
thicker or thinner pieces for the bottom and top 
of the ditches. We think this the simplest and 
cheapest kind of wood-drains when safety and 
comparative durability are taken into account; 
and in situations where tile or stone can not be 
procured, and where durable timber is abundant, 
this plan may be adopted with advantage. 
Stone Drains. —In a very large majority of 
cases where draining is to be done, tile or stone 
drains will be found far preferable to any of the 
methods yet described. We are quite sure that 
tile drains, of all others, are the cheapest in most 
cases, and that they will generally be adopted ; 
yet we think this may sometimes be done too 
hastily, and without a due estimation of some of 
the peculiar advantages of stone drains,—for 
though tile drains are usually more easily and 
cheaply constructed, where tiles can readily be 
procured, yet in other situations stone drains are 
sometimes more available, and they have in 
many cases stood the trials of centuries ; and if 
rightly constructed, we think they give more cer¬ 
tain promise of permanent effectiveness. 
There are various methods of filling drains 
with stones, one of which is shown in the next 
illustration, fig. 15 
fig. 15. 
that nas been thrown out in digging. 
The drain is made 
with the proper width, 
depth, and inclination, 
and filled partly up 
i w i t h small stones. 
These are covered 
' over with straw, turf, 
coarse bog-hay, shav¬ 
ings, leaves, moss, or 
some similar material, 
Z/ to prevent the dirt 
from falling among 
them, and the remain¬ 
der of the drain is then 
filled up with the earth 
Where stones abound, we have seen these 
drains made two to three feet wide at the bottom. 
We have in mind one case where the soil was so 
stony that it was entirely dug over, and a contin¬ 
uous bed of stones a foot thick was laid over the 
whole field two feet from the surface. The own¬ 
er of the land informed us that the profit a ■' the 
first two crops paid the whole expense of digging 
the soil to the depth of three feet, while previously 
nothing had grown upon the field, owing to its 
springy and stony character. 
A second method is illustrated by fig. 16. 
The drain is cut 
wedge-shaped at 
the bottom, and 
two flat stones are 
put in upon the 
sides, meeting in 
an angle at the 
lowest point, and 
spread apart from 
each other at the 
upper edges. Upon 
the top of these a 
flat stone is laid- 
This must be wide fig. 16. 
enough to extend across the drain so as to be 
kept in place by the sides. When these three flat 
stones are thus laid, they will form an open drain 
between them, a section of which may be seen at 
a, fig. 16. Above this, the drain is partly filled 
with small stones, covered over with gravel or 
some vegetable substance c, and the space d, above 
filled with earth. 
A third method is shown in fig. 17. This dif¬ 
fers from the second method in the manner of ar¬ 
ranging the three stones forming the three-sided 
opening, a. The drain is left square at the bot¬ 
tom, a flat stone is laid in, and the two other 
stones are set upon this at the sides of t-he drain, 
and then leaned against each other at the top, or 
one of the stones is wider and lies over the upper 
edge of the other. In either case there is left the 
opening a, fig. 17, and above them is placed the 
layer of small stones as before described. 
Which of the two 
methods is to be pre¬ 
ferred, that of fig. 16, 
or that of fig. 17, de' 
pends much upon the 
character of the soil at 
the bottom of the 
drain. In a compact, 
hard soil, we should 
prefer the first ar¬ 
rangement, fig. 16, for 
two especial reasons: 
1st, in fig. 17 there is 
always danger of the 
fig. 17. displacement and fall¬ 
ing-in of the side stones. Great care is needed in 
putting in the upper layer of small stones, and af¬ 
ter the completion of the drain, there is still dan¬ 
ger of some such displacement in a long drain. 
2d, in fig. 16, when there is but a small quantity 
of water, it will be compressed within the nar¬ 
rower channel in the lower part, and on this ac¬ 
count there will be a strong current to wash out 
any sand or clay that may have found its way 
int6 (he drain ; while in fig. 17, a small quantity 
of water will be so much spread over the bottom 
as to diminish its current, and hence the greater 
liability of clogging up. 
But in a less compact soil, fig. 17 would be 
preferable, since the flat stone at the bottom 
gives a good foundation for the rest of the filling 
up, and this would be safer than the arrangement 
in fig. 16, where the side-stones rest simply upon 
the soil, and may be pressed out of place. 
As before hinted, the character of the soil, the 
quantity of water to be conveyed away, and es¬ 
pecially the kind and quantity of stones that can 
be most cheaply obtained, must decide which of 
these several kinds of stone drains is best adapted 
to a particular farm or locality. Where small 
s-ones only can be obtained, the first method 
must necessarily be adopted. Where a small 
quantity only of suitable flat stones, with an 
abundance of small ones, can be obtained, then 
the third or fourth method would be the best. 
Depth of Stone Drains.— The general depth 
of drains, dependent upon the character of the 
soil drained, will be discussed in our general re¬ 
marks upon this subject. Stone drains, especial¬ 
ly, need to be made deep, from the depth of filling 
they require. They, like all covered drains, 
should be placed entirely below reach of the 
plow. The common depth of plowing, now prac¬ 
ticed, should not be taken as any guide here ; for 
in many fields, and indeed on most farms, the 
the plow has seldom penetrated below six inches 
from the surface. But a better system is coming 
into practice. We are quite sure the time is not 
far distant when most land will be generally bro¬ 
ken up with the surface plow at least twelve 
inches deep, and then six or eight inches deeper 
with the subsoil plow. After lands have been freed 
from water for a year or two, by draining, we 
have every reason to believe, that the deeper 
they can be stirred and pulverized, the greater 
will be the produce. The top of the stone filling 
should then be at least 18 or 20 inches below the 
surface. Seven inches more should be allowed 
for the duct in the bottom of the third or fourth 
methods, (figs. 16 and 17.) The depth of stone 
above the duct will depend upon the charac¬ 
ter of the soil, the abundance of materials for fill 
ittg, and the distance of the drains from each oth- 
