Vol. LVII. No. 2533. 
NEW YORK, AUGUST 13, 1898. 
*1 PER YEAR. 
ARE CORN HARVESTERS SUCCESSFUL ? 
HOW MUCH DO THEY HAVE ? 
Will They Work Where Corn Is Husked? 
Have the various corn-harvesting- machines proved really valu¬ 
able? They, evidently, do good work with ensilage corn, but are 
not the bundles too tight for grain that is to be husked out? 
Some Observations from Iowa. 
As to whether corn harvesters are really labor-saving 
devices, depends entirely upon the condition of the 
corn crop and the ability of an operator to handle the 
machine successfully. I have seen corn that would 
yield from RO to 70 bushels per acre, cut and bound by 
the machine, and shocked by three men at the rate of 
about eight acres per day. It is heavy work shocking 
the corn, and it requires care and good judgment on 
the part of the operator to handle the machine that it 
shock is concerned, I have never found much differ¬ 
ence. The binding, on account of the ears, must 
necessarily be loose at best, and the binding is no 
obstacle whatever to the drying of the corn fodder in 
the shock. JOHN cownie. 
Success Reported From Indiana. 
The most common complaint of corn harvesters is 
that they knock off too many ears. This is worse if 
the corn leans partly toward the team when the horses 
break off many. My brother was greatly annoyed the 
first year he used one ; there were 20 wagon-loads of 
snapped corn to pick up on 20 acres. It was too green 
to pile up, but if kept from heating, was good for hogs, 
and there was no loss except the extra trouble. The 
next year, his corn stood up well and his machine did 
fine work. It is remarkable how well these harvesters 
acres. He is out $2 for wages, S3 for twine, and misses 
the rain which usually comes on about the third day 
after frost. Eight acres cut by hand would cost ftlO, 
and would not be tied in bundles. Of course, strictly 
speaking, one should count team, machine and driver, 
but it works decidedly to his advantage. 3. In filling 
a silo, the fodder is much more quickly handled, bound, 
than cut by hand. This is a big advantage the ma¬ 
chines have over the various sled cutters, as they don’t 
bind. 4. If fodder is put in the shock, he often hauls 
it in dry and cuts corn and all, and it is a big advant¬ 
age to have it bound. 5. In shucking fodder in the 
field, he does not untie the bundles, but rolls them 
over and takes out the ears, so it is still tied to haul 
in or to set up again. It is very common here where 
fodder is cut by hand to tie armfuls as fast as shucked. 
6. If he shreds his fodder, it is much more quickly 
A CORN HARVESTER AT WORK IN .JOHN GOULD’S ENSIUAGE CORN FIELD. 
may do efiieient work. With an abundant hay crop, 
as we have in Iowa this year, there will be little de¬ 
mand for corn-cutting machines, as very little corn 
fodder is utilized, the labor of saving it being con¬ 
sidered too much by the average farmer. 
Notwithstanding all that has been said in favor of 
the cutting and curing of corn for fodder, except in 
seasons when the grass crop is light, very little corn 
will be cut in the feeding sections of this State. In 
the dairy sections, more fodder is utilized, and the 
corn-harvesting machine has been introduced in many 
sections, and gives good satisfact'on. I have cut corn 
both by the old-fashioned method, with knives by 
hand, also with the buckeye one-horse machine, and 
with a self-binding harvester. When the corn is 
standing, the harvester would have the preference, 
but if it is broken down or bent, there is no method 
equal to the hand knife. As far a$ curing 1 in the 
pick up corn badly down. Seme kinds of harvesters 
are so arranged that the reels work just high enough 
to knock off ears, while other machines work above or 
below them and are not troublesome. 
I talked with a man yesterday who has a one-third 
interest in one. He said that frost struck the corn 
one year, and of course, all three owners were in a 
rush. He cut 12 acres in one day to get out of the 
way, but six to eight acres make a fair day’s work. 
He said that the new machines run much lighter and 
do better work. He named the following reasons why 
one pays : 1. More corn is cut now than formerly, and 
it is impossible for hand labor to put it up at the right 
time. It is well-known that fodder is seriously dam¬ 
aged by wet, especially after frost. It is, also, very 
disagreeable cutting by hand to hug the dead, rasp¬ 
ing blades. 2. It is much cheaper. He drives his idle 
team himself, hires two shockers, and puts up eight 
Fig. 258. 
handled tied in bundles, and is not wasted by break¬ 
ing off blades. 
Last Fall, it was so dry that an armful of fodder 
thrown on the shredder table would often break off, 
and one-third of it fall to the ground. We had to go 
through the field with an engine water tank, and 
pump water into the shocks each evening for the next 
day’s thrashing, to toughen the stalks. If not tied in 
bundles, it would have been impracticable to shred at 
all, and those having fodder cut by hand did quit 
shredding, and waited for rain. So it is clear that the 
corn harvester must go with the silo and the shredder, 
and that it pays if neither is used. The fodder is so 
coarse that air passes freely through the bundles, so 
that binding it does not hinder curing; in fact, with 
a harvester, one can wait till his fodder is ripe enough, 
while if cut by hand, he begins a little early. The 
keeping of fodder depends on the curing and standing 
