NOTES ON RURAL TOPICS.

Otago Witness, Issue 2490, 4 December 1901, Page 7

NOTES ON RURAL TOPICS.

A recent issue of the Witness contains a letter from its Loudon corAn Otago respondent, in which the latFaniier ter says that he had met an in Scotland. Otago farmer who had been ■visiting Scotland, and whe told the correspondent that he was much surprised and disappointed at seeing the backward condition of Scottish agriculture. He had been absent about 42 years, and had expected to see a great difference in the system of farming-, especially in regard to labom'-saving appliances, on account of the scarcity of labour which has prevailed in Britain for a good many years past ; but he found that the farmers had not advanced in the least during the last 40 years, and said that both English and Scottish farmers are very much behind New Zealand in their methods, everything being still done in the old-fashioned slow and rcstly manner. Foi instance, he saw an old-fashioned single-fur-row swing p'ough being drawn by three horses (in single file, I suppose), the* stilts bomg held by one man, and the horses driven by another. Most of the corn, he said, appeared to be cul by hand, women follow ing the reapers, and gathering and binding the handfuls laid down by the latter. He mentioned one farmer whe had procured a reaper and binder, but carefullj kept it in a shed^ and performed the cutting and tying in the manner followed by his forefather*. Then, in. leading in, all the grain rmiat be carted to the farm yard, and the stacks built in a cluster, instead of, as here, being built in the field and secured from rain in the shortest possible time. He was pleased with the cattle he saw, but <-poke very t!ieparaginglv of lii" di aught l^or^es, and thought they had deterioi-itixt \eiy n cub m quality for draught purposes, being light and leggy, and more suited for tiap-work t! an for heavy pulling. He expected to find all classes of stock much superior to our c , and expressed tho opinion that New Zealand cau beat all that he saw. The London correspondent adds on his own account that he recently saw a number of old wooden ploughs at work in Kent, within 30 miles of London. This last statement is sufficiently convineinff to cause one to belipv* tiiaJ-.^V.

fcish farmers have made very little advancement in their methods during the last half century; but, still, I am inclined to think That the Otago farmer whose observations have been quoted must have dropped upon Bon>© of the most backward and conservative farmers; for it is a fact that a great number of reapers and binders, double ploiighs, and other, implements of a modern pattern are in. uee in" Britain, and steam threshing plants, mave most , certainly superseded the old horse-power and hand-Sailing method of threshing. It appears, however, that there are parts of the United Kingdom in which •farmers still cling to the old-time implements and fashions, and I do not doubt the accuracy of the statements made by the above-mentioned Otago farmer. It is evident that foreign competition is not the only obstacle to the prosperity of British farmers, and so long as many of them are imbued with prejudice against modern and up-to-date implements, machinery, and methods, so long will they be unable to cope with the competition of their colonial brethren, who are handicapped by the cost of trpnsk over thousands of miles of ocean. [This note waa written before the appearance of " InvereargiUita's " letter in our columns- h^st week, s-o that it will be seen ' :bat'" Agricola's " views were not influenced by the correspondent in 'question. — Ed.]

Last year there were 'about half ,a million acres of turnips in the coThe Turnip lony, and there w ill pro-

Crop. bably be an increase upon that area this year, as wheat is such an unprofitable crop ta produce. As this is the time for sowing the main crop, a [ew remarks upon the matter may be worthy of notice. I would strongly impress upon all turnip-growers the advisability of thoroughly preparing the soil for the reception of the seed. Yeai^f ago, when we had virgin soil to deal with, we could sow turnip seed broadcast upon the first fuurow, after scratching the face of it sufficiently to make a covering for the seed, and if the season proved moist enough good crops were obtained at a trifling expense. Nowadays, the case is vastly different, and a good tilth and suitable manure are essential for the raising of good roots. Stubble land that has not been touched feince harvest ploughs up very rough and himpy in the spring, and requires a great deal of preparation to reduce it to a fine tili.li. The roots of plants cannot get nourishment fx*sm the soil when it is bound up in lumps. It is important, also, to chooio the variety of turnip seed which is most suitable for the grower's requirements aiid for the soil and climate. The varieties of turnip differ in habit and appearance, arid also in value as stock food. The .hard varieties, such as the. Aberdeens and-- swedes, require a longer time to come ■to maturity, and it is manifestly unwise to sow a soft, early-maturing " sort for winter ose. The imperial green globe, the white £!obe, Devonshire greyatone. and purple fop mammoth are also suitable for sowing for 'parly consumption. As a rule, the soft-■fleshe-d sorts contain more water, and consequently less nutriment than the harder roots. It 'must not be thought, however, that the water in roots is the same as ordinary rain water, for it is water in chemical combination, and contains substances of nutiitive value to a certain extent. A healchy. well-grown turnip always contains about 90 per cent, of water, and if the percentage falls much below that it usually mean? that the turnip is over-ripe, aud has formed an excels of dry, woody matter. It is necessary to be careful in selecting tb.6 right sort of seed, and to be sure and get the sort required. It is impossible to be quite sure about the identity of different \arictie-s of turnip seed, and we have to rely to a very great extent upon the good faith of our seed merchants, unless the seed is grown upo.i the farm, and, strictly speaking, i.ha.l i" of course, the proner thing to do.

T'na "riv.ic;- recently contained ffn extract from a JS^orth Otago paper The in which reference was made SJifep Ta - lo the unequal operation of the sheep tax, seeing that, Tviiile this tax is fu^osed to defray the cost of the Stock department, it is a fact that horse and catfla owners and dairymen derive as much, benefit from inspection as do sheep owner*, though the latter are taxed directly while the others are not. There is something in this contention, for from the lates; available returns I find that the s'.ieep ta:: and brand fees bring in about £22,000, and that is the amount now paid aanua'ly in salaries to about 140 officers employed in the Agricultural department, which includes tho Stock department. For the !>enc-3c of those who do not see the animal report of the department, I will ask the editor <o insert the list of the 140 officers employed, -whose total salaries!

amount to the sheep tax and brand fees collected last year— namely, £22,000. Secretary and Chief Inspector of Stock Dairy Produce Inspector, London. Assistant Chief Inspector of Stock. Chief Clerk. Biologist and Entomologist. Assistant Entomologist and Fiuit Inspector. 12 Clerks. 1 Cadet. 10 Veterinary Surgeons, six of whom are en1 gaged as Meat Inspectors. ! 3 Dairy Instructors. j 3 Fruit Experts. I 1 Poultry Expert. 2 Nurserymen. 1 Farm Overseer. 1 Agricultural Chemist. 2 Caretakers, Quarantine Stations. 1 Assistant at Veterinaiy Laboratoiy. 3 Fruit Inspectors and Clerks, etc. 1 Messenger. 44 Inspectors of Stock. 37 Rabbit Agents. 5 Caretakers of Rabbit Fences. 5 Graders of Dairy Produce. 2 Assistants to Graders of Dairy Produce. It seems to me that those who pay sheep tax get no direct advantage therefrom except a portion of the duties of the 44- inspectors of stock, as per above list. There is really no logical reason why sheep should be taxed nowadays any more than cattle, horses, and swine. I believe the sheep tax was instituted in the early days when sheep scab was prevalent, and vigorous measures were necessary for stamping out the disease, and the Provincial Governments required revenue for defraying the cost of officials appointed to see that the regulations re to-bacco-dipping, etc., were carried out. Moreover, in those days, the sheep were pretty numerous, while the total number of other stock was so small as to be hardly worth taxing. As stated by me in a note of a few months ago, the total cost of the Department of Agriculture during the year 1899 was £60,000, or nearly £40.000 in addition to the receipts from cheep lax, which, as I have said, just about pays all the salaries. This £40,000 was made up as follows: — Destruction of Rabbits .. £6700 Travelling expenses 7000 Travelling expenses Produce Commissioner 200 Experimental stations 3000 Encouragement dairy industry .. .. •■ 200 Encouragement poultry industry „< ..- 500 Experimental fruit stations -.., 503 Establishment of dairy schools .. _.., ..■ 1500 Cool storage for dairy produce .. .. ••• 7000 Grading of dairy produce ... .« .. >r 1200 Collection of statistics .. ... .., .. .. 4000 Inspection of vineyards .. -.« •« .. 800 House for rabbit agent .. .. .* . . : .« 129 Rates on farms ..< 34 Compensation for cattle killed .. . ., .. 2000 Contingencies .. .. _.., .. .. ».i ... 6000 £40,000 AGRICOLA.