Permanent link to this item
ASHBURTON PLOUGHING MATCH., Ashburton Guardian, Volume 2, Issue 405, 26 July 1881
ASHBURTON PLOUGHING MATCH.
The farmers of tho district again had the gratification of witnessing the timehonored ploughing match, which, through circumstances caused by the badness o the times and unsatisfactory state of tho crops during the past two years, allowed this once annual meeting to fall through for two seasons. Wo welcome the resuscitation of these matches in our district, not only because they do good to the farmers themselves and the ploughmen, but as a sign of the improved condition of our agriculturalists in a county, above all o thers, an agricultural one in every sense of the word. To many, these matches seem as thing* of the past. Why should they ? Our ploughmen require a time to show their skill quite as much, if not more so, than those who earn their bread by more pretentious undertakings. We hope therefore that increased interest will again awaken amongst our farmers, and with a corresponding interest in farming operations, together with favorable harvests, all may combine to give support to one day’s instructive amusement to those who till the soil, at all events once in every year. Our farmers meet on occasions like the present one, and of course their views get disseminated amongst others, who, perhaps, never ' meet at any other time during the year, about matters which are all-important to that most essential point, the proper tillage of the soil. We can hardly say that these matches conduce in all cases to improve the tillage of soil, yet they instil into ploughmen and others a spirit of emulation, which cannot be promoted by other means. The weather during the day was delightfully fine, and a large number of people visited the ground, which was only situated a short distance from Ashburton. Mr Hay T. Smith, with his usual liberality, had kindly placed a paddock of his at the disposal of the committee, who, under the auspices of the Agricultural and Pastoral Association, earned out the details of the match. The nature .of the ground was not the best for showing good ploughing, as the grass was not thick enough to allow the ploughs to make clean work in many cases. A few ridges of stones were hero and there noticeable, and they detracted from the ppearance of the wo rk to a considerable
extent. Still, the Committee could not get any bettor offer of ground, and, taking everything into consideration, they have to be complimented on their selection, and the result of the day’s match. The lands were laid out very well, and as the Comraittoe had to crowd the competition together somewhat in the different classes, it was rather a difficult matter to note one class from another. We should have liked to have seen more competition in the three-furrow class, as these very useful ploughs are found to be very advantageous to our plains farming. The double-furrow classes were well represented, and goes to shew how popular these ploughs have become within the last few years, and how local makers of these implements appear to be shutting out tho imported article in this colony. The ainglo-furrow classes were also well represented, and tho work done was admirable. For the boys’ classes, there were but few entries, but the work was of a first-class nature. We noticed a pair of Messrs Haxton and Beattie’s patent flexible harrows at work on an adjoining piece of ploughing, and they appeared to attract a good deal of attention during the day. As an improved implement, there can be no question as to their future popularity with our farmers, owing to their simplicity of construction, &c. "Mr Brown, of the Central Hotel, had a refreshment booth on the ground, which appeared to be able to cope with the demand for liquors, and no doubt proved a satisfactory speculation for tho proprietor before the day closed. We now proceed to give a description of the work done by the respective ploughmen, commencing with the
THREE-FURROW CLASS. Charles Sprays was the only entry in this class. The work done by this ploughman, with a P. and D. Duncan implement, was extremely good, but the ground appointed him was in no way the best, as it was of a very brittle nature. The feering was good and the furrows well laid,’ and a capital seed bed was shown, and was as good for the latter purpose as any on the field. His team was a nice steady one of three horses, and appeared to work with ease. The implement was one of the makers’ 1879 make, and, although .slightly our of order, did capital work. . double-furrow classes. Coming to the next in order, we find that of the double-furrows. Keir showed some nice clean work, but his fiering was . too high, and caused the angle to be too steep. The furrows were hardly deep enough in the,soil to show good work, but it improved very much towards the finish. J. Moorhead did some capital work with a Blythe implement, but at the start he made a bad line. The furrows were cleanly cut well and evenly laid and packed, and ga'. e a good seed bed. The ground here was also of a very “ crumby ” nature, and did not show as well to the eye as it would otherwise have done. Taking his work altogether, it was very fair. His implement seemed of light draught, as two medium horses seemed to work it with ease. The adjoining ploughman did not a good line, and his work, though clean, was’ not well laid, and the fiering and angle too high. His implement seemed, however, to be in splendid order. Beckett had evidently a bad start. His line was crooked and fiering too-flat. Towards the finish his angle improved, and the “ ins and outs” were the best in the class. His implement was a Hornby and Son’s patent. T. Millar did some capital work, his fiering being good and the furrow well and evenly laid. He had a splendid team of horses, and they worked very steadily. His line was very straight, . and the furrow seemed well packed, and the work would have . looked very much better had the ground been firmer. G. Winter did some fine work with his implement (Duncan), but his furrows were if anything ..a trifle flat and irregular and not cut clean. He improved towards the finish. George Jones, with one of the same makers’ implements, had rather a crooked line. His angle was good, and his furrows were cleanly cut, and gave a good seed bed. H. Kendall did soma nice clean work with a Ransome plough, but his line was defective and his fiering too high, and, consequently showed a bad seed bed. . The furrows were laid rather flat, but were cleanly cut. A. Innes, with a Duncan implement, did some fair work, but the fiering was too high and his farrows rather uneven. J. Cochrane, with tho same makers’ implement, did some nice clean work. The fiering was good and the furrows well laid to a capital angle. His ground was a little brittle, and did not do him justice, and he improved greatly towards the finish. J. Hocken, with a Ransome and Sims’ implement, did some fair work, but was hardly good enough for his company. Thomas Waykayne, with a Reid and Gray plough, did some very fair work. His line was bad, but the furrows ware well laid and gave a good seed bed. The nature of the ground with him was decidedly “ rotten,” and his work had not a good appearance in consequence. H. Reeves, with the same makers’ plough, did some capital work. His line and angle were very good, and the furrows nicely and evenly packed. Geo. Smith, with a quite new Duncan implement, showed a capital line, his feiring and angle being very good, and a perfect seed-bed the result. Trewyn, with a Ransom and Son’s # plough, made some splendid work. His angle was good, and the furrows were well laid, and, altogether, we considered he did the best work in his class. His finish was also very good. C. Hill, with a Reid and Gray, made rather unevert work. His furrows were rather flat and uneven. At the start his line was bad, but towards the end his work improved considerably.
SINGLE FURROW CLASSES. We now come to the work on the field. In point of excellence, we think that the work in the single furrow classes was superior to that of former years, and very little inferior to that of,some of the best of ploughmen at any match. J. Dunn did soma splendid work, his line was perfect, and the feiring also could not be better. The angle of the furrow was clean and even, and being very good, a perfect seed-bed the result. Trewyn was good throughout, and the seed bed all that could be desired. From the first he was considered as a sure prize-taker in this class. W. Burburough did also some first-class work, his fiering was capital, and the angle well laid. The furrows were all well picked, and the work had an excellent finish. Perks did some firstrate ploughing, which it would, indeed, be hard to excel anywhere. His angle was all that could be desired, and the furrows were nicely packed, and evenly laid throughout, C (Chamberlain did some very creditable work. His fiering was rather high, but the furrows were well packed. Maidens made some good work. His angle and fiering were alike hard to beat, and the furrows were well, evenly laid, giving a good seed bed. The other ploughing in this class was very good. DOYS’ CLASS.
In the Boys’ Glass, K. Evans showed some capital work. His line was very good, and the fiering just the thing for a critical fierman. The other boys did some very creditable ploughing, but in one instance, the furrows were laid too flat. We learnt that tho reason the ground was in many places so brittle was owing to tho quantities of grub that worked directly under the soil last summer. We are unable to give the prize list in this issue, as the judges had not arrived at their decision before going to press. The prize- list will appear in to-morrow’s issue. ,
ASHBURTON PLOUGHING MATCH., Ashburton Guardian, Volume 2, Issue 405, 26 July 1881
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.
Use these buttons to limit your searches to particular dates, titles, and more.
Print, save, zoom in and more.