MODERN IMPROVEMENTS IN AGRICULTURE.

Press, Volume XLV, Issue 7171, 5 October 1888, Page 6

MODERN IMPROVEMENTS IN AGRICULTURE.

The rapid'strides which agriculture hag made within the last half century, are due to various causes in various countries. In Great Britain the first great movement towards improved agriculture dates from 1844, when Liebig published to the world his discovery that by the application of sulphuric acid to bones a manure could be produced much more potent in its immediate effect upon growing plants than simply broken up bones. The manure is known as superphosphate of lime, and is produced by orfte-third acid and two-thirds water to every cwt. of bones, which renders their component parts so soluble, that it was found that lewt. of this manure is equal to at least 2cwt. of bones in a crude state. With this discovery and Its application the culture of roots was vastly increased and the fattening of sheep and cattle became an important part of farm management, completely revolutionising the old order of things. It was science that taught the British farmer how to supplement his manure heaps, and thus to increase his corn averages. Great as the improvements in the theory and practice of crops and stock raising were, still little attention was paid to the production of labour-saving agricultural machinery, manual labour was so plentiful and could be used at so little cost that there was little inducement to spend time and money in the production of machinery which after all could not compete with the human machine. We remember ourselves the time when single furrow ploughs, often constructed of wood, were the rule, and when women and girls were glad to give their labour from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. thinning turnips, spreading manure and other farm work, for 6d a day, and when stalwart men might be had for Bd. or Is. per day. What need was there under such circumstances for improved machinery ? Happily this wretched state of things is now passing away, indeed it has passed away already and is now only a matter of history. The development of American agriculture — under totally different circumstances than those just alluded to as having pre. vailed in Britain—forms a remarkable and we must add a happy contrast to the above. Millions of acre 9of fertile soil untouched by the band of man formed the scene that greeted the early settlers in America. The question with them was, and has up to the present time been—not how we shall keep up the fertility of the soil—but how to pro. duce crops which can compete with the old world cheap labour. Necessity is the mother of invention. The American farmer soon found that he could not produce wheat at a profit when he had to pay more than five times as much for his labour.' It is true that he had not to manure his fields, but this did not make up the difference. It could only be achieved by cheapening the labour bill, which bad to be effected by the invention of mechanical contrivances to take the place of human hands. The first great result was the introduction of the automatic harvester and binder. By its agency the farmers in vast plains of North-west Minnesota and elsewhere were enabled to secure all they could sow. We have read of one farmer having 76 of these machines all at work in one crop, cutting twenty acres each, or 1500 acres per day. Th e invention of this one machine has (aided by bad seasons) brought ruin to the British farmer, inasmuch as it has reduced wheat from 60s per quarter to 30s, or even less. What the ultimate result will be on the agricultural world, it is not easy to divine. Probably the same law which regulates supply and demand in the commercial world will-ultimately regulate this trade also. In the meantime the facility for growing and harvesting grain in such large quantities and at such little cost is mainly responsible for the plethora of wheat in the markets of the world, so that nothing but war or failure of crops can affect the wheat market so as to cause an upward tendency in prices. Next in order as labour-savers may be reckoned the plough. A farmer of fifty years ago would hardly recognise the plough of 1888. With the addition of a single horse a double furrow plough can do exactly double the work of a single plough, and the work will be equally well done. The American gang plough was designed to still further economise labour by not only turning over the soil to a considerable depth, but partially pulverising it at the same time. It was thought that this form of plough was destined to supplant the ordinary furrow plough. Such, however, has not been the case, whether from prejudice or from what other cause we are not prepared to say. We are in clined to think that there must be some other reason than prejudice.'' Our farmers are more inclined to patronise new machinery than to - neglect it. Following the gang ploughs, another form of plough has recently been introduced with a flourish of trumpets, on the score that the work of ploughing and discharrowing ckn how be accomplished in one act at the same cost as single ploughing. The ploughs are appropriately named "pulverising ploughs." They are constructed somewhat after the pattern of the American gang plough, with attachments fixed to the boards, which break up the furrow, and are supposed to leave the soil in a fit condition for the crop. Messrs Howard & Co., England, were the first in the field, followed by Messrs Booth and McDonald, and P. and D. Duncan. Whatever may be said as to the efficiency of these ploughs for the work they are designed to do, there is still a considerable difference of opinion as to their economy. We have taken some pains to collect information on the matter, and have also inspected them at work. There is such a thing as over-doing a good thing—by which we mean that although deep ploughing i a in the majority of cases advisable, it i 3 questionable whether deep ploughing at one act will be found to answer as well, as fairly deep ploughing, followed by a subsoil plough, or even with a subsoiler attached to the plough. Very deep ploughing as performed by the pulverisers has not been found to answeras well as the ordinary furrow ploughing for grain. We have this from farmers of many years experience, whose opinions on such matters is worth listening to. They assert that if these ploughs have a value over any other kind, it will be for preparing land for root crops, and even this is doubtful. However, time will telh The advantage or otherwise of the system will be pretty well tested this season. Many wheat growers prefer a firm bed for their grain, and if tbe subsoil is disturbed at all, to leave it below. There is one thing certain, and it will be wellforfarmerstobearitin mind that deep ploughing of land with a wet subsoil is so much labour thrown away. The best of all preparations for grain is deep ploughing with subsoiling (if the subsoil is dry) in autumn, for roots in spring. If the fine surface soil gets buried too deeply, the seed cereals or other seeds must suffer. The value of these pulverising ploughs is one which should not be judged too hastily. The best test will be the result of crops grown on the land so ploughed, which we shall endeavour to record at the proper time.