AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY IN AMERICA.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 8089, 9 February 1887, Page 2

AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY IN AMERICA.

(Australasian and South American.) The foreign trade of the United States has witnessed important' improvements; during the past few years, but in ns direction has greater progress been made than in the distribution of American agricultural implements in the various foreign markets our manufacturers supply. Prompted by the scarcity and high price of labour in the western our and makers of this class of apparatus established for it a high standard of efficiency, and at the same time took the greatest pains to adapt it to every purpose for which it could be required in this country, and to the characteristic features and methods of agriculture, the climatic condition, soil and nature of the crops raised* in each section. Their success in this country was highly satisfactory, but in onerespect it exercised a harmful effect on their progress in foreign markets; they were tempted to look upon what waa suited for the American market as good; enough for the world, and though they were in a measure correct, their views did not always coincide with those of their customers.

; A buyer in Australia for instance, to whom an American thresher and separator was offered, would be apt to compare its appearance with that of a heavy German or English machine and form an erroneous opinion as to its strength and durabilityKnowing the work of which it was capable, involving a continuous operation at topspeed for perhaps weeks on the dry, hobpraicie farms, the manufacturer would not give sufficient heed to these opinions,, and it has consequently taken yearsto show Australasian farmers that the light American machine, built of the strongest material at the command of our manufacturers, was more than, equal in durability to the cumbersomeEnglish implement; it might have been done in much less time by slightly increasing the weight of the machine and the dimensions of its parts. The same remarks, would apply to many other machines and implements of our manufacture, which, in spite of the recognition of their merits, havebeen slow in finding their way into the hands of agriculturists. It is of no nse to tell a labourer in South America that the hoe or axe offered him will outwear three of the cheap tools sold at half theprice; he must be met half way and taught to discriminate between the cheap and the good by a gradual transition from the former to the latter. After becoming conversant with the facts above set forth, it did not take our manufacturers long to establish a demand for their goods, and our makers of agricultural implements . display as much enterprise and energy in adapting theirproductions to the requirements of their customers as any of their competitors, while enjoying many advantages over them. In this country competition and the high price of labour compel every farmer to use the best machinery he can obtain,, and onr leading firms have at home a field, in which they can broadly develop their ingenuity and their vast resources. In Europe labour is cheap and abundant, and farms as a rule much smaller - than in this country, so that the farmer if lie uses improved implements, does so only to alimited extent, and purchases as a role cheiap machinery. Then, again, the conditions as to climate, the nature of thecountry, &c, in the United States, as well as the character of the crops - cultivated, compare closely with'those prevailingin our two. best markets "for "agricultural implements, Australia and South America.

GREAT NATIONAL FIELD trial of reapers and binders SUPREMACY OP THE BUCKEYE. The following article, taken from the Melbourne “ Argus," of Deo. 15, 1886, is specially recommended to farmers and all persons interested in agricultural pursuits. It is not alone of exceptional interest as .an inponteatible proof of % the immense superiority of the REAPER AND BINDER, hut it gPs to show how very possible it is for the most disinterested judges to make mistakes. The “ Buckeye” is au American machine, and has no. friends in Australia ■outside those who .swear by it for its own intrinsic worth and the enormous advantages it possesses over all other machines for

ECONOMY AND PEACTICAL UTILITY. The Buckeye ” took the premier position in this great struggle, with ease, winning the Grand National Gold Medal •against two competitors, in whose company on the show ground it was not even -considered worthy of a place by the highly -qualified judges who made the awards, and., hut for the protest which was then entered by the representatives of the “ Buckeye,” the public would not have been furnished with this additional assistance in deciding for themselves the relative merits of THEORY AND PRACTICE

in the art of j udging. The “Argus ” says The field trial of reapers and binders in connection with the late National Show at Shepparton was held •on Tuesday, the 14th inst., on Mr Guthrie’s farm, about two miles from Shepparton. Owing to pressure of harvest work, crops in all directions being rip* l , the attendance of farmers did not exceed 150, but great interest was taken in the proceedings. As At the late Show, the judges placed the Hornsby,'Machine first, M’Cormlck second, And the. Woods third. The “ Buckeye ” representative disliked being left out in the cold, and demanded a field trial as provided by the rules, the McCormick also sharing in the protest; so the prizes were held over pending the field trial. The crop was ripe wheat, and the land was so rough that none of the machines oeuld show very low cutting, and the jolting over the hard clods was tolerably severe on horses, machines, and drivers. Two o’clock was the hour fixed for the trial, but as the *' Buckeye ” was the only machine then ready, a delay waa caused by the Hornsby »nd M'Cormick experts giving their machines a preliminary run in the adjoining block of crop, and a start was not made till a quarter-past three. The five judges gave great, attention to their duties, and were ably seconded by the aub-Committee Appointed by ■ the Society, and the Secretary (Mr Harold B. Turniey). About two acres were allotted to each machine, and they finished in the following order: — « Buckeye,” lb lOmin j Hornsby, lb l-9min j M'Cormick, Ih 26min. The two latter machines were drawn by three horses each, while two lighter horses worked the ■ “ Buckeye” binder with, equal ease. The decision of the judges was based on the following scale of points-

"The judges (Messrs A. Kinkaid, H. Wilkin- , «on, J. Grieve, J. M'lntyre and J. M'Guina&eoa) thus awarded the "Buckeye'” the prize, with the maximum number of 1 Hornsby second, with 43; and ™7l‘Cormick third, with 37, adding that the y/otk performed was the best they had ever seen, and their decision was cheered by the fanners present.

aft al|g S' ® ; p w i • o ET • • • <8 1 ©<n ci*cr Clean Catting. W — Hi^ tncntntn | Best Binding. &1WOO | Simplicity of construction ! and l.iglit 1*rhngbt. eoccencn | Fewest Stoppages. cr&CrOt i Low C ut. CO^Org | Total.