So much has it been extended and improved since the Third Edition was published, I have much to say on this subject.
I will divide it into two headings, “Tea Cultivation” and “Tea Manufacture.” Of course the machines for the last far outnumber the first, which are very few, but much of great importance to the industry will find its place under the first heading—
Formerly, with prices as they ruled, Tea paid under most circumstances. It is not so now. Unless Tea, and good Tea, can be made cheap it is hopeless to look for profit from a Tea garden. To cultivate cheaply, and efficiently, is therefore all important (far more important than has hitherto been recognized), and assuredly the more machinery can be made to take the place of hand labour, the sooner shall we attain that end. On this point I need only observe that in most of the Tea districts in India labour has to be imported at a great cost, varying from Rs. 50 to Rs. 100 per coolie, and anything which would lessen this want would materially help to success.
The following, signed “Nil Desperandum,” appeared in the Tea Gazette in August, 1881. I quite agree with the writer and have myself often expressed the same opinions:—
Dear Sir,—On looking over your columns I have been surprised to see the small attention paid to agricultural machinery: in fact, I can’t find the subject mentioned, although one would imagine it was as important if not more so than manufacturing machinery. Various agricultural instruments, such as ploughs, &c., have, I know, been tried in old times, and not with the best results to the bushes; but there is no reason why, because the ordinary machines have failed, that planters should be sunk in the belief that that costly article the coolie must endure as long as Tea does.[94]
I will now consider the cultivation implements I know of.
Planting Pots.—These are made of clay, cow dung, and cut straw. They are placed in the nurseries and the Tea seed planted in them. When the seedlings are big enough to put out, pot and all is buried where the Tea bush is to be. The pot being broken a little when placed in the ground, the rain soon destroys it. The seedling does not know it has been transplanted, and the check of six weeks or more, experienced by all transplants, is entirely avoided. I know not who invented the pots, but the idea is an excellent one.
Jebens Transplanter.—This is an implement for lifting seedlings without injuring the rootlets or disturbing the soil around them. It is noticed at page 79 favourably: since that time (1878) it has been used more or less in all Tea districts. I have seen many opinions both for and against it. I believe the truth is it works very well in light soil, and with smallish seedlings, but does not answer in hard soil or with plants above 2½ feet high. Where the soil and size of seedlings are suitable, it certainly saves much of the check experienced otherwise by transplants.
I know of no other peculiar implements for Tea cultivation.
The greatest expense connected with cultivation is, naturally, opening the soil or digging; the spade is never used in India and would not answer. Coolies dig with a kodali, a thing something like a spade, with the handle set at right angles to the blade. Could we dispense with this, and cultivate between the lines of Tea with ploughs of any suitable pattern, whether worked by steam or animal power, an enormous saving would be effected. I am sure the whole space between two lines of Tea can never be so done, round each and every bush the soil must be opened by hand; but the centre space, say about 2½ to 3 feet, could, I am convinced, be so worked, and I think it is only a question of time when it will be so treated.
The planting community are gradually appreciating the fact that something may be done in this way. The following appeared in the Tea Gazette, end of 1881, re ploughing by steam:—
Dear Sir,—I am glad to see by the letter of a “Man in the Kundah” that some managers have taken up the idea of ploughing instead of hoeing. It is an idea which I have been dinning into the ears of Tea planters ever since I saw a Tea garden. Mr. Lyell deserves credit, and so will everyone who assists to introduce ploughing instead of hoeing. The saving of labour would be immense. The gentlemen who are interested in the subject will be glad to learn that I wrote home last month to several leading agricultural machinery people asking the fullest particulars as to steam ploughing machinery, with a view to seeing how far suitable it would be for Tea cultivation. As soon as all my information arrives, and I have thought the matter out, I will give the planting community my opinion. I have, as far as I am personally concerned, already formed it, and am confident that at no very distant date the steam plough will supersede the dhangar or other hand labour. But of course I must make out a strong case for it, or my opinions would be supposed to arise from a professional predilection for machinery.
F.
Siligoorie, 27th November, 1882.
Again, “Nil Desperandum,” quoted above, continues:—
I enclose a report on Darby’s Digger from the Times and Pioneer, which shows that it is an instrument possessing the principle we require in deep hoeing, viz., turning the earth completely over, and bringing the subsoil to the surface, although of course far too unwieldy, costly, and weighty to be used in Tea. It is, however, the first step in the right direction, as it closely copies spade action; and we may hope that before long a machine with that principle, and capable of being worked in a Tea khet, will be brought out. For light hoeing, last cold weather I procured from Messrs. Vipan and Headly, Church Gate, Leicester, England, two expanding horse hoes, which I worked all the hot weather, and which did their work admirably and at a much cheaper rate than can be done by hand labour. Two of these hoes hoe a 12-acre khet in six days up the lines of Tea and across them, but to make a thorough job it is better to go over the work again. The total cost of this:—
| Planted 4′ × 4′ | |||||
| For one hoe | {Pay of boy and man 12 days | = | 3 | 6 | 0 |
| {Food of bullocks @ 4 as. per diem, Barley @ 24 per Rupee | = | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| Cost of light hoeing 12-acre khet | = | 5 | 6 | 0 | |
| 2 | |||||
| Against | 10 | 12 | 0 | ||
| Nirrikh for 136 bildars, light hoeing, 240 spaces, 4′ × 4′, per diem @ 0-2-9 each | = | 23 | 6 | 0 | |
| Or a saving of more than 100 per cent. | |||||
I gave one 12-acre khet four of these light hoeings during the hot weather, which so thoroughly destroyed the grass seeds that, although heavy rain has fallen here for the last month and a-half, the grass in this khet is thin and not more than 6″ high, a fact which, to those who know how the jungle springs up in cultivated ground in the Doon when the rains set in, will be a sufficient proof of the success of these instruments. The frame of the hoe is only 7″ high, and when the blades are buried in the ground is only 4″, and as the handle projects from the centre of the back of the hoe and not from the sides, there is no danger of the bushes being injured. The hoe will expand from 14″ to 20″ at back, and from 3″ to 7″ in front; and as the standards of the blades are curved outwards, the hoe in its greatest expansion cultivates a breadth of 27″ of ground. I found that one bullock was too weak to drag a hoe, although a good pony was quite equal to the work, so put in a pair of bullocks. The bullocks and hoe take up between them three rows of Tea at once, the bullocks on each outside row and the hoe in the centre one. A boy walking up the centre row leads the bullocks, which are harnessed to the hoe in the same manner as bullocks are harnessed to the country ploughs, but with longer julas of course. These hoes are, I find, useless during wet weather, as they clog dreadfully, but during hot dry weather they are invaluable. What we now want is a machine that, either by bullock, horse, or steam power, will do our deep hoeing as well as the light hoe does the light hoeing. This is a matter which I consider of vital interest to owners and shareholders, as, unless in these days of very low prices we can reduce the cost of production considerably, we cannot hope that Tea will pay a fair interest on the money expended, and great length of time lost in getting up a garden.
Nil Desperandum.
In the above, two bullocks to drag the plough or digger are evidently contemplated. My experience is, that two draught cattle cannot be used, simply because there is not room for them between the lines of Tea.[95] If animal power is used, it must be a single bullock alone. How to harness a single bullock to the plough is the question. A collar with a hinge below, which allows it to open at top, may be put on from below, and then the sides fastened together at the top. But I advise another plan, which I have seen most successfully practised in Austria. The traces, joining together, and thus becoming one behind the bullock, are fastened to the horns, and tightly connected with a leather pad across the animal’s forehead. The bullock thus pulls by his head, and I am sure he can pull in no more efficient or easier way to himself. Bullocks in pairs, or singly, are thus harnessed for plough work in Austria, and I have seen single animals dragging ploughs of much greater weight and power than we should require in our Tea gardens.
Given a proper plough, and I feel sure a large strong bullock thus harnessed would be successful.
A really good Tea garden plough has yet to be invented. All that is necessary is to give some agricultural machinists here at home the conditions necessary for success, and I predict what we want would be soon forthcoming. I will myself try to do so, let others do the same; one of us is sure to succeed.
I give all these extracts to show that many think as I do.
Cultivation with ploughs of any kind can never be feasible except on flat land. The hill gardens in India must in no case hope to introduce it; but I sincerely trust the planters in India who own level gardens will not rest till they have solved the problem, and that Messrs. Kinmond, Jackson, and other inventors of Tea machinery will give their valuable aid. The following two letters from the Tea Gazette show the difficulties to be encountered in steam cultivation:—
Sir,—As promised in your last issue, I now write to say that I have received from England the catalogues and price lists of Messrs. Howard, of Bedford, Messrs. Barford and Perkins, and other makers of steam ploughing machinery. Messrs. Howard seem to think that the greatest difficulty would be in lifting the return rope over the bushes. This would be certainly a difficulty, but the idea of steam cultivation for Tea is so valuable that it is well worth while thinking this out. I will in your first issue for January give a resumé of all the information gleaned from the illustrated catalogues and the letters from the engineers at home on the subject of steam ploughing, and will then be glad to co-operate with any gentlemen interested in Tea by giving my professional opinion and assistance without fee in endeavouring to solve this matter. I trust, should I ever have to write another series of articles on Tea machinery for the Tea Gazette, the steam plough may figure as one of the machines which I will have to describe as in use on Tea gardens.
Meanwhile the principal difficulty in the way seems to be the shifting of the long wire pulling rope over the row of bushes. Let those interested in the subject try to devise a speedy and economical method of doing this.—Yours, &c.,
C. B. Fergus, C.E.
Siligori, 17th December, 1882.
Sir,—As promised, I give you a letter regarding the question as to whether steam-ploughing could be wholly or partially introduced as a substitute for manual labour in Tea gardens. I have been in communication with several of the leading makers of steam-ploughing machinery in England, but notably with Messrs. Howard, of Bedford, and Messrs. Barford and Perkins, of Peterborough. These gentlemen forwarded me their illustrated catalogues in duplicate, one set of which I sent to you.
The first question that ensues in regard to the subject is, “Would it pay, even if found feasible?”
In Assam, Cachar, Sylhet and other places, where labour is scarce, it is probable that the introduction of steam cultivation would be a great boon to the Tea planter. The first cost of a steam-ploughing apparatus with ropes, plough, and everything complete as in use in England on what is called the “single system,” that is, working with only one engine, is about £950. This is heavy, but as a much lighter cultivator would be used for Tea, I think the cost might be reduced to £800—say Rs. 10,000 on the garden. Under moderately favourable circumstances the machinery, making all allowances for native attendants, and the usual difficulties we have to encounter in India through their laziness and stupidity, should cultivate 800 to 1,000 acres per month of twenty working days. The remaining ten days might be occupied in the rains by taking the engine and gear from place to place where it might be required; for, as the expense of a steam-ploughing engine and apparatus would be too much for any concern, except a very large one, to bear, I suggest that two, three, or four gardens unite and purchase one. There need be no clashing or quarrelling about terms at the end of the season: each should pay his share of the cost of fuel, up-keep, wages, &c., according to the number of days it was on each garden. It would thus be to the interest of each manager to forward it on to the man whose turn was next, without delay. Remember, please, that in saying that it would cultivate so many acres in such a time, I mean that it would cultivate two ways—that is up and down and across. There would remain a little hand-hoeing, &c., round the inner part of the roots of the bushes, but not much, as the cultivator I would design would go partly underneath the laterals and still not hurt the roots, the outer lines being much shorter than the inner ones.
Now it is a simple matter to calculate, according to the rates of the district in which the reader may be, the comparative cost of cultivating 1,000 acres of Tea by hand and by the steam-plough. The plough would be worked for Tea by an 8-H. P. portable engine of any maker’s manufacture. Wages for one engineman, one cooly to cut wood, possibly one pair bullocks and cart-driver to bring barrels of water, two coolies to shift the anchors, and two more to assist them (possibly) in shifting the rope, added to the cost of fuel, and 15 per cent. per annum added for repairs and deterioration, seems to be the cost of working. This would be lessened by the rope and anchor-men and the woodcutter on the days when the plough was not at work. Add, however, the cost of elephants or bullocks to take the engine, &c., from garden to garden, and I think it will be found that the saving in expense would be very great on the side of the steam-plough as regards cooly labour.
Now, as to the feasibility of the scheme. It is difficult, without the aid of plates, to describe how steam-ploughing is done. The engine remains stationary at one corner of the field. Near it is a large double windlass, which, when the cultivator is at work, winds up the dragging rope with one barrel of the windlass, whilst from the other the rope is uncoiling, which will drag the plough down the next furrow. When the plough comes to the end of the furrow, two men, one at each end of the rope, shift the anchors, on which are the pulleys round which the rope runs: one furrow breadth forward the plough is double, one set of coulters and shears being at work, while the other set is tilted up in the air by the weight of a man who sits on and guides the plough. When the plough is to return it is not turned round, but the man simply tilts up into the air the set of ploughs that have done their work, and brings down the others. Of course ploughs like this would not do for Tea: a special cultivator would be needed. At the end of the furrow the motion of the windlass is reversed, and the drag rope becomes in its turn the following rope. In England there is an ingenious mechanical contrivance for shifting the anchors, which does away with two men, as it works automatically. Now the greatest difficulty in the whole matter, will be best explained to the reader in Messrs. Howard’s own language in their letter to me. They say:—
“The obstacle to the use of steam-ploughs through rows of bushes or trees is the practical difficulty of bringing the slack or following rope into position for following the implement back on its return journey. The rope cannot be lifted over the intervening row of bushes, and to employ draught animals to take the rope up the next alley between the bushes would add to the expense of the work, and would impede it.” They continue: “If it is important that the land be broken up to a depth of 9 inches, and the obstacles to effecting this by animal power are practically insuperable, the steam plough worked on the single system, with animals to convey the slack from end to end of the land, would probably be the most effectual and economical method of working.”
Now if this difficulty could be overcome (and I confess it is a rather formidable one), I quite believe that on fairly straight land, even if somewhat sloping, with straight rows of bushes, and the land clear of stumps, steam cultivation would be easy. On hill gardens, or gardens where the Tea is irregularly planted, on ground much traversed by nullahs or having stumps left in, the steam cultivator could not work. There may be some method of lifting the rope over the bushes. Coolies might be stationed at intervals along the row, and with the aid of a very light block and tackle might hoist long bights of the rope high enough to clear the bushes. The block and tackle would be fastened to the top of a light pole. One man would hold the pole while the other hove up, and (the pole being midway between the two rows) might incline it over till above the next row and then lower away. A strong 10 ft. bamboo, a pair of light wooden blocks, and an inch and a half Manilla rope, would be all that would be requisite. Other projects for effecting this may strike some of your readers, and what I want is, that those who may think the idea of steam-ploughing of any value should co-operate together to work it out in a practical form: I will give every assistance in my power.
We can scarcely hope, in the present depressed state of the Tea market, that proprietors will club together to subscribe to bring out a set of steam cultivating apparatus in order to institute experiments on the subject. Should 1883 bring better times, something of the sort might be done, and it is as well to have the matter well thought out and discussed beforehand, so that should a series of experiments take place, people would be prepared for any contingencies which might arise, and perhaps be better prepared to overcome these difficulties through the matter having been previously well discussed.
It is now the season for opening out Tea gardens, and one piece of advice I would give to planters—that is this. It is quite possible that steam ploughing for Tea cultivation is a thing of the future, or may be nearer than you imagine: therefore be careful to have your lines of Tea very straight, both along and across, so that there would be no obstacle to the plough or cultivator working. If you object to the expense of taking out stumps, they may remain in, as they could be taken out afterwards.
I trust your readers, Mr. Editor, will not view this subject with indifference, but will co-operate in endeavouring to solve the problem.—I am yours faithfully,
“Tea Machinery.”
Though the signatures differ, I conceive Mr. C. B. Fergus, C.E., wrote the second as well as the first. He has evidently pondered the matter well. Let others do so too, and I foretell that the day is not far distant when flat Tea gardens will, in a great measure, be cultivated by steam or animal power. When this is so, even 8 annas (say 10d.) per lb. for our Tea all round should pay us well.
The processes in Tea manufacture, as generally practised in India to-day, are—
No. 3 is not always done, the others invariably.
I will consider the machines invented for each process, in the order of the said processes.
Plucking.—No machine has ever been invented for this, and I do not think any is possible.
Withering.—In any but continued wet weather no artificial means are necessary. The leaf, spread thinly and exposed to the action of the air below and around (former attained by any kind of mesh), withers perfectly.[96] In continued wet weather artificial means are sometimes required. The various Dryers in use (see further on) are sometimes supposed to furnish the means, but their use necessitates much labour, nor is the result satisfactory. A good withering machine (it must be on a large scale) might, I think, be easily invented; there is none at present. Why do none of the inventors of other Tea machinery try to succeed in this?
Sorting Green Leaf.—This is sometimes attempted in a rough way by the use of sieves of different meshes. To separate the fine from the coarse leaf, and in some cases to eliminate the Pekoe tips, is the object. A machine by John Greig and Co., of Edinburgh, professes to do the latter. I have never seen it, but I doubt any machine abstracting the Pekoe tips alone. A machine which would, however, separate the fine from the coarse leaf previous to rolling is, I think, quite feasible, and it would conduce much to good Tea. This, again, is an opening for inventors.
Rolling.—This is perhaps the most important of all processes in Tea manufacture. The object of it is to break the cells in the Tea and liberate the sap (fermentation could not take place otherwise), and further to give a tight roll or twist to the leaf. Formerly this was always done by hand (it is so done in China, I believe, to this day), but the process was lengthy, expensive and dirty. I might perhaps add inefficient, for doubtless machine-rolled Tea is better done (better in appearance, better in liquor) than hand-rolled.
I will now consider—
The inventors are Jackson, Kinmond, Haworth, Lyle, Greig and Thompson. There may be others, but I have not heard of them.
Jackson has invented five machines. The details of each, how much each can do, the testimonials regarding them, &c., would fill many pages. All can be seen in the illustrated catalogue he supplies, so I will only offer a few general remarks. All planters know Jackson’s rollers, and they are held in high estimation. His last invention (if I mistake not) is the Rotary Tea Roller, which is on quite a different principle to the others. It consists of an elongated revolving barrel or cylinder, with a polygonal internal surface, and a roller with a fluted external surface, mounted within the said barrel its whole length. These revolve in opposite directions (the roller the quicker) and the leaf is rolled in the annulus between. It is not yet known what the success of this last invention will be. Not so with his Cross-action and Excelsior Rollers. These are first-rate machines, and all who have tried speak well of them.
Kinmond invented the first Tea roller (see page 117), many years ago. Many improvements resulted, eventually, in his “Improved Double Action Tea Roller,” which is a very good machine and has given satisfaction to the many who have used it. From all I have heard and seen, however, I doubt if, take it all in all, it is equal to Jackson’s Cross Action Excelsior. Kinmond, some two years ago, invented a “Centrifugal Roller.” It was made in two sizes. The smaller seems to have done well, not so the larger; one of the latter on the Phoolbarry garden (in which I am interested) has proved a failure. But Mr. Kinmond has quite lately materially altered the said Centrifugal machines, and is confident that they will do well. He is now leaving for India with one, and anticipates good results.
Tea machinery is still so much in its infancy that the best machines are likely to be improved upon, and perhaps superseded by others, but as things are now, I think, though some do not agree with me, that Jackson has carried off the palm in rollers.
The following two letters on rollers appeared in the Tea Gazette, and are well worth attention:—
Sir,—You have so repeatedly asked planters to supply you with information regarding “Tea machinery” that it is a matter of surprise to me you have not been flooded with letters on the subject. I know very little about Tea machinery, as I am not an engineer, but I gladly contribute my quota of knowledge on the subject. I have been rolling leaf for some time past in one of Kinmond’s old machines, styled his “Improved Patent Double Action Tea Rolling Machine.” A machine for fine leaf I do not believe there is in existence. I have seen several machines at work on different factories, and I should say for fine leaf this machine of Kinmond’s cannot be beat.[97] A few improvements could no doubt be made, and I feel sure Mr. Kinmond himself is aware of this, and is quite competent to make them. I have seen Mr. Kinmond’s “Compound Action Centrifugal” at work. I do not consider it a success. It certainly cannot hold a candle to his “Patent Double Action.” I would strongly recommend Mr. Kinmond to improve the latter, and forego the former, unless he can make some very material alterations to it. The roll from the “Centrifugal” comes out hot and flat, whereas that from his “Patent Double Action” is turned out not only perfectly cool, but has a perfect twist.[98] For coarse leaf, Jackson’s “Excelsior” is a splendid machine. I should say a factory could not want two better machines than one of Kinmond’s “Patent Double Action” and one of Jackson’s “Excelsior” Rollers—the former for fine, the latter for coarse leaf. Will some of my brother planters kindly give their experience, and thus further enlighten an anxious
Enquirer.
Dear Sir,—I will be glad if some of your numerous readers will kindly furnish results of trials, or of experience, of Kinmond’s Compound Action Centrifugal Tea Rolling Machine. I have tried it repeatedly, and find it not only heats the green leaf a great deal too much, but in addition cuts, I may say into mincemeat, about 5% of the leaf in the process of rolling. I am not an engineer, and therefore cannot state for certain where the fault lies, but I fancy the ribs of the two revolving plates are somewhat at fault. If they were broader and bolder, the machine might, perhaps, be a better success. The green leaf does not come out sufficiently rolled. The major portion of the roll is too flat. Perhaps Mr. Kinmond will kindly help by giving a hint or two to a perplexed Tea-house
“Assistant.”
Haworth’s Roller.—This machine was invented long ago. The leaf is placed in bags and so rolled. In some respects the machine resembles a mangle. It has not been largely used, and thus is not much known. I have no personal experience of its worth, but have heard much of it from an old friend of mine, Mr. Carter, of the Chandpore Tea Estate, Chittagong. He has, I believe, had one from the first on his plantation, and thinks very well of it. Mr. Carter is a first-rate judge on all Tea matters. He conducted some experiments to test the value of Tea rolled by Jackson’s and Haworth’s Rollers, and did it with great care, that the quality of leaf, the withering, the drying, all but the two modes of rolling should be exactly the same. The samples were then sent to Calcutta and valued. Results as below:—
Messrs. Carritt and Co.’s report on the samples is dated Calcutta, 29th October, 1881, viz.:—
Chandpore leaf rolled by Haworth’s machine:—Large irregular open unassorted leaf, brisk, fair flavour, little strong—Re. 0-9-9.
Chandpore leaf rolled by Jackson’s machine:—Leaf preferable, closer rolled, liquor inferior, not very strong—Re. 0-9-0.
Sungoo leaf rolled by Haworth’s machine:—Rather large irregular loosely twisted unassorted leaf, flavoury, little brisk—Re. 0-9-3.
Sungoo leaf rolled by Jackson’s machine:—Leaf little preferable, liquor inferior, wanting briskness—Re. 0-8-9.
By above it appears Haworth’s gave better liquor, and Jackson’s the best Tea in appearance. From all I have heard I think it likely Haworth’s roller has not received the attention it deserves.
Lyle’s Roller.—I have never seen this. From the drawing before me it has no resemblance to other rollers. The inventor claims for it simplicity, cheapness, strength, durability, good rolling, and large outturn with a minimum of labour. One testimonial I have seen speaks very highly of its capabilities.
Greig’s Roller.—This I have not seen or heard of. I can only give the description sent me by the inventor:—
The Greig Link and Lever Tea Rolling Machine, worked by one man, and suitable for rolling the finest nibs without breaking them, or to crush the coarsest leaf into broken black at will. It can roll a large or small quantity equally well. Price £70, delivered in Edinburgh. Small size suitable for cattle gear, £45. Cattle gear, £20, delivered in Edinburgh.
The Calcutta Agent of the Luckea Moung Lung Tea Estate, Sonada, Darjeeling, in sending remittance for a large size machine which has been working there all the past season, says: “I am informed the machine does its work in a most satisfactory manner, rolling better than by hand: I am pleased to have to state this.”
Thompson’s Challenge Roller.—This (quite lately invented) though given last is likely, by all I hear, to stand well among rollers. I have no drawing or description of it, but why I think well of it is that a Tea engineer, Mr. Ansell, of Kurseong, who thoroughly understands Tea machinery, thinks so highly of the machine that he has recommended its purchase by the Phoolbarry Tea Company. I have every faith in Mr. Ansell’s judgment, and feel confident therefore the machine must be a good one. One feature and advantage claimed for it is, “free contact of the leaf throughout the roll with the outer air.”
I may conclude my remarks on rollers with a quaint letter (from Tea Gazette) by a native. If he can judge of Tea machinery as well as he can write English his opinion is worth preserving:—
Dear Sir—On the subject of Tea-leaf rolling machinery, the (to all appearance) strangely opposite results I have obtained from machines of the same make have led me to the following conclusions, viz.:—
1. All “genuses” of machines are equally good.
2. There are hardly two “species” of the same genus which give similar results.
3. Changing the “fixings” of a machine makes all the difference in the world.
Ergo a good mechanic will have a good machine whether he patronize Jackson, Kinmond, Haworth, or any other inventor.
I think with your correspondent “A Voice from Assam” that the machine that gives the roll quickly, and in a continuous supply, is the best.
I would defy any man to prove that any inventor has it “all his own way,” for I certainly have not found it so in my experience.
Yours truly,
Kol Mistry.
Before going to press I received drawing and description of “Thompson’s Challenge Roller.” It is impossible to judge of its merits by the drawing, but some very strong testimonials are appended—one much in its favour from Mr. Ansell, the Tea engineer above mentioned. By the testimonials (more than one from men I know) the following advantages appear to have been obtained:—
If all the above are facts, I quite think the “Challenge” will prove a great success.
The following, written by me to the Tea Gazette, may be worth the attention of Tea-rolling machine inventors:—
Sir,—The following idea, suggested to me by a planter up here, may be practicable or not, but in any case it is worth letting the patentees of Tea-rolling machines know it.
In days gone by when iron worked in contact with iron on the faces of rollers the colour of the outturn (that is the infused Tea leaves) was quite destroyed. That is now remedied, but there is still an evil of less importance. The wood on the said faces of the rollers absorbs the sap of the leaf, and unless they are washed very clean, the said old sap is apt to contaminate, more or less, the new leaf. Could not this be rectified by making the faces of the rollers of porcelain or iron (like camp crockery) and the drums of opaque coarse glass? Both these, if they would stand, could easily be washed quite clean.
I give the idea, given to me, for what it is worth, and would invite the opinion of other planters on it.
Edward Money.
Darjeeling, November 10th, 1880.
Fermenting is the next process in the list. After the leaf is rolled it is put together; some make it up in truncated balls, some put it in baskets, but in either case it is allowed to stand until a given amount of fermentation has set in. This is done in the warm atmosphere of the factory. Naturally no machine is required for this process; but shelves, at varying height from the factory floor, are useful to regulate the fermentation, inasmuch as the higher the shelf the warmer the air, and warmth hastens the process. This plan of shelves was devised by Mr. J. Fleming, at the Phoolbarry Garden, and it seemed to me to answer well.
Drying or Firing comes next. Up to this point the leaf is of a brownish green colour, and soft. After the drying it is black and crisp, in fact, made Tea. By the drying process all the moisture in the mass is driven off. For many years charcoal only was used to fire Tea, and it was an established belief that the fumes given out by the said charcoal had some chemical effect on the Tea—in fact, that good Tea could not be made without it. When, twelve years ago, I published the First Edition of this Essay, I had begun to doubt the soundness of the above belief, and four years later I had thoroughly satisfied myself of its fallacy. It was not, however, till 1877-78 that I devised a means of firing Teas without charcoal. The invention was well received, and thought well of. At all events, it proved what I had long urged—viz., that any fuel, if contact with the smoke was avoided, would dry Tea. My invention was a very crude one, and quickly superseded by far more perfect designs; still I have the satisfaction of knowing that on this head I have done much to perfect Tea manufacture, and that the conviction I had attained to in 1874 is now general and practised throughout India. (Pages 119-121, 295, to end of Addenda, bear out the above remarks.)
I will now consider the various
Robertson’s Typhoon.—This is a late invention: it was noticed in the Tea Gazette in 1881. It had, however, made a great noise at end of 1880, and so well was it spoken of, many, in the early part of 1881, purchased it. The following was the report as to its merits (Tea Gazette, September, 1881):—
Mr. J. M. Robertson, manager of the Arcuttipore Tea Company’s Gardens, has invented a new Tea-drying apparatus which he has named the “Typhoon.” A number of the planters of his district met at his garden, by invitation, to test the merits of his machine. We quote the verdict recorded by them in their own words, and also append the brokers’ report on the Teas which were manufactured in their presence during the trial.
The “Typhoon” is a simple and inexpensive construction of brick and iron, which can be erected without skilled labour. The heating material used is coke, and the quantity of coke required for a maund of Tea is stated to be one quarter of a maund.
The out-turn from the “Typhoon” we found to be at the rate of one half maund of thoroughly dried Tea per hour, and the manner in which the work was done was to our entire satisfaction, some of us thinking that the apparatus was capable of doing more.
The inventor leads us to understand that the entire cost of construction and material will not be over Rs. 300, and we do not see that this sum need be exceeded.
We are unanimously of opinion that unless the dryers at present in use are very materially reduced in price, they will be beaten off the field by the “Typhoon.”
Messrs. William Moran & Co.’s report on the Teas is as follows:—
| Typhoon Teas. | London value. | Cal. Equi. Ex. 1-8½. |
|---|---|---|
| Pekoe, very well made leaf, with ends, good brisk flavour | 1 10 | 14 |
| Orange Pekoe, very well twisted leaf, good amount of tip, very good brisk flavour | 2 0 | 15¼ |
| Br. Pekoe, leafy black Br. Pekoe, some ends strong | 2 1 | 1 |
| Pekoe Souchong, well twisted leaf, some ends good flavour | 1 3 | 9 |
| Souchong, small good even grey leaf, brisk | 1 1 | 7½ |
The above are very desirable Teas as regards leaf and liquor.
The following are some of the chief features and advantages of this machine:
1. The low cost.
2. Durability, there being nothing except the trays that can suffer from wear and tear.
3. The small quantity of fuel required—about ¼ maund of coke for kutcha firing 1 maund of Tea.
4. Ease in stoking, the furnace not requiring attention oftener than once every one and a-half to two hours.
5. Absolute and immediate control over the temperature, which can be raised or lowered instantaneously.
6. No “getting up heat” required. In fifteen minutes after beginning to light the fire the apparatus is ready for work.
7. Requires no troublesome cleaning out.
8. Quantity. The apparatus is capable of drying at least 40 lbs. an hour, and has frequently dried over 50 lbs.
9. Quality of Tea is equal to that obtained by any process hitherto introduced.
Of course all the above was very favourable, and its low price gained it many purchasers. I think, as a first success, it beat any machine yet invented. But, alas! its fall was sudden as its rise, for, judging from several letters in the Tea Gazette, the purchasers were not satisfied with its capabilities, and I doubt consequently if it is now manufactured; still I may be wrong.
Allen’s Tea Drying Apparatus.—I have never seen this, and have not heard much about it. Advantages claimed for it are—1. Quick drying. 2. Coke can be used as a drying agent, 10 seers to one maund of Tea. 3. Only manual labour required. 4. Not necessary to turn the Tea. 5. Perfect control over temperature. I have three testimonials to its merits before me, one from an engineer, and all three speak highly of it.
The following letter from the inventor to the Tea Gazette gives further information:—
Dear Sir,—Some time back your valuable paper contained a description and rough drawing of my Patent Drying Machine. I now beg to say that the machine is in the market.
I will simply state here that it can dry one maund of Tea per hour, or about equivalent to four maunds of leaf.
It cannot burn the Tea as in other machines, yet it thoroughly dries it at one fill of the machine.
It takes half a maund of Tea at each fill, and every leaf of this is done in exactly the same time; no turning over, changing of trays, or further looking after the Tea, after the roll has been placed in the machine on the trays.
Temperature can be lowered from 300° to 100° in two or three seconds, and run up again in five to seven minutes.
It will burn any fuel. Fireplace 2½′ × 3′, when kept regularly three quarters full of firewood or coal about 6 to 8 inches thick, while machine is drying, will suffice (half a maund of fuel to a maund of Tea should be ample). The appearance and fine flavour of Tea dried in this machine by fan beats charcoal; no gloss is lost on the Tea from shaking up and turning over, and the Tea is black, with glossy appearance and good flavour.
The following are valuation and reports on this machine’s dried Tea, by Messrs. William Moran and Co., to whom some of bulk or rough Tea was sent.—Yours, &c.,
J. C. Allen.
I omitted to extract the broker’s reports, but they were favourable. I think it likely this Dryer is well suited to small gardens, which cannot afford steam motive power.
Davidson’s Sirocco.—Many of these, over 200, have been set up in all the Tea districts; it has done good work in its time: had it not done so it would not so long (some years) have commanded attention. When it came out it was, I think, the best machine going. I doubt much that being the case now. It requires no motive power, and is thus, in that respect, cheap to work. The following letter to the Tea Gazette in many respects embodies my views of the machine:—