Chapter XXXVI: Tea Machinery (1)

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--

_Machinery and Implements for Tea Cultivation._

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:--

PLOUGHING AND HOEING MACHINERY.

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 2-1/2 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 2-1/2 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:--

PLOUGHING _v._ HOEING.

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′
{ Pay of boy and man 12 days = 3 6 0
For one hoe { 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:--

STEAM CULTIVATION FOR TEA.

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_.

AS TO STEAM-PLOUGHING ON TEA GARDENS.

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 10_d._) per lb. for our Tea all round should pay us well.

_Tea Manufacturing Machinery._

The processes in Tea manufacture, as generally practised in India to-day, are--

1. Plucking.
2. Withering.
3. Sorting green leaf in a measure, and separation of Pekoe Tips.
4. Rolling.
5. Fermenting.
6. Drying or firing.
7. Sorting.
8. Final heating before packing.

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--

_Tea Rolling Machines._

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:--

KINMOND’S IMPROVED PATENT DOUBLE ACTION TEA ROLLING MACHINE.

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.

TEA ROLLING MACHINERY.

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:--

TEA ROLLING MACHINERY.

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:--

“Balling” of the leaf is avoided.
The tips are kept quite bright.
Heating prevented.
Simplicity of “feed” and “discharge.”
One attendant, a minimum of motive power, and low priced.
A good twist attained.
Simplicity in the machine, and ease of transport and erection.

_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:--

SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING THE DRUMS AND THE FACES OF THE ROLLERS IN
TEA ROLLING MACHINERY.

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

_Tea-Drying Machines_.

_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):--

ROBERTSON’S TYPHOON.

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 Cal. Equi.
value. Ex. 1-8-1/2.
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 15-1/4
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 7-1/2

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 1/4 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:--

ALLEN’S PATENT DRYING MACHINE.

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 2-1/2′ × 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:--

THE SIROCCO.

Dear Sir,--As both sides of a question, _viz._ for and against,
should be stated before the public for their judgment, I think I
may say that, as far as we have seen _in print_, the “Sirocco” is a
“first rate Tea-drying machine.” I beg to state that _all_ does not
appear in print, though what does appear there may be quite true,
and quite right too for the seller to get as many sales of it as he
can, for who would be such an ass as to cry down his own invention
or anything else he wished to profit by. The “Sirocco,” as I have
seen (and I have seen over ten, and amongst them the latest improved
ones), does not thoroughly fire off the Tea without burning it: the
Tea must be taken out of the machine when three parts fired, and
allowed to cool, when its own heat, and the fact of it being gathered
in one place, give sufficient heat to finish the kutcha firing, but
pucka batti is required after that. Again, the advertisement would
lead one to suppose that the drying is effected by means of the
draught of hot air entirely: now if this were the case, when the
fires are first lighted in the machine, the hot air would at once
be of sufficient heat to dry Tea; but this is not the case, for the
whole iron work, in fact, the whole apparatus, iron work, &c., has
to be heated up by fire, and when a little off red hot, the Tea is
put in and fired. I do not mean to say that hot air does not ascend
through the Tea, but I contend that the heat of the iron has more
to do with the drying; there is no detriment to the Tea, I feel
convinced, whether it is dried by hot iron or hot air, but there is a
very considerable detriment to the machine. Let purchasers ask any
engineer, or even blacksmith, how quickly iron burns away, and he can
tell them.

Up to date no doubt the “Sirocco” has seen its run: over 200 are
advertised as in use, but it is now beaten by two machines which
have come out lately, and which beat the “Sirocco” entirely as to
quantity dried and simplicity of working, and for durability should
last any time by careful looking after. One is Robertson’s, which is
firebrick, and the other Allen’s; both these machines for durability
cannot be surpassed: the difference in results between the two is,
that one dries every tray of Tea in the same time without turning
over, and the other requires to have the Tea turned over and the
trays changed, &c., as in the “Sirocco.”

The “Sirocco,” no doubt, was a good Tea-drying machine in its time,
and the inventor deserves the greatest credit for it, but it has been
improved upon, as is always inevitably the case in machinery.

I trust no offence will be taken by the “Sirocco” inventor, as such
is not intended. Any answer of his will be gladly read.

Cachar. Yours faithfully, PUCKA TEA.

There may have been an answer, but I did not see it.

_Gibbs and Barry’s Tea Dryer._--This machine has been lately invented. I saw it when not as complete as it is now. I have tried to get details, but failed. It must have merit, however, for though a late machine, some thirty-six are now in operation; I heard one good judge speak very well of it. More are, I hear, being despatched to India. No trays are used with this Dryer.

_Shand’s Dryer._--This hails from Ceylon. Steam for drying Tea is not quite a new idea. I saw an apparatus to use steam in Cachar years ago. The great advantage claimed for this Dryer is that Tea cannot be burnt. It is quite a new invention. This, from the _Tea Gazette_, describes it:--

A NEW TEA DRYER.

A gentleman in Colombo, Ceylon, a Mr. C. Shand, as we mentioned in
our last, has invented a new patent Tea Dryer. The following is a
description of his invention:--

The barbacue-shaped steam-heated Tea Dryer is the cheapest, most
economical and safest drying machine.

As this machine can be made any length and width, the quantity of
leaf which can be manufactured is only limited by the extent of
drying surface. One, 5 feet wide, and 15 feet long, will admit of
about forty pounds of Tea being spread as thinly as on Sirocco trays,
and, if heated to 150° Fahrenheit, would dry a maund per hour. The
steam for heating thin galvanized iron drying surface is generated in
the space (3 inches) between it and the thin boiler plate bottom.

The machine, which is made steam-tight, is partially filled with
water, and placed on a fire stove. It is evident that a comparatively
small quantity of fuel will generate sufficient steam to heat a large
surface, especially if the smoke flue is placed under the whole
length of the machine.

As it is impossible to fire-burn the Tea, dried by the steam-heated
Dryer, the enormous advantage of being independent of the care and
judgment of coolies, and of the necessity of uninterrupted European
supervision, is too evident to require comment.

Then comes the figure of the Dryer with the following note:--

“Barbacue-shaped Tea Dryer.--The far end should be slightly higher
than that over the fire, to allow the space over it to be full of
water.

An apparatus for escape of steam and supplying water is inserted in
the end plate covering the boiler.”

The _Ceylon Observer_, referring to the above, asks the following
questions:--

Is it really impossible by means of steam to over-heat, though we may
not, indeed cannot, “fire-burn” Tea? And when a boiler is employed
to generate steam, do we become quite independent of the care and
judgment of coolies, and avoid the necessity of uninterrupted
European supervision? Will not a thermometer be necessary to indicate
the proper degree of heat, will it not require close watching, and
will there not be danger of the boiler exploding if neglected? The
danger may be reduced to a minimum, but we should be glad of proof
that it cannot exist.

Mr. Shand in reply writes--With reference to your remarks and queries
regarding my Tea-drying machine, will you allow me to mention that,
as it is not intended to sustain any pressure of steam, the drying
surface cannot easily be heated over 150 degrees.

As a matter of course, the Tea takes a longer time to dry than when
made by Siroccos, in which the temperature is maintained at 275
degrees, but the extent of drying surface available makes this a
matter of secondary importance.

I did not mean that no care or attention is required to keep up
fire and supply boiling water periodically from a cistern placed
over the flue; but you can understand that the same care, judgment
and observation is not required to dry Tea at a comparatively low
temperature as at a very high one: for instance, it does not injure
coffee to allow it to remain on the barbacue after it is thoroughly
dry; but put it in a roaster, and what care and judgment is not
required to perfect the roasting!

No doubt, by the use of Siroccos and other modern appliances,
the risk of fire-burning is now greatly diminished, but these
still require great care in shifting the trays and watching the
thermometer. This constant watching is obviated by the use of my
machine, and all the superintendent has to do is to feel when the Tea
becomes crisp and dry. He has the security that, if this is neglected
to be done at the moment it is sufficiently dry, no injury takes
place by its remaining on the heated surface.

The machine is especially adapted for redrying Tea before packing,
this being an operation carried on at a low temperature, and
requiring a good deal of care.

There are, it is well known, two difficulties connected with the
proper manufacture of Tea, requiring at present the constant
supervision of the superintendent: these are fermentation and
firing. If the necessity of closely watching the latter can be
dispensed with, it gives the superintendents more time to direct
the fermentation, on which the colour of the infused leaf, and
consequently the value, so greatly depends.

I have now considered all the Dryers I know of except Kinmond’s and Jackson’s. I have purposely left these to the last. While in the case of Rollers I thought Jackson had done best, in Dryers I most decidedly award the first place to Kinmond.

_Jackson’s Dryer._--A long and exhaustive report upon it from Mr. Carter, of the Chandpore Garden, Chittagong, appears in the _Tea Gazette_, November 7, 1881. It is too long to insert here. No one can read it and doubt that the trials were most carefully conducted, and without bias of any kind. The results are not in favour of the machine. Moreover, were Jackson’s Dryers a real success I should have been aware of the fact long ago. I incline to the belief Mr. Jackson thinks he can do better, for he has lately brought out a Self-acting Tea Dryer regarding which the following appeared in the _Tea Gazette_:--

JACKSON’S NEW SELF-ACTING TEA DRYER.