CHAPTER XXXVI.

TEA MACHINERY.

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.

Messrs. W. and J. Jackson have invented a new apparatus that will

deal with the Tea itself throughout the drying process, and thus,

they submit, secure a perfection in the dessication of the leaf not

hitherto obtained. The objects arrived at by the new invention are as

follows:--

1.--After the leaf is fed into the machine it requires no more

attention until it is discharged dry.

2.--Every individual leaf is simultaneously exposed in precisely a

similar manner to the action of the heated air, thus producing an

unvaried and perfectly even dried leaf.

3.--The Tea is steadily but very slowly kept in motion, thereby

dispensing with the tedious and tiring watchfulness of attendants,

hitherto required in Tea drying on the tray system.

4.--There are no trays about the machine to handle, and it is,

therefore, thoroughly durable and cannot get out of order.

In operating with the machine, a boy or attendant has simply to

spread the leaf on a slowly moving feeding web or band, which carries

it forward and places it in the machine, where it is steadily but

inactively kept in motion, and in due course is discharged dry and

crisp from a shoot at the delivery end; so long, therefore, as

the attendant continues to supply the machine with leaf, it will

steadily dry and discharge it, and should he have occasion to leave

the machine at any time, no injury can take place to the leaf in the

apparatus, as it must pass on and be discharged.

The leaf is continuously, but very slowly, turned over, disentangled

and individually presented to the action of the heated air by a

peculiar combination of concentric cylinders, thus ensuring not only

the most uniform fermentation, but the drying of each leaf being

simultaneously effected alike must produce an unvaried briskness and

quality of liquor not obtainable from any of the methods of drying at

present known.

The machine will dry about forty maunds of green leaf per day, and

will be approximately 9′ long, 3-1/2′ wide, and 8′ high.

The apparatus will take very little driving, which can either be

effected by steam or hand power. It is very simple, easily erected,

and self-contained.

I know nothing about this new Dryer beyond what is printed above, and I

rather doubt if any have yet been set up. _If_ the advantages detailed

are truly all realised, they are doubtless of much value.

_Kinmond’s Dryer._--I shall devote extra space to this, for I _believe_

in it. I have seen it working for a long time on the Phoolbarry Garden,

and I continue since I left India to receive good reports of it. This

is what the inventor himself says of it recently:--

This Tea-drying machine continues to give great satisfaction. The

improvements made last year considerably increased the out-turn of

Tea, and reduced the amount of fuel required. Further improvements

have this year been introduced in fastening the iron plates at the

corners of the trays with copper rivets, and otherwise strengthening

the trays, remedying many small defects suggested by planters who

are using the Dryers, and in improving the arrangement of the

fire-bricks over the furnace. The latter, as well as some of the

smaller alterations, were suggested by Mr. Ansell (inventor of the

sifting machine which bears his name), an engineer who has had great

experience in and around Darjeeling in erecting and working all the

three sizes of these Dryers.

This is the only Tea-drying machine which can keep pace with the

largest rolling machines. It is made in three sizes. The capacity of

the smallest or No. 1 Dryer is one maund of pucka Tea per hour. The

capacity of No. 2 Dryer is two maunds per hour, and that of No. 3

Dryer is three maunds per hour. The consumption of fuel is less than

one maund of wood fuel to one maund of pucka Tea dried.

One of the great advantages of this Tea Dryer is the facility it

gives for _final firing_ before packing. The enhanced price of Tea

which has been dried and final fired in this Dryer is well shewn in

the high average of 1_s._ 6_d._ per lb., which the Scottish Assam

Company’s Teas have fetched this season. See letters annexed from

their superintendent in Assam, Mr. Cruickshanks, and their secretary

in Edinburgh, Mr. Moffat.

When _final_ firing Tea with the Dryer, it is found convenient to

place a fine gauze cover over the top trays in each compartment, to

prevent any of the Tea dust being carried away with the hot air which

passes through the Tea.

In order to get the maximum quantity of work from the Dryer, the

trays must be spread with rolled leaf twice as thick as that used

when Tea is dried over charcoal, where there is no forced current of

air, and after the Tea has been _half-dried_, then the Tea on _two_

trays should be spread on _one_ tray, and the drying finished. In

the Dryers now in course of construction, the trays have been made

one-half deeper, so that the half-dried Tea on _three_ trays should

be finished in _one_ tray. The out-turn of the machine is greatly

diminished when the foregoing method is not observed; and owing to

its non-observance, many of the Dryers in use have never been worked

to their greatest capacity.

The Dryer should be lined outside with one thickness of bricks--they

are the cheapest and best non-conductors of heat--inferior or

badly-burned bricks may be used. Both ends of the Dryer should be

lined, and both sides and elbows as high as the trays. The top may

either have a lining of bricks, or four inches thick of sand or

clay. When the Dryer is lined round with bricks, it not only greatly

reduces the consumption of fuel, but by preventing the radiation of

heat, it enables the men to increase the out-turn of pucka Tea.

The Dryer is extremely simple and compact--the No. 2 size occupies

a space of about 7 feet long and 3 feet wide. The fan of this Dryer

requires about half a horse-power to drive it.

The fan should be driven at a speed of 500 revolutions per minute.

The pulley on the fan spindle is 7-1/2 inches diameter and 4 inches

wide.

Owing to the satisfaction given by these Dryers this season, an

exceptionally large number of orders are on hand, and although a

number of each size is generally kept in stock, the patentee will be

obliged to those requiring Dryers for next season to kindly send in

their orders early.

No. 1 Dryer, capable of drying one maund of pucka Tea per hour, £150;

No. 2 Dryer, capable of drying two maunds of pucka Tea per hour,

£220; No. 3 Dryer, capable of drying three maunds of pucka Tea per

hour, £300. These prices are f.o.b. in London.

London Agents--Messrs. Geo. Williamson and Co., 7, East India Avenue;

Calcutta Agents--Messrs. Williamson, Magor and Co., 4, Mangoe Lane.

The best of the three sizes is No. 3. I have quite lately sent out two

of them, one for the Phoolbarry, one for the Leesh Company’s Gardens,

both in the Western Dooars. I think the prices are much too high, and

might with advantage (to both inventor and planters) be reduced; but

as to the excellence of the machine there can, I think, be no doubt.

My opinion is shared by many. I have before me many testimonials as to

its excellence. Space forbids me inserting them here, but Mr. Kinmond

or his agents will send them on application.

In March, 1881, so satisfied was I even then with the Dryer (both the

manager, Mr. Pillans, at Phoolbarry, and I am still more so _now_), I

wrote the following to the _Tea Gazette_, and I give it here as details

are embodied:--

KINMOND’S TEA DRYER.

To all interested in Tea in India, and their name is legion, Tea

manufacturing machinery and its capabilities must be a subject of

great interest.

Though Tea prices may, and I think to a certain extent will, revive,

the old scale which existed previous to the late serious fall

will never probably return. How serious the fall has been will be

appreciated when I state that gardens which previously realised 14

annas to 1 rupee for their produce think now they do well if they

obtain an average of 10 annas. Thus, an average of 12 annas (even

if the partial rise I hope for takes place) will probably be more

than most Indian plantations will get in the future. In two words,

the Tea industry of India is passing through a period of depression

and a crisis which argues “the survival of the fittest.” Not only

must plantations, destined to last, produce largely, they must

also make good Teas at a small cost. This latter, I hold, both as

regards quality and economy, _can_ only be attained by the use of

machinery; and thus, what is the best kind of rolling machine, the

best description of dryer, equaliser, and sifting apparatus, is an

all-important point.

Tea machinery is still quite in its infancy. Various as are the

machines in use, and superior as some are to others, perhaps none of

them are yet quite perfect. Still, planters cannot afford to wait

for ultimate perfection, for though any machines bought to-day will

probably be more or less out of date in a few years’ time, he who

waits _must_ go to the wall in the meanwhile. Realising this fact, as

those who know the subject do, they (and they are many) ask eagerly:--

“Which of the several machines for the different processes in Tea

manufacture shall we buy?”

I have not now, perhaps, the knowledge to discuss fairly the several

merits of the various machines for each different process, but as Tea

Dryers hold an important place in the list, and I have, perhaps, an

exceptional experience of one kind, I purpose to give your readers

the benefit thereof.

Years ago, when I first mooted the idea that Tea could be fired

without charcoal, it was scouted. It was said, “The fumes of charcoal

had some chemical and necessary effect.” “The Chinese would not

have used it from time immemorial had a substitute, and a cheaper

one, been practicable.” Such were the objections. It is now no

longer a question. A great part, perhaps the greater part, of the

Indian produce is to-day worked with other fuel, and it is only

a question of time when _all_ of it will be so. It is generally

admitted that Tea prepared in Dryers is more valuable than that fired

over charcoal; and begging the question that the fumes of charcoal

are _not_ necessary (the old idea is very nearly exploded), it is

reasonable that it should be so; for, if there is one thing certain

in Tea manufacture, it is that speed is necessary. Charcoal drying

took on an average 45 minutes; Tea is fired in the best Dryers in

eight minutes. In respect of speed, Kinmond’s Dryer (which is the one

I advocate) is certainly unequalled.

When, as in large factories, 30 or 40 maunds of Tea have to be made

daily, it is evident that, _cæteris paribus_, the machine which will

do most in a given time and given space must be the best. In these

respects also Kinmond’s Dryer stands well, for the small size (No.

1) will do one maund, and the larger size (No. 2) will turn out two

maunds per hour. In other words, in a working day of 12 hours (and I

allow no more, for I do not believe in night work) 12 and 24 maunds

daily are the capacities of the two sizes. Considering that the said

two sizes, with necessary stokehole, tables, &c., occupy respectively

not more than 200 and 260 square feet of space in a factory, the

satisfactory results, in both the above respects, are unquestionable.

Tea made at night, both because the colour of it in its different

stages cannot be well seen (let the light be what it will), and also

because superintendence cannot then be so close, is never so good as

day-made Tea. This is _why_ I do not believe in night work; and it is

also a very important extra reason why machinery (which by its speed

enables all the necessary Tea to be made by daylight) will prove such

a great and lasting advantage.

When Kinmond’s Dryer was first constructed, it was proposed to work

it at 300 degrees. Later experience has proved 260 degrees is better

and sufficient; but of course more time is thus taken, and with the

old sizes one and two maunds per hour could not be turned out at the

lower temperature. The machines are now made one-fifth larger to

obviate this.

The fan is worked at 600 revolutions per minute, and this is found to

be the best speed.

Several alterations, and important ones, have been made since the

first machines were constructed, but I will mention them shortly,

for they will only be understood by those who know the Dryer--1. The

trays now take out alternately both sides. 2. The fine Tea or dhole

trays take out independently. 3. Outside bearings are supplied to

the fan shaft or spindle: thus the lubricating oil cannot now run

down into the fan casing. 4. The chimney is moved forward, and thus

heats a larger amount of air and reduces fuel. After the necessary

temperature has once been obtained, one maund of wood will fire one

maund of Tea. This is an outside estimate.

The great feature in Kinmond’s Dryer is the fact that a _separate_

blast of hot air is forced through the Tea on each tray. In all

other Dryers I have heard of, the _same_ hot air passes through each

tray successively, and moisture is consequently more or less carried

upwards through each. It is principally in this respect, and in the

large quantity of work it executes, that I consider the excellence of

Kinmond’s Dryer to consist.

It remains only to give shortly the results of a long series of

experiments with Kinmond’s Dryer. The valuations were made by more

than one Calcutta broker:--

_Class._ _Charcoal dried._ _Machine dried._

Pekoe Rs. 0 11 0 Rs. 0 14 0

Broken Pekoe Rs. 0 10 0 Rs. 1 1 6

Pekoe £ 0 1 6 £ 0 1 10

Broken Pekoe £ 0 1 5 £ 0 2 7

These were made from the same leaf, at the same time, with every

care. In one of my gardens, after Kinmond’s Dryer was obtained, the

Teas averaged upwards of 2 annas per lb. more all round.

The Dryer can also be used for withering leaf, but in my opinion no

Tea Dryer is fit for that work, inasmuch as to do a large quantity

takes far too much time.

Artificial withering is only necessary when the weather is wet and

cold, and the machine to do it should do a large quantity _at a

time_. No Tea Dryer _can_ do this. A machine fitted for that work has

yet to be invented, unless Baker’s Wet Leaf Dryer, of which I have

heard good accounts, but have not seen, would answer.

EDWARD MONEY.

Since the above was written, further improvements and alterations

(suggested by Mr. Ansell, the Tea engineer, and Mr. Pillans, manager at

Phoolbarry) have been carried out. The machine is now very perfect, and

I consider it the best Dryer at present in the market.

Mr. Kinmond has invented quite lately a coke-burning Dryer. He is now

taking this with him to India to try it, and has sent me the following

prospectus of it:--

The Coke Burning Tea Dryer has been made to meet the want of Tea

districts where wood fuel is scarce, and coke can be obtained at a

reasonable price. The upper part of the Coke Burning Tea Dryer is

exactly the same as the No. 2 Wood Burning Dryer, which is adapted to

burn any kind of fuel, but its capacity is a little more, being from

2-1/4 to 2-1/2 maunds pucka Tea per hour. One maund of pucka Tea can

be dried with the consumption of about 1/4 maund of coke. Besides its

large capacity for doing work, and its small consumption of coke, the

Coke Burning Dryer has other advantages. It is nearly one-half less

in weight than the Wood Burning Dryer, which means one-half saving

in freight. It requires no foundation or brickwork of any kind; and

taking into consideration the quantity of work it does, it is the

cheapest Dryer in the market--costing only £180, f.o.b. in England.

I know nothing of this Coke Dryer. Its price compares favourably with

his other Dryers.

In April, 1881, the following leader, written by me, appeared in the

Calcutta _Statesman_. Though other Tea matters are included (all

of interest), I give it here as further testimony to the merits of

Kinmond’s Dryer:--

The days are passed when Tea planters hoped to make a fortune in

a few years. There are mainly two reasons for this. Firstly, the

prices of Tea have fallen greatly, in many cases 30 and 40 per cent.

This is due to the fact that supply, in the case of Indian Tea, has

overtaken demand. Still, there is some comfort to all interested

in the industry to be derived from the low prices which have ruled

during the last two years. So cheap have Indian Teas been that

the attention of the trade has thereby been directed to them, and

consequently the deliveries of the last few months have exceeded any

known previously.[99] It is calculated by those best able to judge,

that if the present rate of deliveries in London continues, the stock

in June next will not exceed twelve million pounds, and the truth is,

strange as it may appear, that below this point it is not well that

the stock in hand should fall, because, if it does, dealers will not

be able to meet their requirements, and will then perforce buy more

China. Low as prices are, we therefore, nevertheless, consider the

statistical position of Tea to-day as good. There is another point

which should give comfort and hope to the Indian planter, in spite

of the fact that we are heavily handicapped in our race with China,

inasmuch as owing to more expensive labour our cost of production

_must_ exceed theirs. This source of hope is the great point now

generally admitted, that Indian Tea is better and goes further than

China Tea. The experience of each of us can quote instances of

individuals dropping China Tea, and taking to India; who knows of

anyone doing the reverse? We admit the taste for Indian Tea is more

or less an acquired one. Still, the public at home have already been

educated to the taste by the yearly increasing proportion of Indian

mixed with China Tea. Speaking generally (though the exceptions

are many and increase yearly), it is true that Indian Tea is not

obtainable pure, but no more is China. The bulk of the Tea now sold

to the public in the United Kingdom is a mixture, three parts China

and one Indian, and all points to the fact that in a few more years

the general mixture will be half-and-half.

We are thus surely paving the way, in other words, teaching the

English public to like Indian Tea, and the broad fact that, once

used, it is never abandoned for its rival is surely a very hopeful

feature. The truth is that were it possible to _make_ the population

of England, Australia, and America drink Indian Tea for one week

only, the demand after that week would be enormous, and we should

hear no more of “supply exceeding demand;” nay, more, many thousands

of, acres would at once be added to the present cultivation in India.

But we have somewhat wandered from the question we set out with,

_viz._, _why_ Tea does not pay now as it once did. The first reason

we have given; the second is that there is now no market for Tea

seed. This last reason is little dwelt on, but it is a very important

factor. The days were when Rs. 300 per maund, and even more, were

paid for Tea seed, and though this did not last long, the price for

many years up to 1878 was about Rs. 100. Now it is simply unsaleable.

The receipts for Tea seed, during all these years, formed a large

part of mature garden earnings, and, to quote one instance, thereto

in a great measure were due the big dividends paid by the Assam

Company.

But though Tea prices may, and we think will, improve, it is not

likely we shall ever again see the rates obtainable formerly. This

being so, it is probable that only those plantations in the future

will pay that produce Tea cheaply. How is this to be done? Those

gardens that are heavily weighted by unsuitable climates, by a bad

class of plant, by slopes which are too steep, by inordinately

expensive labour, or other causes, will have a hard time of it, but

plantations with natural advantages need in no way despair. Though,

as we said above, we cannot, in the matter of cheap labour, vie with

China, we have a great advantage over the Flowery Land as regards

economy of production in another respect. We allude to the use of

machinery, which does much now, and will do more and more as each

year passes, to reduce the cost of production. Machinery in the

manufacture of Tea is, we believe, almost unknown in China. There

each and every operation is performed by hand; here in India many now

do, and eventually all will, wither, roll, fire, and sort by the

help of machines. It says not a little for the enterprise and the

inventive genius of the Anglo-Saxon race that, while in China the

manufacture of Tea dates back many centuries, and yet all the Tea is

still made by hand, we in India, who have only planted Tea some forty

years, have invented machines and use them to-day for each and every

operation in manufacture. It is but as yesterday that we imported

Chinamen to teach us the _modus operandi_. We now know far more than

they do on the subject, and verily the pupil has beaten his master.

Though machinery reduces the cost of production, and in more than

one case improves the quality of Tea, and planters know it, the

difficulty before them to-day is to know which is the best machine

for each operation. Unanimity on this point is not to be expected

yet. One swears by Jackson, another by Kinmond, others by Ansell,

Barry, Lyle, the inventor of the Sirocco, and so on. The machines

and names of inventors are many, and each has its disciples. Perhaps

the most favourite rolling machines are Jackson’s and Kinmond’s, but

we see the latter has just produced what he calls a “Centrifugal

Rolling Machine” which he thinks will supersede all others. We have

not seen it, though it is at work on several gardens, and so can give

no opinion about it; but another of Kinmond’s machines, his Dryer,

we know well. It was long a moot point if Tea could be efficiently

fired by any other agent than charcoal. Many affirmed that the fumes

of charcoal were necessary; and when, years ago, Colonel Money, so

well known by his writings in Tea matters, affirmed from experiments

that charcoal was not necessary, but that any fuel would do the

work, few believed him, for people said it was impossible to credit

that the Chinese would have gone on using charcoal (so much more

expensive than other fuel) for centuries, were it not a necessity.

What Colonel Money then predicted has already come to pass. Much of

the Tea now produced in India never sees charcoal at all, and it is

very certain that in two or three years all Indian Tea will be fired

by machinery. We say this is certain simply because, apart from the

saving effected by using other fuel, the value of Teas fired by

machinery is increased. It is natural it should be so because, by the

use of the best machines invented for that purpose, the heat can be

regulated to a nicety, an impossibility by the old mode of charcoal

firing.

Kinmond’s Dryer is, in our opinion, the best Tea Dryer machine

yet invented. Space forbids our describing it minutely (besides,

only those, and they are few, who understand Tea machinery would

appreciate our description), but its general features we will shortly

touch on. In the comparatively small space it occupies in a factory,

and in the large quantity of work it does in a given time, we think

it unrivalled. This last feature does away with the necessity of

night-work, which, apart from other drawbacks, is prejudicial to the

excellence of Tea, because, among other reasons, its colour cannot

then be appreciated in its several stages. Tea made at night is

never very good. With sufficient motive power, sufficient rolling

machinery, and Kinmond’s Dryers, the factory (let the leaf gathered

be what it may) can be shut up at dark. Kinmond’s Dryer may yet

be improved upon by himself or by others, but as it now stands it

possesses a feature peculiar to itself, and all important. The hot

air, driven by a fan (the speed of which, under control, regulates

the temperature), does not pass successively through the different

trays, for the hot air, drying the Tea in each tray, has a separate

inlet and outlet. By this means is avoided the objection of carrying

the moisture absorbed by the hot air from one tray to the other.

Another peculiarity in the machine is, that the same air is used

again and again, being re-dried and re-heated each time. By this two

advantages are obtained: (1) fuel is saved, it is easier to heat air

which still retains caloric than fresh air; (2) the aroma of Tea is

very volatile, and when hot air, which dries it, passes away, some of

the essence and strength of the Tea goes with it. But here the same

air being used again and again, the volatile essence (how much who

can say?) is returned to the Tea. It is reasonable to suppose that

this will increase the value of the Tea; indeed, we know it did so

materially in one garden last season.

We do not doubt that the unanimity wanting at present amongst

planters as regards machinery will more or less come with time, but

only long experience can settle the merits of rival machinery. One

thing, however, is very certain--if the exports of Indian Tea ever

vie in quantity with China, it will be due to the use of machinery in

manufacture.

I may state that Kinmond and some other inventors of Dryers claim for

them that in wet weather green leaf may be withered by their means.

But, as I stated some pages back, I do not think any Dryers suitable

for withering. _That_ machine has yet to be invented.

To conclude my remarks on dryers, I give (again from the _Tea Gazette_)

an estimate of the cost of drying by the old primitive mode with

charcoal, and with machines. There was no signature to the letter. I

cannot say if the figures assumed are quite correct, but in any case

the machines have much the best of it:--

TEA DRYING MACHINERY _v._ CHARCOAL.

Dear Sir,--Tea drying by machinery _versus_ Tea drying by charcoal

fires over choolahs is, I believe, still discussed as to the relative

merits of each. I will try and give you a fair estimate of cost, and

speak from experience as far as I know relative to the merits, ills,

&c., &c., of both modes of firing.

_1st. Charcoal firing and its merits._--Except for those who persist

that the fumes of charcoal are necessary to make good Tea, I can

see no merit whatever in charcoal drying, either in cost, quality,

rapidity, saving of labour, or anything else, over machine-dried Tea.

_Cost per maund Tea of Tea dried over choolahs by charcoal._

R. A. P.

Charcoal at 8 annas per maund, 1-1/2 maunds = 0 12 0

1 Battiwallah at annas 4-6, kutcha firing = 0 4 6

Do. pucka firing, say = 0 0 6

---------

Cost of firing by charcoal Rs. 1 1 0

N.B.--Notice the labour staff required for three months in the year

to make charcoal; the immense space (and heat) taken up by choolahs;

cost of timber used for charcoal; the number of trays, gauze, iron,

&c., &c., required; the masonry and carpenter’s work always more or

less out of repair; loss of small tea falling through trays, &c., &c.

Now let us take

_Cost of machine-dried Tea per maund._

R. A. P.

1st. Those machines which dry by coke, say cost

of coke = 0 8 0

3 men at annas 4-6 per 5 maunds Tea = about 0 2 8

---------

Cost of drying per maund Tea for a machine,

drying by coke 5 maunds in 10 hours 0 10 8

I now give an estimate of cost of 1 maund Tea dried by a machine of

similar capabilities, but drying with any sort of fuel--coal, wood,

grass, bamboo, &c., say 2 maunds of firewood at 6 pie per maund = 1

anna per 1 maund Tea.

N.B.--Price of firewood at 3 pie per maund should be nearer the mark.

3 men’s pay, annas 4-6 for 5 maunds in 10 hours = annas 2-8 per

maund. The analysis of the above comes to this--

R. A. P.

Charcoal drying = 1 1 0

Coke „ = 0 10 8[100]

Wood fire „ = 0 3 8

We read of machines drying with any fuel, and doing double the Tea

of what I have estimated above, and how people can still stick to

charcoal beats me.--(No signature.)

_Sorting or Sifting_ is the next process--that is to say, dividing the

Tea (by passing it through sieves) into different kinds, as Pekoe,

Broken Pekoe, Pekoe Souchong, and Broken Tea. All do not divide it

thus, for some make other kinds also. In the body of this Essay (page

122) I say, “I do not believe in any present or future machine for

sifting Tea.” I did not then; that was in the early days of Tea; but I

was wrong. A sifting machine, on the large scale on which Tea is now

made, is essential for every garden.

_Jackson’s Sifter._--I have seen this, and heard it well spoken of, but

I have no experience of it.

_Greig’s Sifter._--This I have not seen, but from the drawing I have I

should doubt if it would sift enough per day for a large garden.

_Pridham’s Sifter._--This is quite a new thing. I know nothing of it.

The fact is, the manager at Phoolbarry and I have been so thoroughly

satisfied with the Sifter we use there (Ansell’s) I could conceive

nothing better, and I have not therefore looked into the matter of

Sifters.

In January, 1881, I sent an article to the _Tea Gazette_ describing

_Ansell’s Sifter_, and as I thought then I think now. I believe it is

by far the best Tea Sifter yet invented. Many are the testimonials,

too, in its favour. The price, £80, is too high; but the manufacturers

(Ransomes, Head and Jeffries, of Ipswich) advise me they propose

reducing it to £70. Even that, I think, is too much; but there can be

no question the use of it effects a great saving in a factory.

This is my article:--

ANSELL’S SIFTING, SORTING, AND FANNING MACHINE.

_January 27, 1881._

In the days gone by, Tea cultivation was, to those commencing a

Tea career, _the_ thing to study. Those days are passed. None

are embarking in new gardens, and but few are extending existing

cultivation. Prices have fallen so wofully that all that Tea planters

think of to-day is how to make what they have _pay_. _I_ believe in

Tea still. I think the present low range of prices cannot last, and I

think so simply because I know Tea will not be cultivated year after

year at a loss. But the present crisis is very serious: it means,

in five words, “the survival of the fittest,” and even the fittest

will not succeed, unless every advantage is taken of all existing Tea

knowledge.

Tea manufacture is now the most important branch in the industry. We

have advanced greatly in the last few years; but Tea manufacture, as

regards economy in doing it, is yet comparatively in its infancy.

Still we have done a great deal since the indigenous plant was

discovered in the jungles of Assam, now nearly fifty years ago; we

have advanced more in Tea manufacture than the Chinese, who have

been making Tea many centuries. That is to say, I affirm that the

Indian Tea planter of ordinary intelligence knows more of both Tea

cultivation and Tea manufacture to-day than any of his Chinese

contemporaries. The Chinaman grows Tea, and makes Tea, as he taught

_us_ to do it twenty to thirty years ago. The pupil in this case

has certainly beaten his master. We have made some improvements

in Tea planting and Tea cultivation, but where we have left our

teachers far behind is in manufacture. “Johnny” makes his Tea as

his father made it before him, taught by his grandfather who made

it the same way; and, for aught we know, no improvements, in that

way, have taken place in the course of many centuries. All is hand

labour; machinery to them is unknown. The most primitive ideas in Tea

manufacture are still adhered to. In support of the latter, I will

quote one instance: Tea, from time immemorial, has always been dried

by charcoal in China; no other way is known there now. How is it

here in India? A large proportion of the produce is fired with other

fuel, aided by machinery; and it is only a question of time (and a

very short time) when the whole of it will be thus prepared. I could

quote other instances: let this suffice, for no comparison can be

drawn between Tea manufacture as followed out in China and India in

this year 1881. The former is as crude as it was two or five hundred

years ago: the latter (though still far from perfection) in its many

details, in its numerous machines cleverly contrived to save labour

and better the Teas, is a striking illustration of the activity, the

energy, the inventive genius of the Anglo-Saxon race!

An Indian Tea factory, well set up with machinery--that is to say

with a green-leaf drying apparatus, rolling machines, Tea dryers,

equalisers, and sifting and sorting machines, all driven by an

engine of 15-horse power--offers a wonderful contrast to a Chinese

Tea factory, where all is handwork. But more strange still is the

comparison alongside of the fact, that in the former case the

industry dates back only some thirty years; in the latter many

centuries.

Tea machinery is destined to work great results in India. When

brought to perfection (it is far on the road now), it will so cheapen

the cost of manufacture that, though labour is dearer with us than

in China, we shall, thanks thereto, be able to lay down our Teas at

cheaper rates than the produce of the Flowery Land. If Indian Tea

ever vies in quantity with China in the Tea-consuming countries of

the world, it will be due entirely to the economy effected by our

machinery. I do not myself anticipate that Indian Teas will ever

beat China out of the field, but, inasmuch as our Teas are better,

because the taste for Indian Tea is growing apace, I do believe the

day will come (it will scarcely be in our time) that the Tea exports

from India will equal those from China; and, as I said before, to

machinery, far more than to anything else, will that end be due.

There is therefore no question of more importance to the Indian

planter to-day than Tea machinery. It is a difficult question too,

because so many machines, for each of the different necessary

processes, are vieing in competition for public favour. “Which is

the best machine to buy?” is the question one hears asked daily.

I propose, with your leave, to write a series of articles on Tea

machinery, pointing out, as far as in me lies, the advantages and

defects of those which commend themselves most to me, for I wish to

give planters, through your paper, the advantage of my experience;

and as my expressing an opinion in no way precludes others from

doing the same, and I know your columns are open to all, I would

invite discussion on rival merits, and thus certainly benefit the Tea

industry.

I will to-day describe what, I think, is the best Tea sifting and

fanning machine extant. It is true it is the last machine used in

manufacture, but that does not signify; I will take all the others in

turn.

The said machine is the invention of an able man and engineer, Mr. C.

W. Ansell, well known in the Darjeeling district for his knowledge of

Tea machinery. He has been for many years employed as an engineer in

Tea factories. I heard of his machine when I was lately in England,

and went down to Ipswich to the manufactory of Messrs. Ransomes,

Sims, and Head to see it. Though difficult to judge of it, as there

was no Tea wherewith to test it, I was so pleased with the principle

that I ordered one. The cost was £80. It has now been working on one

of my gardens some thirteen months, and in every way it has proved a

great success. But to describe it, as far as I can, in a few words:--

Its length is 19 feet, its breadth 5 feet. The Tea, in bulk, is

delivered through a hopper from an upper floor, on what I will call

the A end of the machine, to distinguish it from the other end, which

I will name B. The principle of all other sifters (except Jackson’s),

as far as I know, is, that the succeeding trays of differing wire

mesh are arranged one below the other, the slope all being the

same way, that is--from A to B. This plan is objectionable in the

following way: if the Tea has been well rolled and clings together, a

good deal of the fine Teas that are in the mass or bulk often passes

some distance down, perhaps over half the tray or wire-mesh length,

before falling through. If they do so, and the object is to sift out

any particular class on the next succeeding tray, there is only half

the length of mesh left to traverse to effect the object, instead of

the whole length of the tray. This is obviated in practice by pushing

the Teas continually back up the inclined tray; but this is done at

the expense of extra labour and making the Teas dusty and grey.

The above objection is obviated in Ansell’s machine. It consists

of four slopes, but each of these incline downwards, alternately,

different ways--_viz._, No. 1 (the upper), from A to B; No. 2, from

B to A; No. 3, from A to B; No. 4, from B to A, and below the mesh

of each slope is a carrying tin tray, sloping the same way, which

carries all the Tea which falls through each mesh down to _the head_

of the succeeding slope, while in each case the Tea which will _not_

pass through the mesh is delivered separately. The above arrangement,

however, does _not_ hold with the upper or No. 1 slope. This consists

of two wire trays or meshes, with the carrying tray below the lower

one. Such of the bulk as will not pass through the upper tray is

delivered on the head of No. 2 slope, at the B end of the machine.

What passes through the upper tray, but will not pass through the

lower, is delivered by a side shoot at the B end of the machine, and

is “No. 1 Pekoe.” What passes through both sieves on to the carrying

tray is also delivered by an opposite side shoot from the B end of

the machine, and is “Broken Pekoe.” Between Nos. 1 and 2 slopes is

an air chamber, which, as the bulk left on the upper sieve of No. 1

slope falls on the head of slope No. 2 (a blast being sent through it

by a fan at the A end of the machine), drives out of the said falling

bulk all red leaf, stalks, fannings, &c.

No. 2 slope receives the bulk at the B end of the machine, after the

red leaf and fannings are taken out as stated above, and what will

not pass through the mesh is delivered at the back of the A end of

the machine, and is “Congou;” while what does fall through the mesh

into the carrying tray below it (which is still bulk, consisting of

“Pekoe,” “Pekoe Souchong,” and “Souchong” mixed) is delivered at the

A end of the machine on to the head of No. 3 slope.

What will not pass through the mesh of No. 3 slope is delivered at

the B end of the machine in front, and is “Souchong;” while what does

pass through the mesh of No. 3 slope on to the carrying tray below

(still bulk, consisting of “Pekoe” and “Pekoe Souchong”) is delivered

on to the head of No. 4 slope at the B end of the machine.

No. 4 slope has no carrying tray: it would be useless. What will not

pass through the mesh is delivered at the A end of the machine, and

is “Pekoe Souchong;” while what does pass through the mesh falls

on the floor of the factory and is the remaining “Pekoe,” that is,

“Pekoe No. 2.”

The sorting is so far finished, and the results are the following

Teas, placed round the machine thus:--“Pekoe No. 1,” at the left

side of B end; “Broken Pekoe,” at right side of B end; “Red Leaf

and Fannings,” some distance in front of B end; “Souchong,” also in

front of B end, but nearer to the machine; “Congou,” at back of A

end; “Pekoe Souchong,” also at back of A end, but nearer the machine;

“Pekoe No. 2,” on the floor below the machine.

With Teas thus minutely sorted, all possible requirements are

provided for, and the planter can, by mixing or otherwise, make any

number of classes he may choose.

It will be observed that “Pekoe” is taken out twice, resulting in

“Nos. 1 and 2 Pekoe.” These differ slightly, but are better mixed

together. “Why take them out separately,” some exclaim, “to mix them

together again?” But there are three very good reasons: firstly,

the “Pekoe” is taken out at the commencement, previous to fanning,

to prevent the small or broken Pekoe tips being blown out in that

process; secondly, the “1st Pekoe” being taken out thus early,

its appearance is not injured by passing over a large amount of

sieve-mesh area; and thirdly, _all_ the “Pekoe” is thus extracted,

which it could not be, as far as I can see, by any other process.

From all the kinds detailed above, I make only four--viz., “Pekoe,”

“Broken Pekoe,” “Pekoe Souchong,” and “Broken Tea;” but others can do

as they will.[101]

The machine is of course driven by steam.[102] The movement of all

the trays is a backward and forward one of 3 inches longitudinal

semi-circular motion, the latter movement being imparted by the steel

spring hangers. Only a small amount of power is required to drive the

machine, viz., under half horse.

I must here conclude my description.

Now as to the amount of work the machine will do. I speak from actual

experience when I state what follows:--

It will sift and fan seven maunds of Tea per hour. The only hand

labour required to supplement it is a few (a very few) women to pick

out any foreign substances out of the “Congou.”

At our garden in Western Dooars, 1,260 maunds of Tea were made in

1880, and all sifted by this machine, the hand labour besides being

only 44 women during the whole season, or about one-fifth of a woman

per day.

The machine requires only two men to work it continually, and one boy

to feed it from the upper floor.

I can think of no possible objection to this machine, or even of any

possible improvement. I believe, in the case of a 300-acre garden

with a decent amount of produce, the machine, in its saving of

hand labour, pays for itself in one year, whilst the Teas are much

improved in appearance by its use, and fetch higher prices.

EDWARD MONEY.

I add two more letters in favour of the machine from the same paper:--

ANSELL’S PATENT TEA SORTING AND WINNOWING MACHINE.

Sir,--In respond to your call for information regarding Tea

machinery, I am happy to supply you with my experience of Ansell’s

Patent Tea Sorting and Winnowing Machine. I have been sifting the

whole of my Teas, through it this season, and am therefore in a

position to state what I think of it. I consider it a most useful

machine, and a great saver of labour. With four men, I do with it in

one day an amount of work which without it I would have to employ

from twenty to twenty-five men to accomplish.--Yours, &c.,

“SIFTER.”

ANSELL’S SIFTING MACHINE.

A correspondent writes from London to the _Ceylon Observer_ as

follows:--Ansell’s Patent Tea Sorter seems to be an article which

will later be much used in Ceylon. In a memo. before me there is

an extract from Messrs. George Williamson and Co., who say:--“The

manager of our Majilighur Garden writes:--‘I have now had sufficient

experience of Ansell’s Sifter to be able to report very favourably

upon it. It does its work thoroughly and cleanly, and, owing to the

comparatively small space it occupies, little or no loss occurs even

of the finest dust. Sixteen maunds in nine hours is what I find to be

about its capabilities, and four boys do all the work connected with

it. It has effected a great saving in the Tea house this year, and

has quite done away with hand-sieving, except equalizing the broken

Pekoe and broken Tea--a very trivial operation.’”

_Packing._--This is the final process. Unless Teas are packed directly

they are made, they require to be heated once more to drive off any

moisture imbibed. This can be done in a way in most of the dryers

described, perhaps in Kinmond’s best of all.[103]

This concludes my remarks on Tea machinery; but I shall not have a more

appropriate place than this to mention the ornamental tin boxes devised

by Messrs. Harvey Bros. and Tyler, as a new mode of packing Teas. The

following is an article of mine on the subject to the _Tea Gazette_,

written in 1880:--

I saw lately tin Tea boxes made to hold 20 lbs., which are

manufactured by Messrs. Harvey Brothers and Tyler, 21, Mincing Lane.

I was much pleased with them, for I foresaw that by their use great

good to the Indian Tea industry would accrue. I went to Mincing Lane,

and had a long talk with the firm, and came away convinced that the

fact of the said boxes should be known far and wide in India.

The boxes measure 15-3/4 by 10 15/16ths by 10 5/16ths. They are

handsomely illustrated with Indian Tea plantation subjects.[104]

Each piece runs into a groove in the adjoining one, so that one

minute will put a box together, and a touch of solder here and there

completes it; they are then perfectly air-tight. The boxes are very

sightly. Price is now 2_s._ 5_d._ per box. Boxes sent to Calcutta

up to this have been charged 2_s._ 7_d._ The price is dependent on

the fluctuating price of tin, which is somewhat lower now. Of course

they are sent out in pieces. Cases holding pieces for 100 boxes weigh

4 cwt. The firm tell me that Messrs. Schœne, Kilburn and Co., and

Messrs. Begg, Dunlop and Co., in Calcutta, have consignments of the

boxes, so any of your readers can see them.

In my opinion there are several advantages, to be derived from their

use:--

1. They will help to open up new markets. The ungainly, unwieldly

packages we have used hitherto are certainly detrimental, at least

where Indian Teas are not known. By the use of these tin boxes the

sale of our Teas would, I am sure, be extended at home, and they

would also give great facilities for successfully introducing Indian

Tea into Australia, Canada, the United States, the Cape, &c. It seems

some Indian Tea has already been sent home in these tins, and I am

told it met with a ready sale, quite to 8_d._ per lb. over what it

would have brought in chests. This is, of course, too good to last,

but less than one penny a lb. increase would pay for their use.

2. The sale of Indian Tea in India would be developed by using them.

3. The tares of these boxes is and must be exact, viz., 3 lbs. 15-1/2

oz., so only a few would be opened at the Custom House,[105] and the

great loss by the deterioration of Tea being exposed (few know _how_

great it is) would be avoided.

4. There is no doubt Tea will keep better in transit in these boxes

than in our old packages. How often are the latter broken and the

lead torn! This evil would be quite avoided.

There seems to me to be but one doubtful point. The boxes cannot be

sent loose on board ship: how then are they to be packed? Chests

holding four tin boxes were recommended, but they do not smile on me.

True, they might be made very light: still they would add to the

size, weight, and cost considerably. I think crates of strong light

battens would answer perfectly, and six, or perhaps eight boxes might

then be placed in each. However, this is a matter of detail, which

experience would quickly decide. To continue the advantages:

5. Teas packed in these boxes, and so sold, would not be used for

bolstering up China rubbish. They would be drunk pure, and thus the

great desideratum of teaching the public, both here and abroad, to

use Indian Tea by itself, would be, in a measure, attained.

I do not say that any planter should pack _all_ his Teas in this

new way. The mass of Indian Tea, do what we may, will still be used

to mix with China. Again, the highest class of Indian Teas are not

the ones to commence with. As a rule they are too expensive for the

public to use them alone. Ordinary Teas, or perhaps a mixture which

could be sold cheaply, and would be a good household Tea, is what I

should recommend. It is just this kind which is now such a drug in

the market, and necessarily the diversion of some of this into other

channels would help us greatly.

6. A considerable saving in the loss of Tea at the Custom House would

result by the use of these boxes, as the following figures will show.

To begin with, the trade allowance of 1 lb. per package which is now

allowed the buyer, and which is of course a loss to the producer,

would be avoided; for this allowance does not apply to any package

under a gross weight of 28 lbs., and these tins with 20 lb. 2 oz. of

Tea in them, will weigh gross only 24 lbs. 1-1/2 oz.

To make the figures below clear, I must state that the rule of the

Custom House is to discard fractions of a pound both in the gross

and the tare. But in the gross the number _below_ is written, in

the tare the number _above_. Thus, if the gross weight of a package

is 132-1/2 lbs., the gross is written 132. If the tare of a package

is 37-1/4 lbs., it is written 38. Now to take one extreme case, to

show the loss on our ordinary Indian packages: a chest weighs gross,

say, 132 lbs. 15 oz.; it is still written 132 lbs. The tare of the

said package weighs, say, 37 lbs. 1 oz.: it is written 38. The tare

deducted from the gross gives the net weight of Tea. In this case 132

minus 38 equals 94 lbs., which is all the producer is paid for. But

the net weight of Tea in the box is 132 lbs. 15 ozs., minus 37 lbs.

1 oz., equals 95 lbs. 14 ozs., and thus on such a package there is a

loss of exactly 1 lb. 14 ozs. Add to this the trade allowance of one

pound, and the whole loss is 2 lbs. 14 ozs., which is about 3 per

cent.

It will be observed that by this custom the advantage, as regards

the duty of 6_d._ per lb., is on the side of the payee, but none the

less is it to the loss of the producer. The case quoted above is,

of course, an extreme one, but in practice I believe the loss of

Tea on Indian packages, including the trade allowance, is not much

under 2 lbs. In the case of our ordinary Indian packages, if we could

regulate our tares exactly, so as to make the gross weight only one

ounce above the whole number, and the tare one ounce below the whole

number, the loss would necessarily be much decreased. This, however,

is impossible, for, as a rule, the tares are one or two pounds less

when they arrive in England than when they left the garden, owing to

the wood drying in transit; and thus it is quite a chance what the

real tares come out here.

But, with the tin boxes in question, the tares, that is their weight,

being fixed and equal, and not liable to change, we can so arrange

the weights that the loss will be very trifling, thus:--

lbs. ozs.

The box weighs 3 15-1/2

We put in Tea 20 2

--------

Gross Weight 24 1-1/2

--------

In the Customs the gross is written 24 lbs.

And the tare is written 4 „

------

The Tea paid for will be 20 lbs.

that is a loss of only 2 ounces, or not much above half per cent.,

instead of three per cent., as shown in the old packages.

Shortly, to conclude this point. In the case of the old packages by

no means can we help ourselves; but, as shown, with the tin boxes,

the loss need be very little.

Roughly, the cost of using these tin boxes would be, all told, from

1-1/2_d._ to 1-3/4_d._ per lb., and with our lead-lined boxes it

averages perhaps per penny. The difference of a halfpenny, or even

three farthings, one pound would not be much for the advantages

detailed.

One point I have forgotten. If 500 boxes are ordered, the plantation

mark is put on the ends of the boxes gratis. If less than 500 are

ordered, the additional cost for this would be about £5.

I hope the Syndicate in Calcutta will try these boxes. I shall

certainly do so.

I enclose the directions for making up the tins, and hope you will

insert them at the foot of this letter.

Reading over the above, there is one point I find not observed on

as regards the loss of Tea at the Custom House. By the mode of

weighing, as explained, the producer often loses 2 or 3 per cent.,

but still, strange to say, in practice, this loss is sometimes more

than counterbalanced by the increased weight of the Tea due to the

moisture imbibed while exposed (if boxes are broken in the transit)

anyhow at the Custom House. But I need not point out that this gain

is dearly bought by the deterioration of the Tea. The Custom House

procedure is bad in every way. More on this subject later.

EDWARD MONEY.

The following is also from the _Tea Gazette_, and is much in favour of

the boxes:--

PACKING OF TEA IN TIN BOXES.

In our issue of November 7th, 1881, we inserted a short editorial

note questioning, on the authority of certain correspondents, the

advisability of using tin Tea boxes for the packing of Tea, at the

same time asking our readers to favour us with their opinions on

the subject, in case we were misinformed. Our invitation has met

with a response from several quarters, and the correspondence we

have received leads us to alter the opinion we formerly held on

the subject. A gentleman largely interested in Tea, but in no way

connected with the manufacturers of the patent tin boxes, writes to

us from England:--

“I made enquiries as to the condition in which Tea packed in Messrs.

Harvey Brothers and Tyler’s lacquered tin boxes is turned out in

London. I found that the Tea was not at all injured by this method

of packing, but that its condition is quite as good as that of Tea

packed in chests. Messrs. W. J. and H. Thompson assured me that you

were entirely mistaken in your remarks as to the contamination,

but they thought that an objection to the packing in the lacquered

tin boxes was the labour of putting up in these boxes. Catalogues

were shown me in which I saw that the Teas in the lacquered tin

boxes fetched higher rates than the same Teas packed in chests, the

difference being in one case 3_d._ per lb.”

This is certainly a most favourable testimony, and coming as it does

from a disinterested party, who writes simply in defence of what he

considers the right, we cannot but accept of his statement in its

entirety.

Another correspondent writes:--

“I now give you a few of the sales of these boxes made at public

auction during the last month, shewing the preference of the trade

for Tea so packed, and the higher prices realised.

_Public Sale 3rd November._ _s._ _d._

Koliabar. {28 chests Pekoe 1 10-1/2 per lb.

K. Assam. {28 cases, each 4 tin boxes 2 3/4 „

_Public Sale 16th November._

M.L.B.D.S.A. {30 chests Pekoe 2 1/4 „

{30 cases, each 4 tin boxes 2 2-1/2 „

„ {20 chests Souchong 1 3-1/2 „

{20 cases, each 4 tin boxes 1 4-3/4 „

_Public Sale 23rd November._

M.L.B.L.P. {20 chests Pekoe 1 6-3/4 „

{19 cases, each 4 tin boxes 1 9-3/4 „

“In every case the above Teas were packed out of the same heap

in India, and the difference in the selling price arises chiefly

from the _better condition_ of the Tea on arrival, and the growing

preference of the country trade for Teas so packed.”

The following is worth notice:--

HOOP IRON.

The _Ceylon Observer_ says: “The planters should note the following

(writes to us a London firm)--From quotations lying before us the

prices of 22 gauge iron hooping are as follows: 1/2in., 165_s._

per ton; 5/8in., 110_s._ per ton; 3/4in., 70_s._; 7/8in., 60_s._;

1in., 50_s._ Thus by using one inch hooping, less than one-third the

price is paid. The narrower the hooping, the more difficult is it to

manufacture.”

It is also not so strong.

FOOTNOTES:

[94] “Nil Desperandum” evidently foresees what must be sooner or later.

All interested in Tea, owners, planters, and inventors, should aid to

achieve the result.

[95] “Nil Desperandum” takes up three spaces--one bullock in each

outside space and the hoe in the centre. I don’t like the plan. It

_could not_ be done where the tea plants are high.

[96] In wet weather especially the warm air generated in the factory by

the fires in it helps the process.

[97] This, after the previous sentence, is obscure.--E. M.

[98] I agree with “Enquirer” in this.--E. M.

[99] They are still higher now. The last three months they have

averaged five millions.--E. M.

[100] I should be glad to be set right if I have not rightly calculated

the price of coke.--(_Writer of the letter._)

[101] I advise only these four kinds. When the trader becomes more

sensible, three or even two would be better, but as it is now four are

necessary.

[102] With a driving belt from the engine shafting.

[103] Heating before packing has to be done on a large scale. None

of the Dryers notified are large enough. A special machine should be

devised.

[104] Top is “The Tea Garden;” front, “Weighing Leaf;” back, “Packing;”

ends, “Elephant with Howdah,” or, if desired, the plantation mark.

[105] The following are the numbers to be opened by the Custom House

regulations:--

From 1 to 5 1 to be turned out.

„ 6 „ 40 3 „ „

„ 41 „ 80 4 „ „

„ 81 „ 120 5 „ „

„ 121 „ 200 6 „ „

„ 201 „ 300 8 „ „

„ 301 „ 500 10 „ „

„ 501 „ 800 12 „ „

„ 801 and upwards 16 „ „

This applies to packages of all sizes and kinds, if the tares are equal

or nearly so. If the difference in the tares are not great, an average

is struck. If tares are various all are turned out!