The Illinois State Tile-Makers' Convention at Springfield, last week, was more largely attended than in any previous year since the association was formed. Nearly one hundred joined the association.

The convention was welcomed to the city by Governor Hamilton in an appropriate address in which he expressed his deep sympathy with and interest in all the manufacturing enterprises that are giving employment to the people and adding wealth to the State. He announced himself as in favor of protection and encouragement to the manufacturing interests. He thought the tile men were greatly adding to the wealth and productiveness of Illinois, and that they were also indirectly improving the health of the people.

The President's address was brief but full of information and good sense. He pointed out at length the improvements in tile kilns, and in various appliances, which have been made in recent years, and declared that valuable as these all are, they can not make up for the lack of skill and experience. He believed the increased interest in terra cotta, and in useful ornamental and out tiling points to the great source of supply as the timber of the country decreases in quantity. The drain-tile manufacture was simply the beginning of an era of skillful clay working, which would not only add greatly to the fertility of the soil, but to the means of the beauty and endurance in numerous forms of building. Of the statistics of the business, he said the latest information is that there are in the State 600 factories, built at an average cost of $3,000 each, employing about 5,400 men seven months each year, who receive about $250,000 and their board. The total annual capacity of these factories he estimates at 56,100 miles annually. He estimates the amount invested in the industry, including the value of tile already laid, at $5,000,000, and the increased value of land drained at $10,000,000.

The Secretary's report gave the general condition of the society. In 1879 it was composed of forty-five members; in 1880, of thirty-five; in 1881, of twenty-eight; in 1882, fifty-three; in 1883, of eighty-three, and in 1884, of eighty-six. The first meetings of the association were necessarily crude, the programme having been prepared after the association met. Now, however, they were in working harness, and met with a regularly prepared programme. The proceedings of the meetings and a summary of the papers read and discussed, are now published in the report of the State Board of Agriculture.

The treasurer, John McCabe, Esq., of Rushville, made his report of which the following is the summary:

These reports were followed by an essay by Mr. C. G. Elliott, which is of so much merit that we give it in full deferring a further report of proceedings until next week.

MISTAKES IN DRAINAGE.

To speak of our successes rather than our mistakes, is far more agreeable to ourselves and also to others. We all take pride in giving our experience in any work when we have been successful, but our errors and mistakes we often carefully hide from public gaze. The transactions of our industrial conventions are largely made up of the successful parts of the experiences of members. Our tile manufacturers fail to speak of their losses in correcting mistakes the number of kilns they have rebuilt, the number of tile they weekly commit to the waste pile, the percentage of good and poor tile in each kiln, and many other things that your humble servant will probably never suspect until he attempts to manufacture tile.

A similar statement may be made with reference to drainage mistakes. How many dry weather drains do we hear mentioned in our conventions, or see described in our newspapers. By such drains, I mean those which in favorable seasons so operate as to permit the land to produce a heavy crop—one worth publishing—while in wet years, merely a total loss results. Cases of such drainage can be numbered by the score. How many miles of drain tile have been taken up and relaid during the past year because of some mistake in plan, size of tile, or execution of the work? Much might be said of drainage mistakes in a general way, but it is proposed in this paper to treat the subject in a specific and practical manner. It may be encouraging to remember that it is only by comparing success with mistakes that we make progress in any valuable science or art. Great skill and success rest upon a foundation of corrected mistakes.

MISTAKE NO. 1—LACK OF INFORMATION ON DRAINAGE.

We might more properly call this the cause of many mistakes. "Knowledge is power," says the old adage, and we might add that knowledge in drainage is success. This knowledge may be obtained in three ways: First, from reliable books; second, by inquiring of others who have had experience; third, by our own experience. The first is of prime importance to the beginner, for in books are found statements of the general principles and philosophy of drainage, together with the best methods and practice known. The second is often unreliable, for the reason that the error of one is often copied by another and becomes wide spread before it is detected. The third, though valuable is costly, and discouraging to the learner. Gleanings from all of these sources will, perhaps, give the most complete satisfaction.

Tile drainage began to be practiced in my own neighborhood about seven years ago. Those who were about to begin knew nothing about drainage, except from hearsay knowledge that had crept into the community. Not a single book upon the subject was consulted or even inquired for. Even now they are as rare in farmers libraries as the classic poets. Farmer A. wished to drain and consulted farmer B., who had put in some tile the year before. Did he think it paid? Yes. What kind of tile did he use and how was the work done? So A. planned and did his work in accordance with information obtained from B. Neighbor C. followed A., and so the work spread. It is now found that mistakes were made in the beginning which were handed from one to the other, until now, no alternative remains but to remove the whole work, and no little trouble and expense. This case is but one out of many which might be stated illustrating the lack of information at the beginning of drainage work. My observation upon this point has been that those have availed themselves of information given in books and papers upon drainage matters made fewer mistakes and did better work than those who relied upon the general wave of progress to push them along in the footsteps of their nearest neighbor. The theory, as well as the art, of drainage should be studied, and all knowledge adapted to the peculiarities of each case.

MISTAKE NO. 2—NOT PLANNING FOR FUTURE DRAINAGE.

A mistake often made by the novice is, that at first, drains are located without reference to the future drainage of other parts of the farm. Drains are put in as experiments, very much as we would plant a new variety of fruit or grain, expecting that probably the chances are against their success. Subsequently, when plans for more extended drainage are made, the drains already in operation were found to poorly serve the desired purpose.

In order to guard against this mistake, have faith in drainage. Put it down on the whitest page of your memorandum, and with your best pen and ink, that drainage will pay, and the fewer mistakes made about it the better it will pay. Put it down that the time will come when you will drain all of your wet land, and make your plans accordingly. Many times have I heard this objection to locating a drain so as to benefit a certain field, "O no; I'll never drain that field. It's all right as it is. If I can only get this wet over here dry I shall be satisfied." In two years this same farmer was planning how he could drain the rejected field, and regretting that he had not made provision for it from the beginning. I have in mind several miles of tile that will be taken up during the coming season and relaid with reference to the drainage of all land having a natural slope in that direction.

MISTAKE NO. 3—NOT BEGINNING AT THE RIGHT PLACE.

Many of the drains first put in are at the head of the water shed instead of at the lower part or outlet. They discharge improperly and fail to fit into a more thorough system, where plans for better drainage are laid out.

To avoid this error, begin at the outlet and work with reference to ultimately draining the whole section naturally sloping toward this outlet. If a surface ditch is necessary, make it. If tile can be used, lay them, even if only a fraction of the entire work is done each year. Drain laterally toward the main as it is carried upward. The outlay at first, rod for rod, will be greater, but the final cost will be less, and yearly profits greater.

I have in mind several cases of unsatisfactory drainage growing out of a desire to avoid difficulty and expense in making a sufficient outlet. Among them may be named the following: Putting a drain across one side of a pond because sufficient depth can not be had to admit of its being run through the center. Placing drains each side of a slough, parallel to its center line, leaving the center undrained. Draining cultivated fields and allowing the water to discharge upon land occupying a lower level. All of these are make-shifts for the purpose of avoiding the expense of a good outlet.

There is in this connection a difficulty which can not be overlooked, one which is beyond the control of the individual farmer, and that is, when the drainage section is owned by two or more parties. The adjustment of such cases has occupied the attention of our legislators, and some progress has been made in framing laws to meet the case, yet many difficulties remain unprovided for. If all parties agree to accept such awards and assessments as a commission may make, then the matter of drainage outlets can be satisfactorily adjusted, but if any party is disposed to resist, the desired drainage can be practically defeated. I may, at present, be justified in saying that where only a few neighbors are concerned, it is a mistake to attempt to use the law at all. Arrange the matter by mutual agreement or by leaving it to disinterested men to decide.

MISTAKE NO. 4—TOO SMALL TILE.

No mistake has become apparent sooner than this. The following observations will account for this, and also aid in correcting it. The whole area of land which naturally discharges toward the drain is not always taken into account. It is generally thought that land lying at some distance from the drain, though sloping toward it, does not affect the capacity required for the drain, whereas in times of heavy rains, when drains are taxed to their utmost, water flows from those more distant parts over the surface to the ground acted upon by the tile drain. We must then provide for the drainage not only of land contiguous to the drains but for an additional amount of water coming from adjoining slopes.

Another popular error is that the diameter of the tile is the measure of its capacity, whereas the grade upon which it is laid is as important as the size of the tile. The extreme porosity of many of our soils, and the lack of thorough lateral drainage is another thing by reason of which main drains become over-taxed, simply because drainage water is not held in check by close soils, or distributed by lateral drains, but is brought in large quantities over the surface to the drain line, and must be taken away in a short time or injury is done to the land. In making mains or sub-mains it is better to err in making them too large than too small.

MISTAKE NO. 5—NOT LATERAL ENOUGH.

We expect too much from a single line of tile. We often see a line of tile put through a fifteen or twenty acre field with the expectation that the field will be drained, and thanks to our tractable soil, and the magic influence of tile, a great work is done for the field. It is, however, the dry weather drains previously alluded to. Put in the lateral drains so that the whole flat will come under the direct influence of tile, and you will have a garden spot instead of a field periodically flooded. Your sleep will not then be disturbed by fears that the morning will reveal your tiled field covered with water, and your corn crop on the verge of ruin. We often see a single line laid through a pond containing from one half to three acres. Ponds with such drainage always get flooded. Put in an abundance of laterals and the difficulty is overcome.

I am glad to say that the tendency now among farmers who have practiced random drainage is toward more thorough work in this direction. The loss of an occasional crop soon demonstrates in favor of more thorough work.

MISTAKE NO. 6—INATTENTION TO DETAILS.

Farmers have been too much under the rule of professional ditchers. Having no well defined ideas of good drainage work, they have left the matter largely to the judgment, or rather the cupidity of the ditcher and the layer. There are many first-class, conscientious workmen, but it is to be regretted that the average ditcher does work far below the standard of excellence. If by some magic means the conditions of many of the drains in our State could be spread out before us in open view, it would be a wonder to this convention that tile drainage has wrought out such favorable results as it has. We would see tile laid on the siphon plan, good and poor joints, faulty connections, ditches crooked enough to baffle the sagacious mole should he attempt to follow the line. Patience would scarcely hold out to enumerate the exasperating defects of much of our drainage work. Nothing can overcome the egotism and self-confidence of the average ditcher except the constant supervision of the employer. Such work is so soon covered, and errors placed beyond immediate detection that nothing else will suffice. To guard against such mistakes, know what work you want and how you want it done, and then look after it yourself or employ some one in whom you have confidence to superintend it. When any mistake is guarded against, from beginning to end, the work will not be too well done. The cut-and-cover, hurry-scurry methods of doing things, common on some Western farms, will not do in drainage work. Carefulness in regard to every detail is the only safe rule to adopt.

MISTAKE NO. 7—FAILURE TO MAKE OPEN DITCHES FOR WATER COURSES.

The farmers of Illinois have, in many sections, been avoiding the main question in the drainage of our rich prairies, and that is the improvement of the natural water courses so that they will carry off the drainage water of sections for which they afford outlets. Every feasible plan and device has been used to circumvent the forces of nature and relieve valuable farm lands from surplus water. In the flat sections of our State nothing will serve this purpose but the deepening of our large sloughs by constructing capacious open ditches. Our land can not be properly drained without them. They must be of ample depth and width, and well made in every respect. No problem connected with the drainage interests of our State should, at present, receive more careful attention than this. Nature, has, in most cases, marked out the line for work, and says, "let man enlarge and complete for his undivided use according to his strength and skill." When such work is done, the demand for tile to supplement the drainage thus made possible will be unprecedented. The drainage of our roads will be facilitated, and the greatest difficulty thus far encountered in the drainage of our flat prairies will be overcome. Much has been attempted in this direction in some portions of the State, but many open ditches are too shallow, too small, and too carelessly made to serve the desired purpose.

In pointing out some of the mistakes made in drainage, I am well aware that there are differences of opinion as to what may be properly considered a mistake. The aim of drainage is to fit the wet land of the entire farm for the successful cultivation of all the field crops at the least expense consistent with thoroughness. Now, if experiments must be tried by tiling here and there, and afterward take the tile up and remold the whole work, there is a loss which, were it not for the large profit resulting from the use of tile, would be disastrous.

Should a Board of Public Works build several bridges of insufficient capacity in order to find out the necessary dimensions and strength of one which will serve their purpose, we should at once regard them incompetent and wasteful. I know of tile which have been taken up at three different times, larger tile being used each time. This farmer discards the use of lateral drains and rests his success upon single lines of large tile. He will probably be disappointed in this and, perhaps, finally hit upon the correct method. Would it not have been the part of wisdom to have obtained some reliable information upon that matter at first from books, from inquiring of others of longer experience, from a competent engineer, or from all of these sources? Anything which needlessly adds to the expense, or detracts from the efficiency of the work, should be regarded as a mistake.

As a summary of what has been said regarding mistakes and how to avoid them, I append here a few

DRAINAGE MAXIMS.

1. Become informed upon the theory and best methods known and used.
2. Do not literally copy the methods of others, but carefully adapt them to your own case.
3. Provide good outlets and large mains.
4. Have faith in good tile and thorough work.
5. Study economy and efficiency in locating drains.
6. In difficult cases, or where you have doubt about the success of your plans, submit the case to a good engineer before expending money or labor.
7. Employ good help by the day, and work it under a competent superintendent, rather than job out the work by the rod.
8. Drain as you would plant fruit trees—for the future as well as the present.

I have been prosy and practical enough and now have used my allotted time and space. It may not be wholly out of place to further tax your time and patience, and ask you to lift your eyes from taking a critical view of defective drains, muddy ditches, and unattractive detail work, and look at the result of careful and thorough labor. As the years come and go with their changing seasons, your drained fields are ever your friends, always cheering you with a bountiful harvest, always answering to every industrious touch you may bestow upon them. "No excellence without labor," says the scholar to the discouraged student. "No excellence without labor," says the soil to the farmer, as he drains and plows and digs, and so we all learn that success in dealing with nature is brought about by thorough and honest work.

Our enthusiasm scarcely knows bounds when we see that by our drainage work the apparently obstinate soil is made to reflect the sunlight from a covering of golden grain; when gardens and orchards bloom and yield fruit where once the willows dipped their drooping branches in the slimy fluid below, and frogs regaled the passer-by with their festive songs. Roses now twine over the rural cottage and send their fragrance into the wholesome air, where once the beaver reared his rude dwelling, and disease lurked in every breath, ready to seize his unsuspecting victim.

Think you that these changes can be wrought without earnest and careful effort? I have but little sympathy with the glittering generalities and highly colored pictures of success in industrial pursuits, held before the public gaze by unpractical but well meaning public teachers. We need the dissemination of ideas of thoroughness and the knowledge necessary to put those ideas into practical use in order that the farmers of Illinois may make the fewest possible mistakes in drainage.