CHAPTER XXXVI. TEA MACHINERY.

Previous

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 2½ feet high. Where the soil and size of seedlings are suitable, it certainly saves much of the check experienced otherwise by transplants.

I know of no other peculiar implements for Tea cultivation.

The greatest expense connected with cultivation is, naturally, opening the soil or digging; the spade is never used in India and would not answer. Coolies dig with a kodali, a thing something like a spade, with the handle set at right angles to the blade. Could we dispense with this, and cultivate between the lines of Tea with ploughs of any suitable pattern, whether worked by steam or animal power, an enormous saving would be effected. I am sure the whole space between two lines of Tea can never be so done, round each and every bush the soil must be opened by hand; but the centre space, say about 2½ to 3 feet, could, I am convinced, be so worked, and I think it is only a question of time when it will be so treated.

The planting community are gradually appreciating the fact that something may be done in this way. The following appeared in the Tea Gazette, end of 1881, re ploughing by steam:—

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'
For one hoe {Pay of boy and man 12 days = 3 6 0
{Food of bullocks @ 4 as. per diem, Barley @ 24 per Rupee = 2 0 0
Cost of light hoeing 12-acre khet = 5 6 0
2
Against 10 12 0
Nirrikh for 136 bildars, light hoeing, 240 spaces, 4' × 4', per diem @ 0-2-9 each = 23 6 0
Or a saving of more than 100 per cent.

I gave one 12-acre khet four of these light hoeings during the hot weather, which so thoroughly destroyed the grass seeds that, although heavy rain has fallen here for the last month and a-half, the grass in this khet is thin and not more than 6 high, a fact which, to those who know how the jungle springs up in cultivated ground in the Doon when the rains set in, will be a sufficient proof of the success of these instruments. The frame of the hoe is only 7 high, and when the blades are buried in the ground is only 4, and as the handle projects from the centre of the back of the hoe and not from the sides, there is no danger of the bushes being injured. The hoe will expand from 14 to 20 at back, and from 3 to 7 in front; and as the standards of the blades are curved outwards, the hoe in its greatest expansion cultivates a breadth of 27 of ground. I found that one bullock was too weak to drag a hoe, although a good pony was quite equal to the work, so put in a pair of bullocks. The bullocks and hoe take up between them three rows of Tea at once, the bullocks on each outside row and the hoe in the centre one. A boy walking up the centre row leads the bullocks, which are harnessed to the hoe in the same manner as bullocks are harnessed to the country ploughs, but with longer julas of course. These hoes are, I find, useless during wet weather, as they clog dreadfully, but during hot dry weather they are invaluable. What we now want is a machine that, either by bullock, horse, or steam power, will do our deep hoeing as well as the light hoe does the light hoeing. This is a matter which I consider of vital interest to owners and shareholders, as, unless in these days of very low prices we can reduce the cost of production considerably, we cannot hope that Tea will pay a fair interest on the money expended, and great length of time lost in getting up a garden.

Nil Desperandum.

In the above, two bullocks to drag the plough or digger are evidently contemplated. My experience is, that two draught cattle cannot be used, simply because there is not room for them between the lines of Tea.[95] If animal power is used, it must be a single bullock alone. How to harness a single bullock to the plough is the question. A collar with a hinge below, which allows it to open at top, may be put on from below, and then the sides fastened together at the top. But I advise another plan, which I have seen most successfully practised in Austria. The traces, joining together, and thus becoming one behind the bullock, are fastened to the horns, and tightly connected with a leather pad across the animal’s forehead. The bullock thus pulls by his head, and I am sure he can pull in no more efficient or easier way to himself. Bullocks in pairs, or singly, are thus harnessed for plough work in Austria, and I have seen single animals dragging ploughs of much greater weight and power than we should require in our Tea gardens.

Given a proper plough, and I feel sure a large strong bullock thus harnessed would be successful.

A really good Tea garden plough has yet to be invented. All that is necessary is to give some agricultural machinists here at home the conditions necessary for success, and I predict what we want would be soon forthcoming. I will myself try to do so, let others do the same; one of us is sure to succeed.

I give all these extracts to show that many think as I do.

Cultivation with ploughs of any kind can never be feasible except on flat land. The hill gardens in India must in no case hope to introduce it; but I sincerely trust the planters in India who own level gardens will not rest till they have solved the problem, and that Messrs. Kinmond, Jackson, and other inventors of Tea machinery will give their valuable aid. The following two letters from the Tea Gazette show the difficulties to be encountered in steam cultivation:—

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 10d.) 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 value. Cal. Equi. Ex. 1-8½.
Pekoe, very well made leaf, with ends, good brisk flavour 1 10 14
Orange Pekoe, very well twisted leaf, good amount of tip, very good brisk flavour 2 0 15¼
Br. Pekoe, leafy black Br. Pekoe, some ends strong 2 1 1
Pekoe Souchong, well twisted leaf, some ends good flavour 1 3 9
Souchong, small good even grey leaf, brisk 1 1

The above are very desirable Teas as regards leaf and liquor.

The following are some of the chief features and advantages of this machine:

1. The low cost.

2. Durability, there being nothing except the trays that can suffer from wear and tear.

3. The small quantity of fuel required—about ¼ maund of coke for kutcha firing 1 maund of Tea.

4. Ease in stoking, the furnace not requiring attention oftener than once every one and a-half to two hours.

5. Absolute and immediate control over the temperature, which can be raised or lowered instantaneously.

6. No “getting up heat” required. In fifteen minutes after beginning to light the fire the apparatus is ready for work.

7. Requires no troublesome cleaning out.

8. Quantity. The apparatus is capable of drying at least 40 lbs. an hour, and has frequently dried over 50 lbs.

9. Quality of Tea is equal to that obtained by any process hitherto introduced.

Of course all the above was very favourable, and its low price gained it many purchasers. I think, as a first success, it beat any machine yet invented. But, alas! its fall was sudden as its rise, for, judging from several letters in the Tea Gazette, the purchasers were not satisfied with its capabilities, and I doubt consequently if it is now manufactured; still I may be wrong.

Allen’s Tea Drying Apparatus.—I have never seen this, and have not heard much about it. Advantages claimed for it are—1. Quick drying. 2. Coke can be used as a drying agent, 10 seers to one maund of Tea. 3. Only manual labour required. 4. Not necessary to turn the Tea. 5. Perfect control over temperature. I have three testimonials to its merits before me, one from an engineer, and all three speak highly of it.

The following letter from the inventor to the Tea Gazette gives further information:—

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 2½' × 3', when kept regularly three quarters full of firewood or coal about 6 to 8 inches thick, while machine is drying, will suffice (half a maund of fuel to a maund of Tea should be ample). The appearance and fine flavour of Tea dried in this machine by fan beats charcoal; no gloss is lost on the Tea from shaking up and turning over, and the Tea is black, with glossy appearance and good flavour.

The following are valuation and reports on this machine’s dried Tea, by Messrs. William Moran and Co., to whom some of bulk or rough Tea was sent.—Yours, &c.,

J. C. Allen.

I omitted to extract the broker’s reports, but they were favourable. I think it likely this Dryer is well suited to small gardens, which cannot afford steam motive power.

Davidson’s Sirocco.—Many of these, over 200, have been set up in all the Tea districts; it has done good work in its time: had it not done so it would not so long (some years) have commanded attention. When it came out it was, I think, the best machine going. I doubt much that being the case now. It requires no motive power, and is thus, in that respect, cheap to work. The following letter to the Tea Gazette in many respects embodies my views of the machine:—

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, 3½' 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 1s. 6d. 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 7½ 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 2¼ to 2½ maunds pucka Tea per hour. One maund of pucka Tea can be dried with the consumption of about ¼ 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, 1½ 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.

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:—

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 15¾ 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 2s. 5d. per box. Boxes sent to Calcutta up to this have been charged 2s. 7d. 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. Schoene, 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 8d. 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. 15½ 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. 1½ 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 132½ lbs., the gross is written 132. If the tare of a package is 37¼ 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 6d. 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 15½
We put in Tea 20 2
Gross Weight 24
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 1½d. to 1¾d. 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 3d. 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 10½ per lb.
K. Assam. 28 cases, each 4 tin boxes 2 ¾
Public Sale 16th November.
M.L.B.D.S.A. 30 chests Pekoe 2 ¼
30 cases, each 4 tin boxes 2
20 chests Souchong 1
20 cases, each 4 tin boxes 1
Public Sale 23rd November.
M.L.B.L.P. 20 chests Pekoe 1
19 cases, each 4 tin boxes 1

“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: ½in., 165s. per ton; ?in., 110s. per ton; ¾in., 70s.; ?in., 60s.; 1in., 50s. 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.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

Clyx.com


Top of Page
Top of Page