HISTORY OF TREATMENT. 63 



marked as they would have been had the disea.se developed seriously.' 

 As it was light in ISH;') uiul ls:»ti. no gain in fruit was shown by 

 sprayed over unsprayed trees these years. In 18J»7 the work was con- 

 tinued, and owing to the serious development of curl the desired 

 contrasts in foliage were obtained. Unfortunately, however, the fruit 

 buds had been killed by cold and no fruit rcM-ords were obtainable. 

 The first contrasts in fruit on sprayed and unsprayed trees in Mr. 

 Miller's orchard were reported to Mr. Selby in 18U8, and they are 

 both valuable and conclusive.' 



The announcement of the Department's work on leaf cuil was sent 

 to the growers of peaches in Illinois, Indiana, and Pcimsylvania at the 

 same time that it was sent into Ohio and other States of the East, viz, 

 in November, 1898; and during the winters of 1893-94 and 1894-95, 

 leSo peach growers in Pennsylvania. 81 in Indiana, and 'Mi in Illinois 

 were re(iuested to spray for the control of curl and report to the 

 Department. A complete plan for these tests, control trees l)eing 

 provid(Hl for in every case, was sent to each of the growers. So far 

 as reported, where instructions were followed, the results of this work 

 were satisfactory in all cases where curl developed and where frost 

 did not prevent the obtaining of results. 



Winter spraying for the control of curl began in New York, so far 

 as known to the writer, in the winter of 1898-!>4, during which and 

 the following winter over seventy peach growers of the State received 

 from the writer full instructions for the treatment. These instruc- 

 tions were sent out through personal correspondence with orcliardists 

 in over twenty of the peach-growing centers, and by means of care- 

 fully prepared circulars. Among others, Mr. W. T. Mann, of Barkers, 

 undertook spray Avork for the Department in the winter of 1893-94. 

 Carefully planned experiments were carried out by him in his young 

 orchard, the spraying being done on April i>, and before growth 

 started, and alternate rows being left untreated for comparison. Mr. 

 Mann reported the results of this work as satisfactory, and they are 

 elsewhere given in this bulletin. Mr. James A. Staples, of Marl- 

 boro, also conducted spray work for the Department in 1894, 1895, 

 and 1896, and where the instructions were carried out respiecting 

 the time of first spraying his results were fully satisfactory. Prof. 

 L. H. Bailey ^ reported the work of Mr. Henry Lutts, of Youngstown, 

 for the spring of 1894; and Mr. A. D. Tripp, of North Ridge way, 

 reports excellent results from his work. 



»Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 92, pp. 246,247. 



■•'Ohio Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 104, March, 1899, p. 210; also Rept. Ohio State 

 Hort. Soc, 1898, p. 13. 



^Bailey, L. H., Impressions of the Peach Industry in Western New York, Cor- 

 nell Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. No. 74, Oct., 1894, pp. 382,383. 



