156 



THE CANADIAN HORTICULTURIST 



June, 1913 



The Canadian Horticulturist 



COMItlNKn WITH 



THE CANADIAN HOfiTICULTURIST 

 AND BEEKEEPER 



With which h;i8 been incorporiitcd 



The Cnnadian Bee Journal. 



PublUhad bT Tfaa Horticulturml 



Publishins Companr, Limitsd 



PKTlilKUORO, ONXA.IIIO 



The Only Magazinaa in Their Field in the 

 Dominion 



OrFioiAL Oboans of the Ontario and Qubbko 



VnUTt GrOWBIW' ASgOCIAlIONB 

 AND OK The Ontakio Heekekpers Association 



H. BnONSON Cowan, Managrlnc Director 



UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVES 



STOCKWELLS SPFXJTAL AdENCY 

 Chicn^Sn Office— I'oonle's Gas Building. 

 New York OfBce— 286 5th Avenue. 



1. The Canadian Horticulturist is jrabllshed in 

 two editions on the 25th day of the month pre- 

 ceding date date of issue. The first edition is 

 known as The Canadian Horticulturist. It is de- 

 voted exclusively to the horticultural interests 

 of Gana<ia. Th« second edition is known as The 

 Canadian Horticulturist and Beekeeper. In this 

 edition several pa^es of matter appearine in the 

 first issue are replaced by an equal number of 

 pages of matter relating to the bee keeping in- 

 terests of Canada. 



2. Subscription Tirice of The Canadian Horti- 

 culturist in Canada and Great Britain, 60 cents 

 a year; two years, Sl.OO, and of The Canadian 

 Horticulturist and Beekeper, $1.00 a year. For 

 United States and local subscriptions In Peter- 

 boro (not called for at the Post Office), 25 cents 

 extra a year, including postage. 



5. Remittances should be made by Post Office 

 or Express Money Order, or Registered Letter. 



4. The Law Is that subscribers to newsipapers 

 are held responsible until all arrearages are 

 paid and their paper ordered to be discontinued. 



5. Change of Address— When, a change of ad- 

 dress is ordered, both the old and the nerw ad- 

 dressee must be given. 



6. AdvertisiDg rates. $1.25 an Inch. Copy re- 

 ceived up to the 20th. Address all advertising 

 correspondence and copy to our Advertising 

 Manager, Peterboro, Ont. 



CIRCULATION STATEMENT 

 The following Is a sworn statement of the net 

 paid ctroulation of The Canadian Horticulturist 

 for the year endinc with December, 1912. The 

 figures given are exclusive of samples and spoiled 

 copies. Most months. Including the sample cop- 

 ies from 13,000 to IS.fOO copies of The Canadian 

 Horticulturist are mailed to people known to 

 be intere.=ted In the growing of fruits, flowers 

 or vegetables. 



January, 1912 9,988 August, 1912- •■•••■11.1^ 



February, 1912.... 10,437 September, 1912... 10.997 



MJaroh, 1912 10.877 October, 1912 10.971 



April, 1912 11,788 Novemberi, 1912... 1U62 



May, 1912 12,112 December, 1912... lUUM 



June, 1912 10,946 



July, 1912 10,986 132,556 



Average each issue In 1907, 6.627 



■ " 1908, 8,695 



" " " " 19*9. 8.970 



" " " " I9I«, 9,067 



" " " " 1911, 9,54! 



" " 1912. 11.057 



May, 1913 Il,609 



Sworn detailed statemente will bo mailed 

 uipon application. 



OUR GUARANTEE 



We guarajitee that every advertiser In this Issue 

 is reliable. We are able to do this because the 

 advertising columns of The Canadian Horticul- 

 turist are as carefully edited as the reading 

 ooltunne, and because to protect our readers we 

 turn away all unscrurulous advertisers. Should 

 any advertiser herein deal dishonestly with any 

 unbecrlber, we will make good the amount of 

 his loss, provided such transaction occurs with- 

 in one month from daite of this issue, that it la 

 reported to us within a week of its occurrence, 

 and that we find the facte to be as stated. It 

 Is a condition of this contract that in writine to 

 advertisers you state: "I saw your adTertisememt 

 in The Canaxilan Horticulturist." 



Roeues shall not ply their trade at the expense 

 of our subscribers, who are our friends, through 

 the medium of these columns; but we shall not 

 attempt to adiust trifling disputes between Bub- 

 scribers and honourable business men who ad- 

 vertise, nor pay the debt* of honest bankrupts. 



OommunicationB should be addressed 

 THE CANADIAN HOETIOtJI/rURIST 

 *«c v""-*- PETBBBOHO, ONT. 



1 EDITORIAL 1 



A SPARTAN EFFORT 



The elimination of the middleman, by 

 selling direct from orchard to consumer, 

 has been the dream of the fruit growers of 

 Ontario for some years. Outside of a few 

 growers securing private customers, not 

 much has beeni dome toward? making the 

 dream come true. Last fall and winter, 

 however, as previously noted im these col- 

 umns, an attempt was made to sell direct 

 to the general public of Toronto by an 

 Elgin county man — Mr. J. A. Webster, of 

 Sparta. Im the progress of his efforts and 

 results there are some lessons worth not- 

 ing. 



With exceptional valor, like the Spar- 

 tans of ancient Greece, this modern Spar- 

 tan had the courage of his conviction that 

 the people of Toronto would consume large 

 quantities of fruit if they could buy it at a 

 reasoinable price, and "direct from orchard 

 to consumer." With this in mind and with 

 more money for himself, as the producer, 

 in view, he secured storage space in the 

 basement of the St. Lawrence market, and 

 commenced to sell wholesale and retail — 

 and then the trouble commemced. Various 

 situations and differences arose betweerii 

 Mr. Webster and the city officials, some of 

 which resulted in law suits. The city did 

 not permit the selling by retail in the stor- 

 age rooms, nor selling anywhere in the 

 market in quantities of less than one 

 bushel ; it doubled Mr. Webster's rent, amd 

 moved him from one place to another. 



Mr. Webster's experiences in the St. 

 Lawrence market serves to show that the 

 Toronto City Council, which is influenced 

 in this matter probably by the Retail Mer- 

 chants' Association and by the wholesalers 

 amd commission men, does not intend to 

 encourage the fruit growers to sell direct 

 to the people. It is altogether unreason- 

 able, for instance, for Toronto to charge 

 seventy dollars a month rent for storage 

 and selling space to only one grower who 

 wants to sell a few apples. What a tre- 

 mendous revenue the city would acquire 

 should a few hundred growers undertake 

 the same scheme ! 



One local result of Mr. Webster's efforts 

 has been the opening of the market to 

 farmers and hucksters for the selling of 

 fruit in small packages. Although many 

 farmers did sell apples in the past in small 

 quantities, they constantly were in fear of 

 being fined ifor so doing. Some of them 

 were fined at times as a warning to them- 

 selves and others. Of course, the consum- 

 ers did not do this nor want this regula- 

 tion to stand. But there were others with 

 sufficient reasons and influence to demand 

 it. Since Mr. Webster's testing of the by- 

 law, one can go there on market days and 

 find everybody buying and selling in; any 

 quantities desired. This may all yet be 

 put back into the old order by subsequent 

 city by-laws, should the council forget its 

 duty to the consuming public, and give 

 way to the pressure of selfish interests, 

 which will be sure to be applied once more 

 as soon as the present interest of the con- 

 sumers subsides. 



The case of Mr. Webster brought out in- 

 cideintally another factor in fruit market- 

 ing that at first thought is rather com- 

 plicated. A certain large hotel in Toronto 

 had been buying Oakville apples at two 

 dollars a box through a well known com- 

 mission firm. Mr. Webster offered his 



apples to the hotel at one dollar and a half 

 a box — the same price that he quoted on 

 the market to the gemeral public — and got 

 an order. Later, when soliciting for a re- 

 peat order from the same hotel, he was re- 

 fused and told that the commission man 

 was then supplying the Oakville apples at 

 one dollar and thirty-five cents a box. 

 This was a deliberate under-cut on the part 

 of the commissiom man. Who lost the dif- 

 ference between the one dollar and thirty- 

 five cemts and two dollars .' Did Mr. Wel»- 

 ster injure the Oakville fruit grower? 

 Would any one or more growers with fruit 

 for sale ini Toronto, were they to endeavor 

 to sell it at a reasonable price direct to 

 the consumer, be injuring the fruit indus- 

 try of the province ? W'ould a distributing 

 centre in Toronto, as proposed by the 

 Niagara Peninsula Fruit Growers' Asso- 

 cLition, hurt all other growers in the Niag- 

 ara district who are compelled by circum- 

 stances to ship to commission men.'' If 

 this would hapften, what is the use of all 

 the talk about elminating the middleman? 

 In our opinion, no grower or body of 

 growers would be injured in the long run. 

 The uncertainty of the methods practiced 

 by some, not all, of the commision, mem, 

 and the fact that the growers would be 

 selling, like Mr. Webster, direct to the 

 people at prices more near what produc- 

 tion warramts, would ?oon counterbalance 

 any apparent temporary injustice. 



While the Sparta grower probably has 

 not been over successful this year, oni ac- 

 count of high rents, strenuous opposition, 

 cost ot law suits and other discouraging 

 factors, his propaganda is worthy of fur- 

 ther efforts 001 the part of himself and 

 other growers. The expenses of the 

 scheme are too great for one man alone. 

 .Schemes of this kind could be handled 

 much more economically and more profit- 

 ably by O'ir fruit growers' associations. 

 .Should it be found that they are not wanted 

 in the St. Lawrence market, they ihould. 

 amd could, establish a fruit market of 

 their own. 



ROADSIDE PESTS 



The article in this issue of The Cana- 

 dian Horticulturist, by Professor E. M. 

 Straight, serves to show the extent to 

 which the wild fruits may become a source 

 of infection in our commercial orchards. 

 Anyone who has carefully examined a wild 

 apple tree could not but be impressed by 

 the diversity of pests that it harbors. The 

 trunk not infrequently is perforated with 

 borers, the bark covered with scale, the 

 branches and leaves draped with webs, and 

 the fruit a veritable happy hunting ground 

 for codling worm. 



The destruction of these breeding 

 grounds of orchard pests is a phase of or- 

 charding that has not received the atten- 

 tion that it merits. There are two main 

 reasons why these outside sources of in- 

 fection have been somewhat neglected. 

 First, the extent to which they menace 

 the orchard has not been fully realized ; 

 second, their destruction has often been a 

 matter outside the orchardists' control. In 

 respect to the former, fruit growers are 

 more and more cominig to realize the ex- 

 tent of such infection and the need for 

 immediate action. In the latter case we 

 meet with a difficulty not easily removed. 



No matter how much he may wish to, 

 the fruit grower has no authority to de- 

 stroy wild trees on the property of a care- 

 less neighbor. Perhaps this neighbor has 

 a small orchard that is never sprayed_ and 

 is really growing under wild canditions. 

 Here is where the law must step in, as it 



1 



