^^-^^^^^^^^ 



POMOLOGY, GARDEiXINO, FORESTRY, HORTICULTURE, RURAL ARCHITECTURE, BEES. 



Vol. II. Des Moines, Iowa; Leavenworth, Kan., May, 1871. 



N 



o. 



MARK MILLER, 

 Hditor and Publisher, - ■ Des Moines, Iowa. 



DR. J. STAYMAN, 

 Associate Editor, - - Leavenworth, Kansas. 



DR. WM. M. HOUSLY, 

 Correeponding Editor, - - Leavenworth, Kansas. 



Terms.— Single copy, $1.50. Five copies, $fi.OO. Ten cop- 

 ies, $11.00. Twenty copies and npwartls, ?1, 1)0 per copy. An 

 extra copy to the Ayunt, without regard to size of club. 



ADVEnriSINQ KATE3. 



Three-fourth inch, first insertion, $2.50. Each subsequent 

 insertion, $1.2.3. 



One inch, first insertion. $3.50. Each subsequent inser- 

 tion, $1.60. 



Onc-fonrth column, first insertion, $6.00. Each subse- 

 quent insertion, $4.00. 



One-half column, first insertion, $9.00. Each subsequent 

 insertion, $0.00. 



One column, first insertion, $12.00. Each subsequent in- 

 sertion, fS.OO. 



For a longer continual. ce than three months, a reasona- 

 ble reduction will be made on the above rates. 



Fifty per cent, will be added to the above rates when set 

 double measure. 



^~It should be observed by advertisers that our columns 

 arc much wider than those of news and agricultural papers 

 generally. 



Should Trees be Framed? No 5. 



Bt the AssocrATE Editor. 



In our last article we gave the result of pruning 

 trees up to give them form. We shall now give the 

 effects produced in cutting them back in the nursery 

 " to make them grow more stocky," and ballancing 

 the tops to the roots at transplanting "to make 

 them live and grow better," and thinning out the 

 tops to give them more light and air. 



In 18.59 according to the theory of shortening-in 

 nursery trees, we cut back about ten thousand one 

 year old apple trees which had made a very rapid 

 growth to make them grow more stocky, as we then 

 supjiosed, but left about an equal number which 

 Were not cut back. 



The result was we retarded their growth, they 

 took much more time and- attention, and they were 

 not as large, stocky, or handsome trees as those not 

 cut back, and they never became such. 



In 1860 we reset over 100,000 trees, one, two, and 

 three years old, first cutting them back thor- 

 oughly, and trimming their roots. The result was 

 we lost over 90 per cent., while another party by 

 our side re-set 20,000 trees of the same sizes and age 

 not balancing the tops, and did not loose five per 

 cent. 



This great difference could not be attributed to 

 anything except the difference in pruning as far as 

 we then were able to percieve, and numerous ex- 

 periments since has fully convinced us. 



In 18G4 we re-set about 200 apple trees and short- 

 ened-in a portion of them. The result was nearly 

 all those cut-in are diseased or dead, while those 

 not cut-in are healthy and doing well, except three 

 which were otherwise injured. 



In 1867 we had a large number of nursery trees 

 cut back by order of the party who bought them, 

 and intended removing them the following season. 



A portion of these trees were left on our hands; 

 some were sold to different parties with other trees 

 not cut back — (of the same lot.) Of the balance 

 left we selected the best which were the least cut 

 back, with others of the same lot not cut-in to the 

 amount of 1,300, and transplanted them in an or- 

 chard. The result was we lost over 40 per cent of 

 those cut-in, and scarcely two per cent, of those not 

 cut-in. The balance left we set in nursery rows and 

 did not save two per cent., while we set by their 

 side of the same lot not cut-in, and did not lose two 

 per cent. 



Of those sold to other parties and transplanted by 

 them the result was equally as unfavorable with 

 those cut-in, (if not worse.) 



Now it must be remembered that these trees were 

 cut-in one year previous to transplanting, while in 

 the nursery row.s, and had the addition of a year's 

 growth to heal up their wounds, and were handled 

 by different parties, yet the result was unanimously 

 against the cut in trees. How much less are trees 

 prepared to withstand such treatment when done at 

 transplanting, as generally recommended with near- 



