vrv^ 



;:-• .*' .; -\ 



•\'.' ".:•■.■.>"■'.' '„..'- ' ■'^ ■■■*.'>7jiV;' '''7 (l-r/i'si/. 



» *;.\*- V..'T(V^' -' 



July 7, 1904. 



The Wcctly Florists^ Review* 



297 



View of the Exhibition at Newport, R.'L, June 21 and 22. 



Miss E. J. Clark, Pomfret Centre, Conn., 

 received a silver medal for a collection 

 of fruit which included Diamond Jubilee, 

 Foster's Seedling, and Black Hawtro 

 grapes and peaches. Diamond Jubilee 

 grape received a certificate of merit. 



In the way of miscellaneous exhibits, 

 F. K. Pierson Co, was awarded a silver 

 medal for their new dense sport of 

 Nephrolepis Piersoni. John Scott re- 

 received a certificate of merit for Nephro- 

 lepis Scottii. M. H. Walsh showed some 

 of his new seedling rambler roses, which 

 included Carissima and "Wedding Bells. 

 These received a silver medal. Mildred 

 Grant was also shown by . him and re- 

 ceived a certificate of merit. D. Mc- 

 intosh had a table of nice seedling dra- 

 caenas which were favored with a bronze 

 medal. Blue Hill Nurseries had a fine 

 lot of hardy perennials, and Lager 4 

 Hurrell a very pretty table of orchidfi. 

 Geo. Melvin received honorable mention 

 for a plant of Brassia verrucosa. Cer- 

 tificates of merit were also awarded a 

 specimen plant of Dracaena GodseflSana 

 and to a seedling drarsena in foliage in- 

 termediate between indivisa and congesta. 

 The judges were M. H. Walsh, F. C. 

 Green and W. N. Crai^. C. 



RENEWING THE BENCH SOIL. 



Popular Belief in Necessity. 



The article under this heading in the 

 Review for June 9, by your able corre- 

 spondent, Mr. William Scott, has been 

 read with much interest. The question 

 was sent to the Eeview some time ago, 

 and the thorough consideration which Mr. 

 Scott has given to the question makes 

 the answer of considerably more value. 



The question why greenhouse men 

 change their soil for certain crops each 

 year would seem at first a very simple 

 one, but the characteristic answers one 

 is likely to receive in reply to such a 

 question would indicate, as Mr. Scott 

 has pointed out, that most of the flor- 

 ists do not know, or at least have not 



a very clear conception, why they do 

 this. 



As to the matter of using the soil a 

 second season for certain crops, the prac- 

 tice of the best growers is undoubtedly 

 correct, since experience has shown too 

 often that failure results. This fact 

 alone would be a sufiicient reason for not 

 using it two years in succession, at least 

 so long as such results follow. All 

 greenhouse soils, however, are not re- 

 newed each year. For example, lettuce 

 soils are better the longer they are used 

 and cucumbers and other crops thrive 

 well in old soil. There are in use in 

 Massachusetts to-day some soils which 

 have been utilized for lettuce for twen- 

 ty-five consecutive years without chang- 

 ing, although such soil may occasionally 

 be used for a crop of cucumbers, rad- 

 ishes, etc. 



Reasons for Renewing Soils. 



Mr. Scott has enumerated three prin- 

 cipal reasons why the same soil is not 

 used the second year. They are rea- 

 sons which I think would be invariably 

 accepted by good, intelligent growers. 

 These reasons, condensed, are as follows: 



First, the crop has taken the essential 

 elements from the soil which they need. 



Second, fibre has been utilized and de- 

 stroyed and mechanical conditions mod- 

 ified. 



Third, fungus and insect pests have 

 been increased. 



These three reasons are stated more 

 extensively and explicitly by Mr. Scott, 

 but for our purpose we condense the 

 same. In regard to the last two reasons 

 we are in full accord with the writer and 

 it is only the first one that we wish to 

 discuss. Before discussing the matter, 

 however, we will briefly touch upon a few 

 points relating to our experience. 



An Experience With Roses. 



We have grown American Beauty roses 

 in the same soil for two years and we 

 met with the customary trouble before we 



had got very far along with the second 

 crop. Our crop was an experimental one, 

 in which we were testing the influence 

 of aoll texture on the development of 

 roses, and we did not wish to go to the 

 expense of changing the soil. We were, 

 of course, well aware that we were vio- 

 lating the rules and going contrary to 

 the results of the experience and prac- 

 tice of the best experts, but, since we do 

 not market our plants, failure to grow 

 the crop did not embarrass us. Before, 

 however, we had gone very far with the 

 second year crop about two-thirds of the 

 plants became sickly and many died. 

 Careful examination of the plants showed 

 no fungus or insect enemies at work; 

 neither wiere there any eel worms. The 

 trouble was one which affected the roots 

 and since no organisms were found we 

 looked elsewhere for the causes of the 

 trouble. 



The soil represented variations in text- 

 ure, and they were taken from different 

 places and mixed with sod and cow man- 

 ure, according to prescribed formulas. 

 One bench, however, did not have any 

 sod added to it. The second year crop 

 was set in this same soil in August, 1903, 

 the only changes in the beds being the 

 addition of some cow manure very care- 

 fully incorporated. No sod was added to 

 the soil at the time of setting the sec- 

 ond crop. During the first year, liquid 

 manure was applied as usual but only 

 a limited amount was used during the 

 early period of the second crop. Some 

 soil was taken six feet below the surface 

 of the ground, others were surface soils 

 and others had been used for cucumber 

 crops, etc. It will be seen that the soils 

 were a variable lot and had been used 

 for different purposes, yet as far as 

 the dying of the plants was concerned 

 there, was comparatively no difference 

 which could be attributed to the behavior 

 of the soils. 



The Giuse and Remedy. 

 The question naturally arises, what 



