— 91 — 



Mr. Lelong: We have investigated this matter very thoroughly in 

 districts where there is no water — I am speaking now of hilly sections, 

 where it is impossible to get water unless you carry it up hill — and the 

 pricking machine has been an advantage to those people. But it is not 

 pronounced a success in the valley. There is an objection to the 

 machine there. It has not been satisfactory in the valley, because we 

 have smut on our trees, produced by scale insects, and the surface of 

 the prune that is pricked by the machine will retain that crusty matter, 

 or a slight covering of smut on the prune. The machine does not 

 remove it, and it is not removed afterwards, even if dipped before 

 packing. That has been the experience of those who have tried it. Yet 

 I have been told that there are many growers who advocate the use of 

 this pricking machine. 



Mr. Righter: We pricked some, and we don't like it. We have vari- 

 ous reasons for our dislike, principally because it does not remove the 

 bloom. When a man comes to look at them, unless he is an expert, he 

 will swear that they are all moldy. Another reason is that it is a dirtier 

 process. The dirt that is on the prune is washed off by dipping in the lye r 

 but in the pricking process it is not. And another thing, we think the 

 skin is thinner after it is dipped. We think the lye has a tendency to 

 cut the outer skin off considerably. We think that by this pricking 

 process it will not make such a soft, delicate kind of fruit when cooked. 

 We are not so certain about that, but we think it is so. Mr. Burrell, 

 who has a machine, wrote me asking if I would let him come down and 

 use one of the machines on my place, and I told him he could come 

 down, and I would give him just what it cost us to run ours. He 

 wanted to know how many prunes we could run through our machine 

 in a day. I told him seventy-five tons. I don't believe he could run 

 seventy-five tons in a week. So he stayed at home with his machine. 

 When it first came out I was very anxious to have it tried. But we 

 have no faith in it any more. 



Mr. Mosher: I have had considerable experience with the pricking 

 process, and I think it has some very great advantages. The great 

 trouble with us in dipping our fruit is that it does not cut evenly. Some 

 of the prunes seem to be hermetically sealed to the lye. Consequently 

 we have what we call bloaters, or fruit that dries for a long time and 

 turns yellow inside. You all know what bloaters are, or "frog-bellies." I 

 tried pricking, and I find that the great disadvantage that pricking has 

 is that there is a large amount of gum on the prunes, and the pricking 

 does not dissolve it or remove it; while in dipping, you will find at the 

 close of the day a sediment five or six inches deep, and your lye has to 

 be changed. Of course if you prick them this dirt remains on the 

 prune. I also found that in pricking, it took longer for the prunes to 

 dry — from one to three days longer. Now I have combined the two 

 processes. I dip my prunes in a weaker lye, and then I prick them, 

 and I got most excellent results. And I believe that is the process of 

 the future. Every prune that I dipped in weak lye and then pricked, 

 dried very nicely and quickly, and there were no bloaters. They were 

 graded by machine before they were dipped, and when one was dried, 

 they were all dried; and they were dried evenly and they look very nice, 

 Hereafter I shall dip and prick every one. 



Mr. Adams: I have used a pricking machine for two years. Of 

 course I have not been there all the time, but so far as I can learn, 



