47 



AMiatever other changes there haA'e been, none are greater than 

 the changes in the "point of view" regarding fruit production. 

 And our present understanding of fundamental principles surely 

 represents marked lines of advancement. Listen again to Bernard 

 .M'Malion to show a contrast between some of the notions of a 

 hundred years ago and present-day conceptions about the same 

 thing: "When a tree has stood so long, that the leading roots have 

 entered into the under strata, they are apt to draw a crude fluid, 

 which the organs of the more delicate fruit trees cannot convert int.^ 

 such balsamic juices as to produce hue fruit." Even if the orchards 

 of Bernard IM'^Iahon's day were representative in many respects 

 of the orchards of our own time, the understanding of his time 

 reo-ardino- the nutrition of the trees was indeed not the modern one. 

 And we note a very marked advance towards what we believe is 

 the truth when it comes to the matter of plant foods. Xearly 25 

 vears later than, the time when Bernard ^I'Mahon wrote — in 1829 

 — Jethro TuU said. "It is agreed that all the following materials 

 contribute in some manner to the increase of plants, but it is dis- 

 puted which of them is that very increase of food. i. Xitre : 2. 

 Water: 3. Air: 4. Fire: 5. Earth." Further on in his argument 

 this ancient writer states apparently to his own satisfaction, that it 

 is in reality earth that is the true food of plants. And he says : 

 "Too much earth, or too fine, can never possiblv be given to roots; 

 for they never receive so much of it as to surfeit the plant, luiless 

 it be deprived of leaves, which, as lungs should purify it." His 

 philosophy of tillage was that it made the earth sufficientlv fine so 

 that the roots could take up and assimilate it< very minute particles. 

 In other words, as he viewed it the root-^ of plants literallv ate up 

 the earth when it was made stifficiently fire for them to do so. 

 And no doubt these views represented the best information and 

 thought of the times 75 and 100 vears ago. 



But we want to turn now to some of the more living issues. 

 A\'hat I have said tiius far. however, is by way of stating that in 

 talking about the management of orchards here to-day I have no 

 new story to tell and I don't suppose there is any originalitv in the 

 manner of presentation. But if I can aid any of vou in better 

 understanding the wJiy of things, or if I can help you to gain a 

 better "point of view" — a better way of looking at things, mv com- 

 ing here will perhaps have been worth while. 



The more I study orchard, management, however, and the 

 more I try to tell about it. the more I think there is in it — in the 

 telling — a strong similarity to trying to tell how to choose a wife or 

 when to spank the small boy. I should like some intelligent advice 

 regarding the latter proceeding, myself, but somehow the things 

 that work \\ell in other cases fail flatly in my own experiences. 

 That is just the way it is in managing orchards. Xo rule-of-thumb 

 methods can be applied. What is good in one case is not necessar- 

 il}- good in another because of differences in conditiqjis. 



Right at the very outstart there are a number of important 

 considerations in which great numbers of fruit growers fail. The 

 American propensity for doing big things is at the bottom of one 



