162 
THE GARDEN MAGAZINE 
April, 1917 
Starting Seeds in the Windows. — For years 
I have taken The Garden Magazine and 
value it very highly, and am particularly 
interested in your new feature “Among our 
Garden Neighbors.” 
So many books and papers deal in such 
large terms, thousands of bulbs, hundreds of 
this and that, that the ordinary gardener is 
discouraged. Yet one can raise a goodly 
amount without a hot bed or conservatory, 
just in ordinary windows. With three good 
sized windows I have raised six hundred 
seedlings and transplanted them in tiny pots. 
I would like to call attention to the joy 
to be had with hardy Chrysanthemums both 
single and double, preferably the former, 
such wonderful pastel colors and shading, 
and such quantities of blooms! I planted 
mine in the house the latter part of March, 
the first year had a goodly amount of blos- 
soms, the second year a great profusion till 
frost. From two packages of seeds I got four 
dozen fine plants. Another late discovery 
of mine is the double white Morning Glory 
which blossoms till frost most profusely and 
the blooms keep open till late afternoon. 
It is fine for covering stumps and trellises or 
for a background for a hardy border. I 
use it on wire netting as a background for a 
hardy border of purples, blues, lavenders 
and white with a little light pink — this is 
very effective. It is such fun to experiment 
though of course one must not expect to 
always succeed. — H. II. Ossining, N. Y. 
Dahlias from Seed in April. — Flowers from 
seed the first year. “Impossible!” is what 
greeted me when last April I planted Dahlia 
seeds in flats. I rue, I could have bought a half 
dozen roots for a two dollar bill, but I had 
read in The Garden Magazine that from the 
seeds came the new varieties. Perhaps the 
element of the game, call it gamble if you 
wish, is stronger in some than in others. To 
me there is a strong fascination in tending for 
a plant not knowing into what it may develop, 
but also knowing that out of thirty I may have 
a few rare plants, some good ones and of 
course some odds and ends that duplicate my 
old stock. In August and early September I 
called in my doubting friends. 
From the point of the gamble I was lucky. 
Beginner’s luck ! At the end of the row stood a 
giant of his kind, towering five feet in height 
over all others, topped with a magnificent 
single blossom seven inches in diameter. The 
heart of gold surrounded by deep velvety red 
petals. Next to this was a pure white Cactus, 
a beautiful flower with long stiff stem. Near 
by another Cactus — the inside of the petals a 
soft reddish yellow, the outside a bronze color. 
There were pure gold Shows; single yellows 
which worked up well in large bouquets of cut 
flowers; double reds and single reds. Others 
looked as if more than one paint can had been 
spilt on them. 7 here was a wonderful assort- 
ment, an assortment that would make happy 
the heart of any lover of the flower. 
With the variety of blossoms also came the 
variety of foliage, some tall, some short and 
branching, ideal for hedges. Some with broad 
leaves others of a soft green and as feathery 
as fern. But of all my best prize was a soft 
orchid pink with broad petals which curled 
ever so slightly at the ends. 1 he heart was a 
deep firm ball of unfolded petals. It was a 
beautiful plant branching well from theground. 
— JVinnina E. Brozvnson, Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 
THE SMALL GARDEN PLOT AND THE 
HIGH COST OF LIVING 
G. W. HOOD Sta ^K a rsity 
WHAT CAN BE DONE BY EACH INDIVIDUAL TO COMBAT THE INCREASED COST OF FOOD MATERIAL 
[Editor’s Note: — Each individual reader of the Garden Magazine is in a peculiarly favorable position to exert an influence on public 
opinion concerning the production of food crops in the home garden. National movements are under way to stir up action among those who have the 
opportunity but who as yet have not seen just how to do the thing in mind. People generally do not understand the possibilities of small areas. \ 
S HOULD a nation suffer for a waste 
of its opportunities? Is not the high 
cost of commodities only an answer 
to this waste, and a reflection of our 
great extravagance? 
Recently three committees met in New York 
to investigate the high cost of living. Their 
findings on the subject did not warrant any 
short cuts to the reduction of the cost of com- 
modities, but they were of the opinion that it 
might be offset by better organization and 
more cooperation. This report not only agrees 
with other more or less local investigations 
going on in various parts of the country, but it 
also draws the same conclusion. After a care- 
ful analysis of the situation it appears to me 
that all these reports shed very little light on 
the true situation. I believe they are at- 
tacking the problem at the wrong end. There 
exists in this country to-day an unusual and 
never-before-experienced condition, brought 
about by no act of our own, which we, as a 
nation, cannot change. Without a doubt the 
great European war is either directly or in- 
directly the cause of the high cost of every 
commodity. Can you expect anything else? 
Isn’t it just as natural to have this condition 
existing in our country to-day as it is for water 
to flow down hill? We didn’t start it, we can’t 
stop it. Can we do anything to relieve this 
distressed condition? 
If my analysis of the present situation is 
correct, there is only one remedy, and that 
remedy lies in the increased production of our 
living commodities. I neither mean the pro- 
duction of wheat and potatoes on a larger 
scale, nor the planting of more acres of peas and 
beans to flow in the regular channels of trade, 
which is offered to the foreign buyer. 
One way seems to be open, and not only to 
those individuals who own farms or control 
large tracts of land, but open to millions of con- 
sumers all over the country. These millions 
can in a way be producers. Every consumer 
can produce edible products that do not flow 
in the natural channels of trade, but which 
flow in the all important direction of the family 
table. Figures and facts stand ready to prove 
the assertion that millions of dollars could be 
saved annually if each consumer in large and 
small towns would make his home plot or an 
adjoining vacant lot into a family garden. 
You do not have to go out of your own town 
to find these unused and available spots. Pos- 
sibly at your own backdoor or by the side of 
your kitchen window, there is the opportunity! 
You know it too; but still assure yourself that it 
is of no practical value. Unfortunately there 
are millions of people who think the same, and 
that is the reason why they and the nation are 
lamenting the fact that every commodity is so 
high in price. Do your duty now. Become a 
producer in a small way. Add your energy to 
that of your neighbors, and the total combined 
product will mean millions of dollars to this 
country, as well as a great saving to yourself. 
Now is the time to think, plan, and act. See 
that your home plot, your neighbor’s backyard 
and vacant lots in your district grow vege- 
tables, not weeds. 
Did you ever stop and think of the great 
number of vacant acres in our cities? Did you 
ever figure up what these vacant acres could 
produce? Did you ever think that you are to 
blame for this woeful waste of nature’s gift to 
us? Wake up. Look around. Get busy. 
FACTS AND FIGURES 
Small areas, such as city gardens occupy, 
and ranging from plots ioby iofeet to 40 by 60 
feet produce fromi.4 cents a square foot to 3.8 
cents a square foot. A trifling amount you 
say. Why should I plant a garden when I can 
only make 1.4 cents a square foot? Multiply 
that 1.4 cents by 43,560 or the number of 
square feet in one acre, and the result is 
$619.84. If you multiply the number of square 
feet in an acre by the maximum yield of 3.8 
cents per square foot you would have the sum 
of $1,655.28, the maximum income from one 
acre. A total return varying from a minimum 
of $619.84 to a maximum of $1,655.28 an acre is 
no trifling matter. Think of what it would 
mean to your community to have every square 
foot of vacant land produce even the minimum ! 
Think what it would mean to increase the 
total production of our country by this 
method. Remember now, these products are 
not for sale, they are not to be shipped to 
Europe, they are for the family table. If every 
family became a producer many problems in the 
high cost of living would be largely solved. 
Six hundred and twenty dollars are the mini- 
mum returns from an acre of backyard gar- 
dens; sixteen hundred and fifty dollars is ap- 
proximately the maximum income from an 
acre of vacant lot and backyard gardens. 
These figures are not theoretical, they are from 
actual trials. They are not taken from one or 
two cases, but are the results of a series of 
twenty different combinations and the average 
