142 
AMERICAN POMOEOGICAE SOCIETY 
their way? Surely the fruit grower needs to give as much attention to the 
elimination of unprofitable trees from his orchard as the dairyman to the 
detection of his star boarders in his herd. One way of lowering the cost 
of producing apples is to see that every tree in the orchard renders a fair 
return. Many commercial apple growers evidently consider the orchard as 
the unit in management, not the individual tree. Certain trees here and 
there, by reason of exceptional productiveness or evident lack of vigor may 
make an impression on the owner so that he is able to distinguish them from 
the mass; but the behavior and the condition of the individual trees are 
usually forgotten from one year to another. 
My experience with this orchard, has convinced me that it pays to keep 
an account with each tree in a commercial orchard, especially if it has been 
neglected in the past, and is quite variable in vigor and productiveness. 
The trouble is slight, and the expense is negligible. The note book is the 
Babcock test of the fruit grower. With it he may maintain sympathetic 
acquaintance with each tree, and administer to it according to its needs. 
Discussion. 
Mr. Lazenby: I want to ask Prof. Fletcher if he thinks that apple trees 
are sometimes unprofitable because they are overfed; too much organic 
matter in the soil, and under that condition if he thinks there is any virtue 
in using sulphate of iron as a remedy? 
Mr. Fletcher: I have had no experience with trees in this way. What 
is your opinion? 
Mr. Lazenby: My attention was called to this in France, where the 
well-trained, well educated horticulturists use the sulphate of iron wherever 
they see an overfed tree, or a grapevine looking yellow, and losing its leaves. 
It is not used where there is a deficiency of plant food or moisture, or for 
blight or insects or anything of that kind. It is only used for mal-nutrition. 
They simply bore into the tree as far as the center, and put powdered sulphate 
of iron into the hole. It is a very common practice. They bore a hole that 
is in just one-eighth of the diameter of the tree: If the tree is 8 inches, 
they will use an inch bit; 4 inches, one-half inch, and so on. The hole is 
made just as near the base of the tree as it can be conveniently. That is 
perhaps so that the scar will not show, but maybe for other reasons. 
I had always looked upon any practice of this kind with a good deal of 
suspicion. It seemed something like a sort of quackery that no honest man 
would countenance. Yet it is so universal in France, was given public dem- 
onstrations at their national school of horticulture, and it has been so well 
thought of by some of their best men that my prejudices were all melted 
away. I would like to find somebody that would thoroughly test it in this 
country. 
Mr. Van Beman: I assume they can just as well bore it without putting 
in the sulphate of iron; if it is an emulsion that might have been the case. 
Mr. Lazenby: It certainly was the case. I examined quite a number of 
trees they had been treating some time previous, say six months, and the 
material had all disappeared — gone somewhere. 
Mr. Van Deman : Had they tried that trick or that plan of using “checks,” 
as we say; that is, in this case it would be tapping, and not putting in the 
