646 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
September 28 
averaged 1,272 pounds. Three of the Short-horns 
brought $5.65 per 100 pounds, while the other three 
and all of the “scrubs” sold at 84.65. After slaugh¬ 
tering, the carcasses were cut up, and each part care¬ 
fully weighed with accurate prices made for each 
part, so as to give the real selling price for each steer. 
As is the custom in the West, hogs followed the steers 
to eat the undigested grain that was passed in the 
manure, both lots of hogs were fed the same amount 
of corn, but those following the Short-horns gained 
most in weight. 
We have selected four pictures of these steers to 
show what they were like—two “scrubs” and two 
Short-horns. It will be interesting to note how a 
“ scrub ” really differs from a “ pure-blood ” not only 
in outward appearance, but in a slaughter test. First, 
let us see the financial statement of the two lots. 
They were fed 1,525 days in all. The prices for food 
are figured at local rates. All the grain and hay 
were weighed. 
SIX SHORT-HORNS. 
SIX SCRUBS. 
Dr 
Dr. 
Pasture . 
.$27.00 
Pasture. 
$>7.00 
Ear corn. 
. 16.02 
Ear corn. 
15.63 
Corn meal. 
. 23.13 
Shelled corn. 
29.97 
Shelled corn. 
. 35.36 
Corn meal. 
22.51 
Hay, straw, etc.. 
. 60.85 
Hay, straw, etc... 
39 43 
Wheat. 
.105.35 
Wheat. 
101.65 
Cotton-seed meal. 1.12 
Cotton-seed meal. 
1.12 
Freight, etc. 
. 11.40 
Freight, etc. 
11.40 
- $280.23 
$248.7! 
100 lbs. Or 
3 steers @ $5.65.. 
$263.29 
W 100 lbs. <Jr. 
3 steers @ $4.65.. 
207.39 
6 steers @ $4.65. .$358.51 
Profit on hogs... 
24.34 
Profit on hogs ... 
21.90 
- $495.02 
- 
$380.41 
Total profit.. 
.$214.79 
Total profit. ., 
.$131.70 
In estimating the profit on the hogs, the cost of the 
grain actually fed to them was taken from the money 
they brought in market. It will be noticed that the 
Short-horns ate over 830 worth more food than the 
scrubs—the difference being chiefly in hay and fodder. 
You will also notice that, if the firstcostof the Short¬ 
horns at 840 each is considered, they were fed at a 
loss, while the “scrubs” at 810 made a little profit. 
But this is only one side of the matter. The ques¬ 
tion of “quality” is yet to be settled. Let us take 
the four animals pictured here, and compare them as 
cut up on the block. The steer marked 1 was the best 
one of the lot, as will be seen below, with 5 ranking 
close to him in profit. This was not so much because 
of their weight, as because of the greater proportion 
of the choicer cuts. Here is a statement showing how 
these four steers compared in weights of various 
parts, and in selling value from a butcher’s standpoint: 
x 5 XI 20 
Weight before slaughter_ 1,500 1,410 1,140 1,220 
Loins. 151 152 111*4 120 
Ribs. 91 87 63 71 
Rounds. 202 197 146 162 
Neck. 15 18 17 18 
Chucks. 191 182 129 156 
Head. . 32 32 28 31*4 
Legs. 23 22 18*4 21 
Total beef. 927 886 640 724 
Selling price. $77.26 $75.06 $46.45 $55.42 
These two “ scrubs ” cost but a little less to feed 
than the two pure Short-horns ; yet see the difference 
in selling price ! The experiment as it stands simply 
shows, in a general way, that good blood makes a 
better carcass in a steer, and that, while a “scrub” 
may make an easier gain under rough conditions, it 
by no means follows that this is the cheapest way to 
make beef. The purebred cattle represent many 
years’ careful selection to improve certain desirable 
qualities. One can’t have a trotter and a dray horse 
in the same hide. The tough muscles of the leg, 
neck and flank, which carry the “scrub” over dry 
plains for its scanty food, are not valuable in the 
market. The pure-blood represents an animal with 
these unprofitable things bred out, but in order to 
breed them out, the comfort of the animal had to be 
considered, and, above all, abundance of food close at 
hand and warm shelter had to be provided. These 
things must be kept up, or the descendants of the 
pure-blood will tend to work back to the original 
type, or fail to thrive. We believe that either Here¬ 
ford or Black Scotch cattle would have shown better 
“ rustling ” qualities than the Short-horns ; but in any 
event a feeder must understand that improved cattle 
need good care. They have been improved largely by 
improved feeding, and a good share of their value 
consists in their ability to consume large quantities of 
food under the best conditions. 
Prof. Georgeson intimates that good Short-horn 
grades —that is, animals from “scrub” cows and full- 
blood bulls—would have made a better showing, on 
the whole, than the thoroughbreds. We have no 
doubt of it, and for the average farmer, the grade is 
the best animal to raise. The high first price of the 
Short-horns made it impossible for them to compete 
with the scrubs. In ordinary farming, it will cost 
but little more to produce a good grade steer than it 
will to raise a scrub of the same age. If that can be 
done, it is quite evident that pure blood in the herd 
will pay, and this is one of the best lessons to be 
learned from this experiment. A dash of improved 
blood will make itself felt to the butcher’s block. 
FIGHTING THE ELM LEAF-BEETLE. 
In many parts of the country, the elm trees present 
a sorry spectacle. Some are almost bare of leaves, 
while on others the leaves are brown and sickly. This 
damage is caused by the Elm Leaf-beetle. Fig. 205 
shows the insect in its various developments as well 
as its work on the leaf. This cut is taken from an ex¬ 
cellent description of the insect printed in Bulletin 
121 of the Connecticut Experiment Station (New 
Haven). The following life history is given : 
The beetle (see c, k, Fig- 205) deposits its eggs, a, e, in small 
clusters on the lower side of the young leaves early in June; the 
larvae hatch out in about a week, and at once begin feeding upon 
the leaves. These larvae, b, g, are small worms about five-eighths 
of an inch long, marked on each side with a broad, blackish stripe. 
They are soft, moist, and somewhat hairy to the touch. It is at 
this stage that the insect is most destructive, eating off the delicate 
surface-tissue of the leaves, and causing the latter to become 
shriveled and brown, and eventually to fall from the tree. By the 
end of June or early in July, the worms become full grown. They 
then crawl down or fall from the trees, and in crevices of the bark 
or soil or under grass and leaves change to soft, yellowish pup®,.?'. 
Ten days later, the pup* give rise to the adult insects, small yel¬ 
lowish beetles, c, k, about one-quarter of an inch in length, marked 
on the back with two black stripes. The beetles ascend the tree 
and for a month feed upon the remaining leaves, though the injury 
done by them is much less than that due to the worms. During 
August and the early part of September, the beetles enter cracks 
or crevices, where they secure protection during the winter, and 
hibernate until late in May, when they appear upon the young 
leaves to deposit their eggs. It seems probable that in New Eng¬ 
land there is but one brood during the season. 
Stephen Hoyt’s Sons, of New Canaan, have fought 
this pest successfully on their large elm trees, by 
spraying—using a large steam pump to force the 
spray. Mr. Edwin Iioyt sends us the following notes 
on their experiments : 
“ There is but one way to overcome this pest, and 
that is to spray, and also to catch the larva as it comes 
down from the tree. The tree should be first sprayed 
when the female is on the leaves laying the eggs. 
She eats holes through the leaves, making them look 
as though large shot had cut through them. This 
THE ELM LEAF-BEETLE AND ITS WORK. Fig. 205. 
a, eggs; b, larvae; c, adult; e, eggs, enlarged;/, sculpture of eggs; 
g, larva, enlarged; h, side view of greatly enlarged segment 
of larva; i, dorsal view of same; j, pupa, enlarged; k, beetle, 
enlarged ; l, portion of elytron of beetle, greatly enlarged. 
spraying should be done as soon as the leaves start 
out so as to make surface enough to catch and hold 
the spray, as she comes as soon as the leaves do. This 
spraying may be done by throwing the spray on the 
top of the leaves, while for the larva or young insect 
the spray should be thrown up into the leaves that 
the spray may strike on the under side, as the young 
insects never eat through the leaves. The spraying 
for the young stock should be about the middle of 
June in our locality. This spraying, if well done as 
above stated, will be sufficient to save the trees ; yet 
many leaves will be eaten, as it is impossible to spray 
every leaf. 
“ Should any of the larvae escape the poison, as many 
will, they will either fall from the tree, or crawl down 
the limbs, and either secrete themselves under the 
scales of the bark, or come to the ground. If the 
body of the tree is thoroughly scraped, and then a 
band of tin put around it, so as to make a basin all 
around to catch the larvae, many may thus be 
destroyed. They are very sluggish and slow in their 
larval state, and would not get out of the tin cup or 
basin around the tree. The spray may be made of 
Paris-green, London-purple or Hammond’s slug shot, 
and should be thrown with a strong pump, as a fine 
spray is necessary. We use steam power for this 
purpose. The proportion of Paris-green should be 
about one pound to 200 gallons of water ; with this a 
little lime slaked and strained through a fine sieve or 
cloth, should be added with a little flour ; this causes 
the spray to fasten itself a little better to the leaves. 
“ This year we tried Hammond’s slug shot, and 
found that it did good work, and is perfectly safe for 
the man who uses it. With Paris-green, the one who 
holds the nozzle in the tree, is in a Paris-green spray 
or mist more or less, most of the time, and great care 
should be taken not to breathe much of it into the 
system, or get it into sores on the hands. It is neces¬ 
sary to climb into large trees in order to throw the 
spray thoroughly into the leaves. Many of the large 
elms in this section have died from the effects of this 
Elm beetle, and unless something follows to kill the 
beetle or eggs, our elms all over the country will 
be destroyed, unless thorough work in spraying be 
adopted.” _ 
WHAT AILS THIS APPLE ORCHARD? 
We have an apple orchard of about 1,000 trees, 15 and 16 years 
old ; part of it having been set in the spring of 1879, and the re¬ 
mainder the following season. The trees have always grown 
well, and now look thrifty and in good condition ; but they have 
not yet borne anything to speak of, and it seems to me that it is 
high time they were doing something to pay their board bill. 
Their annual growth is good, but on the inside of the tree, the 
buds that ought to make fruit spurs, seem to produce sap-suckers, 
and make the top very dense. We have sprayed the orchard now 
for two years, and the trees have improved in appearance very 
much. The trees are set 20x40 feet apart, and among the Bald¬ 
wins and Rhode Island Greenings, the branches in many places 
meet. We have always grown a good many berries among the 
trees, and after taking up a berry patch, we always take off some 
sort of grain, rye or oats, and seed down with a mixture of Mam¬ 
moth and Medium clover. Our soil is a heavy sand, in places 
having a liberal mixture of clay ; this top soil is filled with small 
gravel stones; underlying this is a deep bed of clay in noplace 
more than eight feet below the surface, and in many portions 
about four feet below. On top of the clay, is a stream of water 
which never dries up. The only manure we have used to any ex¬ 
tent is from the barnyard, and the turning over of old clover sod. 
On one piece, we have given a liberal dressing of unleached wood 
ashes, and this season I tried muriate of potash on about an acre; 
but as the season up to within less than a week, has been un¬ 
usually dry, I can see no effect. The ashes have had no notice¬ 
able effect. The varieties are Red Astrachan, Baldwin, Oldenburgh, 
Ben Davis, Maiden’s Blush, Rhode Island Greening, Cooper’s 
Market and Russet. From the above, what helpfill suggestions 
can you make in regard to pruning, cultivating, and fertilizing ? 
Benton Harbor, Mich. c. h. h. 
It Is Crowded Too Much. 
In the first place, this orchard is set twice too thick, 
and needs the removal of every alternate tree. The 
“sap-sucker” is generally understood to be a bird ; 
but C. II. H. seems to apply the term to what are 
commonly called water sprouts—rank shoots, which 
should be removed as soon after their appearance as 
possible. The treatment seems to have been fairly 
liberal ; and the land, if it has good surface drainage, 
ought to grow good apples and a fair crop ; and prob¬ 
ably will do so, if the surplus trees be removed, and 
the heads of the remainder opened by careful thin¬ 
ning. Close planting gives weak trees, encourages 
the production of “sap-suckers,” and an unnatural 
upward growth in search of light and air. There may 
be a deficiency of pollen for proper pollination, which 
will cause the young fruit to drop. This is a frequent 
trouble in orchards planted with but few varieties. 
Vermont. [dr.1 t. h. hoskins. 
Cut it Down; Its Feet are Wet. 
1 would say, cut down this orchard, and utilize the 
ground for berries. Evidently there is too much 
water near the surface, which induces growth of wood 
instead of fruit buds. A stream of water that never 
dries, four to eight feet below the surface, is not the 
best thing for an orchard. C. H. H. is a good culti¬ 
vator, and deserves better success. Possibly root 
pruning might be of advantage ; but I never took 
much stock in that. His trees should have borne him 
a good crop of fruit the past eight years. Such an 
orchard, I think, never will pay. N. ohmer. 
Ohio. 
The Soil is Too Wet. 
The case presents a complication of difficulties. 
Doubtless capillary attraction keeps the upper soil 
constantly moist, from the constant underflow spoken 
of—a condition well calculated to encourage wood 
growth, at the expense of fruit. Quite possibly, also, 
in so porous a soil, the surplus surface moisture may 
have carried down such fertilizers as lime, potash, 
etc., to be washed quite away by the underflow spoken 
of. Assuming such to be at least in part, the cause of 
the failure complained of, it would seem important 
to cut off such underflow, by means, preferably, of a 
raDge of tile laid somewhat below the level of the re¬ 
tentive clay bed, along its upper side or sides ; with, 
of course, a free outlet. In addition, the annual ap¬ 
plication of fertilizers, promotive of fruit rather than 
wood growth, would, doubtless, be found useful. 
Patience in the matter, is also essential, since there 
can be no fruit, in the absence of fruit buds, while it 
is already too late for their development this year 
For this reason, next year will be needed for such 
purpose ; and if the pruning of next winter or spring 
be judiciously done, improved results in fruit, may be 
anticipated during the year 1897. Judicious root and 
top pruning combined, will doubtless be an aid to the 
desired result; but care should be exercised not to 
overdo the matter. t. t. lyon. 
Stop Feeding; Root Prune; Drain. 
Stop manuring in any form. If the trees meet, this 
has a tendency to cause them to sucker. I would try 
root pruning, and by that means reduce the supply of 
sap. If the above method should fail, I would thin 
out the trees, let in more daylight, and seed the 
oi’chard to grass, permanently if possible. Linder- 
