Vol. LXIL Xo. 2772. 
NEW YORK, MARCH 14, 1903. 
81 PER YEAR. 
AN EXPERIENCE WITH PEAR BLIGHT. 
HENKFIT FROM THF. USE OF SULPHUR. 
Scientific Experiments are Needed. 
A START ON QUINCES.—In the Spring of 1893 we 
set a pear orchard of 650 trees, all dwarfs. Adjoining 
the pears on the east we set 150 quince trees, one-half 
each of Orange and Rea. We bought the best trees we 
could get and intended to give them the best care 
possible. None was lost in planting, and they started 
to grow quickly. From the start they were cultivated 
and sprayed thoroughly. During the Summer of 1896 
blight began to appear on the Orange quince trees, 
but did,not attack the pear trees that season. As soon 
as the blight appeared we began to apply the only 
remedy we knew of (cutting off the affected parts), 
and part of the season we went over the trees three 
times each week. We tried to follow carefully the di¬ 
rections that had been published at that time. At the 
close of the season of 1896 we did not leave any visible 
sign of blight on the trees; but in the Spring of 1897 
it began to appear on some of the nearby pear trees, 
and spread quite rapidly to other parts of the orchard. 
During this season we fought the disease with deter¬ 
mination to stop it if it were possible, but made very 
little headway. After studying the matter over care¬ 
fully I decided to make some experiments the next 
season with a well-known 
germicide (sulphur) to dis¬ 
cover a preventive for the 
disease. In the Spring of 
1898 the blight began to 
show quite early; during 
this season we used a wash 
of lime and sulphur on the 
bodies and large limbs of the 
trees, and also used a spray 
made of the same materials 
over the entire tree. The 
first spraying was done 
about the middle of June. 
We went just ahead of the 
spraying, and cut off all the 
blight carefully. 
FIRST EFFECT O F 
SPRAYINC.—When we had 
sprayed 10 rows, which was 
just one-half of the orchard, 
we found that we were getting too much of the spray 
on (he currants, which were growing between the 
pear trees, and not being sure that our work was do¬ 
ing any good we stopped spraying, but cut the blight 
from the rest of the orchard at this time. After the 
currants were picked in the first of July, we com¬ 
menced spraying again where we had left off, to finish 
the work. At this time we discovered what we took 
to be good evidence that our early spraying had 
checked the progress of the disease, because we found 
very little new blight on the 10 rows sprayed, while 
it was very bad on the 10 rows unsprayed. This 
gave us confidence to work and by one more spraying 
we were able apparently to hold the blight in check 
for the remainder of the season. After watching the 
disease closely I have become satisfied that it general¬ 
ly enters the tree some time before there is any out¬ 
ward indication of its presence. In regard to the wash 
mentioned above I want to state here as my opinion, 
based upon close observation of many tests which I 
have made, that it will destroy the germs of the dis¬ 
ease where thoroughly applied to the blighted wood. 
Of course it cannot bring back to life the dead wood, 
but 1 have found that the sap or gummy exudation 
which we find during the Winter or Spring in such 
cases has a dark color, and as near as I can judge does 
not contain live germs 
SUI.PHl^R AND BORDEAUX.—Up to the season of 
1900 we had not sprayed until after the blossoms had 
fallen, but beginning with 1900 we have made one 
spraying just before the blossoms opened and one just 
after they had fallen, with one or more later on. We 
began in 1901 to use the sulphur with the Bordeaux 
Mixture. Dr. Caldwell of Cornell University gave it 
as his opinion that no chemical action would take 
place by putting the sulphur with the Bordeaux 
that would in any way interfere with the proper work¬ 
ing of either. We found a great advantage in using it 
this way; that is, for some reason which 1 cannot ex¬ 
plain, the Bordeaux held the sulphur in suspension, 
so that it would spray out clean and not leave any at 
the bottom of the barrel, as was the case before. 
When spraying after the blossoms had fallen we put 
in the poison also, and in this way were able to do 
three things at once. As a result of our spraying, or 
for some other reason, we have had no new blight in 
our trees until September, 1902, when I found two 
cases, one on a Winter Nells and one on an Anjou 
tree on opposite sides of the orchard. This season 
was an ideal one for the spread of the blight, as we 
had so much rain, and the trees made rapid growth. 
In 1902 we only sprayed twice with sulphur, just be¬ 
fore the blossoms opened and just after they had 
fallen. The two cases found in September show that 
the germs of the disease are still in the vicinity. 
CONCLUSIONS FORMED.—I have tested the use 
of sulphur long enough to' give me some confidence 
in saying that 1 believe it will check the disease if 
used in the right manner and at the right time. The 
blight is a hard disease to fight because It is so ir¬ 
regular in its appearance. It may be very bad for a 
few years, and then we may not see much of it for 
some time; but if we are ready when it does appear 
with a remedy a great deal of damage may be pre¬ 
vented. By our present method of using the sulphur 
with the Bordeaux we do not make any extra spray¬ 
ings and are put to no extra expense except for the 
sulphur, which, of course, can be used or not as we 
may think necessary. The question arises In the mind 
of every fruit grower: “Is there anything in it or 
not?” The faith I have in its efficacy I have obtained 
through my own experiments and observations. Up 
to the present time I do not know that any of our 
scientific friends in this State have undertaken to 
prove or disprove the proposition which I made to 
them through The R. N.-Y. one year ago, and after¬ 
wards by letters directed to them. I.et us consider 
for a little where science has left the fruit grower in 
this matter. During the year 1879 Prof. Burrill of 
Illinois discovered the bacterium which is said to 
cause the disease. Careful experiments have been 
made to prove that this bacterium causes tne disease 
by making cultures of it and inoculating healthy 
trees, by this means causing the tree to blight, and 
here they seem to stop. I do not know of any great 
effort to discover anything that might destroy these 
bacteria before they had gained entrance to the trees, 
but simply advise cutting off the blighted wood. The 
germs are said to enter the trees through the blossom 
or tender wood, being brought by bees or insects from 
afi’ected trees. It is at this time that we hope to meet 
them with a destroying agent. Everyone who has 
made observations on the blight knows that it does 
not spread so rapidly in dry weather as in a wet time. 
This can probably be explained by the fact that the 
bacteria cannot live without moisture, and therefore 
die before they get into the sap of the tree. Is it un¬ 
reasonable then to say that we can place some ma¬ 
terial upon the tree with a spray that may also de¬ 
stroy them before they have entered the sap of the 
wood? This is what I have been trying to do with 
sulphur. 1 contend that we have here a very fair 
proposition for our experiment stations to investigate, 
and of sufficient importance to demand their attention. 
Tompkins Co., N. Y. u. r. fe.vsk.. 
NOTES ON APPLE CULTURE. 
KILLED BY CULTIVATION.—In 1864 1 came in¬ 
to possession of a farm on wliich was an oi-chard 
of about two acres. The top soil was sand 
with clay subsoil. The trees 
were at least 30 years old, 
but looked rather vigorous 
and l)ore fruit every other 
year. The orchard was in 
Blue grass and Timothy 
sod, and had not been plow¬ 
ed for at least 20 years. Be¬ 
ing a young man and full 
of ambition I concluded 
that the orchard should be 
cultivated. I plowed it in 
the Spring and when iin- 
ished the ground was cov¬ 
ered with roots. I took Mr. 
Hale’s plan and cut off all 
the roots. In plowing I 
would find plenty of nice 
healthy roots not much over 
one inch in thickness and 
not two inches under the 
surface, extending from trees 20 or more feet. I put 
on a good supply of stable manure and planted to 
potatoes, had a fair crop, but no apples, I seeded to 
rye and grass in the Fall, got a good set of grass but 
never a crop of apples. In 1870 I contracted to have 
the trees dug out, as most of them were dead. Some 
had blown down, roots all decayed. This is my ex¬ 
perience in cultivating an old orchard. I believe had 
I put the stable manure on the sod and enriched the 
soil by top-dressing my orchard would have lasted 20 
years longer. My advice to readers would be, keep 
out the plow. II. E. w. 
Quincy, Pa. 
IS THIS PRACTICAL?—I have been quite interest¬ 
ed in the mulch vs. cultivation case, though the tes¬ 
timony of the experts has made me doubtful of the 
correctness of what I thought I had learned by e.x- 
perience. We have 10 acres of apple orchard set by 
my father in 1860 on land too stony for cultivation. 
The treatment was hand cultivation of a small space 
around each tree till they were well started; mulch¬ 
ing with briers and gi-ass for a number of years cut on 
the ground; then 10 years as a hog pasture. Now and 
for four or five years past I have used the Woodward 
method, pasturing with sheep with grain feed in addi¬ 
tion to pasture. This last seems just to suit the 
ground, myself, and, I think, the trees. The orchard, 
with about a day’s work cutting weeds, always looks 
FAIR SAMPLES OP SWAZIE POMME GRISE APPLE. Fig. 71. 
