June 6 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
4i8 
MISSINC LINK AND OTHER LONG-KEEP¬ 
ING APPLES. 
Your issue of May 16 is rather suggestive to an 
“apple crank” like myself. The two views showing the 
Missing I>ink apple are somewhat contradictory, even 
as to the origin of the apple. Mr. Stone says “Ohio 
60 years ago,” while Mr. Van Ueman says its “native 
State” is “in Illinois”—a mistake somewhere. 1 
planted trees of this variety four years ago, and noth¬ 
ing was said which induced me to think the variety 
under restriction. But I have since been notified 
that all who disseminated it under the name of “Miss¬ 
ing Link” would be prosecuted. It is curious that an 
apple that dates back “60 years” with the keeping 
qualities ascribed to the Missing Link should not have 
been named before. If named long ago of course the 
disseminators have no more right to a “trade mark” 
than I would have to one on a renamed Ben Davis. 
But it is now pretty well understood that a trade 
mark on the name of a fruit does not amount to any¬ 
thing more than a “bluff.” Yet all admit the justice 
of some method whereby the originator of valuable 
fruits may get fair returns for his work. 
I have not fruited the Missing Link, but have 
tasted it at different times and think Mr. Van Deman 
a little too low in his estimate of its quality. I would 
say, with Tiik R. N.-Y., fair flavor, and I wholly agree 
with Mr. Stone that a long keeper is much better for 
farmers and people of small tov/ns than the storage 
apple. No doubt the Missing Link is a long keeper. 
But there are other things. Will it bear? Will the 
fruit hang to the tree? Here it blights in young 
trees more than I like to see—elsewhere this might 
not be a serious defect. As to the other points, I can¬ 
not yet say. It seems to me to be better in quality 
than either Willow, Clayton, Mann or lyansingburg. 
which are named by Mr. Van Deman. But Mann does 
not keep here, not even as well as the Ben Davis, 
while in this soil it is the prince of poor 
bearers. As to Lansingburg, who knows 
it? Who can explain the difference in 
tree and fruit between it and Rock Pip¬ 
pin? I have seen in many fruit shows 
“Lansingburg” and “Rock Pippin”—all 
the same thing. I have a number of old 
trees planted as Rock Pippin; they have 
borne well, of hard, medium-sized, cylin¬ 
drical, green, turning yellowish, some 
bronze or even sometimes dull red ap¬ 
ples that keep better than any of my 
260 varieties that I put in the cellar last 
Fall. They may be put in a tight box 
and placed on the north side of a build¬ 
ing and kept sound till May—or even 
another year with extra care. They 
make a rich thick cider, but one must 
be apple hungry to eat them without 
cooking. I know of an orchard of for¬ 
merly 500 trees of this variety, and the 
owner simply puts an inch of board be¬ 
tween the apples and the weather in the Fall and sells 
sound apples in the Spring. I am inclined to say that 
Rock Pippin and Lansingburg are the same, but I will 
gladly receive evidence to the contrary. 
While discussing long keeping varieties it may not 
be amiss to name those that keep this year with me 
into May—in a rather warm cellar. Some varieties 
seem to keep because of texture, lack of juice and 
other inherent qualities, while others keep because 
they are not ripe at picking time. I have noted 
Minch as a November apple, yet from a second bloom¬ 
ing I obtained a half-sized specimen that was sound 
in May. A southern apple, the Black Warrior, also 
illustrales the latter point. 
May (of Myers), above medium; yellow; good; last 
of season May. Helper, under medium; yellowish; 
good; May. Clayton, above medium; thin red; good; 
May. Tewksbury Blush, under medium; yellow 
blush; good; May. Frazer Hardskin, under medium; 
red; good to very good; May. Berry Red. under me¬ 
dium; very red; good; May. Hiley Eureka, medium; 
thin red; good to very good; May. Ailes, small; dull 
red; below good; May. Crockson, medium; red; be¬ 
low good; May. Santa, nearly medium; greenish yel¬ 
low; good: May to June. Cumberland, nearly me¬ 
dium; fine red; good to very good; May. Yates, 
small; red; very good; May. Maxey, medium to little; 
red; below good; May. Andrews Winter, medium; 
red; below good; May. Moultrie’s Winter, medium; 
yellow, green and red; good; May. McCuller, under 
medium; red; good to very good; May. Black War¬ 
rior, under medium; green; good; May-June. Fink, 
under medium; yellow blush; good to very good; 
May-June. Rock Pippin (?), medium; green, yellow 
and bronze; below good; June. 
I have also an apple under the name of Connett 
Sweet that keeps till May, and is really a fair apple 
in quality, or from good to very good, but it does not 
have tUe “4ark re(J” given by Downing, antJ I am 
in some doubt as to identity. As Mr. Van Deman 
intimates, high quality and long keeping do not seem 
to be relations. A large red May apple of high qual¬ 
ity is one of the “long-felt wants.” b. bucioian. 
Illinois. 
A SO-CALLED FLY-PROOF " WHEAL 
I send you a circular that was handed to me lately hy 
men here in the seed wheat busine.ss. They have a 
few glass .iars full of different wheat that they are 
taking orders on at $1.50 and $2 per bushel. Fall delivery. 
Do you know of them, and if so, what are they? a. d. 
Blackwell. Okla. 
The circular accompanying the letter of A. D. adver¬ 
tises in somewhat glowing terms a wheat called by 
the sellers “Auburn,” of which they say: “While we 
cannot guarantee that the Auburn is insect-proof, we 
have iiever known of its being injured by the Hessian 
fly. While the common varieties growing in this vi¬ 
cinity were practically ruined by the fly, (he Aubuni 
under equal conditions passed through the ordeal ap¬ 
parently unscathed.” In another place they say: 
“T^ast year we found a limited acreage of a medium 
berry red wheat, standing up and giving large yields 
right in the midst of where the ordinary varieties 
were Tuiined by the fly. We. secured all we could get, 
which was but a small quantity, and have named it 
‘.Auburn,’ and we now offer it for the first time, be¬ 
lieving that it will solve the problem of growing 
wheat in the fly-infested districts.” The circular says 
this wheat was growm and is for sale by Ti. P. Gunson 
& Co.. Rochester, N. Y. No one at the College of 
Agriculture has any knowledge of Jj. P. Gunson & Co. 
or of the Auburn wdieat. Last year there was not 
suflicient datnage to wheat from the fly in the State of 
New York to attract attention or to furnish a basis 
for comparison. Tn 1901 wheat was seriously dam¬ 
aged in this State. A few' varieties were conspicuous 
by their comparative immunity. Among those ob¬ 
served by the College was the Red Russian, which 
answers fairly well to the general description applied 
to the so-called Auburn w'heat. Possibly it is this 
variety of wheat that these parties are offering for 
sale, but it looks to us as though they were simply 
trying to palm off upon the farmers under a new 
name a variety of wheat in regard to which there is 
very little evidence that it has any unusual value. 
Cornell Agricultural College. j. i.. stone. 
THE TRUE DITCHING MACHINE. 
We have been asked whether there are any ma¬ 
chines which will dig ditches suitable for laying tile. 
We have heard of two—one of which is pictured this 
week. Prof. J. B. Smith, of the New Jersey Experi¬ 
ment Station, saw this one at work on the salt 
marshes at Salisbury. Mass. He says that this ma¬ 
chine has been in use over 20 years—and still does 
good work. The machine works hy hand pow-er—two 
men turning the w'heel and tw'o others moving the 
tracks. It cuts out a ditch four to eight inches w'ide 
and tw'o feet deep at the rate of 40 to 100 rods per 
day. The principle upon w'hich it operates is that of 
forcing knives dowm into the marsh and then lifting 
out the cake or chunk thus cut off. Of course such a 
machine will not work on hard or stony ground, but 
is useful only in soft ground which is free from stones. 
Just now there is a demand for such a machine, since 
efforts are being made to drain salt marshes and thus 
get rid of mosquitoes. We show this machine merely 
to Illustrate one principle of machine ditching. We 
understand that the owners of the machine refuse to 
sell one. 
A Scotchman claims to have invented a process for 
tanning hogs’ hides so as to make them a substitute for 
rubber In cushion tires for all vehicles. He claims that 
after his treatment the hide is more durable than rub¬ 
ber and well suited for automobile tires. 
BRIEF TALKS ABOUT FERTILIZERS. 
Ashes, Refuse Bone; '‘Insoluble.” 
What is the value of unleached wood ashes as a fer¬ 
tilizer, based upon the present prices of lime and potash, 
and also the number of bushels of dry wood ashes to 
ilic ton? M'hat is the value of dry bone chips and filing.s 
.such as would come from a knife-handle factory? 
M'ould such bone dust and chips have approximately the 
value of fine fresh ground bones, and w'ould its value 
be increased by dissolving in sulphuric acid? As to the 
liorcentage of insoluble phosphoric acid in ground bone, 
what is its value as a fertilizer? c. t. h. 
New York. 
The following table will show how these substances 
compare: 
Nitro- P.hos. Pot- 
gen. acid. ash. Lime. 
Wood ashes . 36 100 650 
(•round bone . 70 500 
(’hips and dust. 70 450 
Dissolved bone . 50 350 
The potash in wood ashes is considered worth five 
cents a pound, and the phosphoric acid four cents. 
The value of the lime will depend on the price of 
Slone lime, which varies according to the distance 
from the kilns; a bushel of ashes weighs about 40 
pounds. The chips and dust which are the refuse 
from button and knife-handle factories vary some¬ 
what. but are usually worth about the same as ground 
bone. When such chips are treated with sulphuric 
acid they become more available, and unless the bone 
is very fine it will pay to buy dissolved bone. We do 
not advise the use of sulphuric acid on the farm. An 
ordinary sample of ground bone contains eight iier 
cent of reverted phosphoric acid, 17 per cent classed as 
insoluble. In order to understand what this means 
we must remember that phosphoric acid in bone is 
found combined with lime. When three parts of lime 
are combined in one part of phosphoric acid we have 
an insoluble form which the plant cannot utilize. 
When tw'o parts of lime combine with one part of 
phosphoric acid it is spoken of as “reverted.” While 
not soluble in water it is soluble in the 
acids secreted by the plant, and is thus 
available as plant food. When only one 
part of lime occurs we have a form solu¬ 
ble in water. When sulphuric acid is 
used on bone or phosphate rock the pro¬ 
portion of lime is reduced, and w'e have 
the “soluble” or the “reverted” forms. 
In the case of bone the test is made hy 
using hot weak vinegar. This is pre¬ 
sumed to be about the strength of the 
acids secreted by the plant—what the 
vinegar will dissolve out of the bone the 
plant will also be likely to. As w'e see 
hy this test about one-third of an aver¬ 
age fine bone is called “available.” The 
finer it is ground the larger this 
proportion w'ill be. We do not con¬ 
sider this a fair test for the bone, 
as even the large pieces will slowly de¬ 
cay when put in the soil and thus 
become more and more available. 
It is not fair to compare what the chemists rank “in¬ 
soluble” in bone with insoluble phosphate rock, be¬ 
cause the former is an organic substance which will 
decay in the soil, w'hile the rock will not. 
Sulphuric Acid in Phosphate Rock. 
Oil page 254 I read this question by A. S. K., Fort 
AVayne, Ind.: “Some say it was the sulphuric acid the 
rock was treated with that did the good, by unlocking 
and making available the plant food that was already 
in the soil.” Your reply to this mooted proposition is 
as follows. ‘‘It is true that the superphosphate sets this 
plant food free,” and then further along you add: “It 
is not the sulphuric acid w.hich sets free the plant food. 
Has that question been satisfactorily determined? We 
know acid phc-sphate in the condition of floats represents 
25 per cent phosphoric acid, and when dissolved in acid 
about 12 to 13 per cent. It would appear it takes about 
SOO to 1,000 pounds to dissolve one ton of rock. It has 
been a question with me for some time as to how much 
the benefits have been derived by indirect action upon 
the soil, through the use of such quantities of sulphuric 
acid. D- c- 
t’ranhury. N. J. 
It would not pay the manufacturers of acid phos¬ 
phate to use more sulphuric, acid than is needed to 
“cut” the ground rock. In this process a chemical 
change takes place so that the acid changes its form, 
and unless there be more used than was needed there 
could be n(t action on the soil. If there was enough 
of this extra acid present to affect the plant food in 
the soil, the bags in which the phosphate is carried 
would be soon destroyed. Acid phosphate will help 
the crop in three ways—first, and most important, by 
supplying phosphoric acid as plant food; next, by 
supplying lime, and also by a chemical action whicn 
gives up lime from the acid phosphate and sets potasn 
free to serve as plant food. Phosphoric acid may also 
hasten the decay of humus in the soil, and thus pro¬ 
vide soluble nitrogen. Thus acid phosphate might be 
all that is needed on a heavy clay soil full of yegeUble 
matter, because it will make some of the insoluble 
potash available, and also provide nitrogen. Of course 
the time would come when the acid phosphate alone 
'^ould not answer. 
