1899 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
3 
time. Our first experiment in using these tunnels for 
steam conductors in Winter, is just under way, and 
promises very satisfactory results. 
Exhausting steam into the asparagus bed, instead 
of returning it to the boiler in an inclosed circuit, 
would at first, seem to be a wasteful process of heat¬ 
ing. Experiment showed, however, that the circum¬ 
stances justified this method. Care must be taken 
not to apply too much steam to a tunnel at one time. 
A bed forced in this way, if carefully and gradually 
heated, is not ruined for further use, but will recu¬ 
perate if given good care, and allowed to grow with¬ 
out being cut, during the next Summer. 
Missouri Experiment Station. j. c. whitton. 
Fig. 2 shows the steam pipe which carries the steam 
across the field to the tiles. Fig. 3 shows a one-year- 
old asparagus plant which was started in the green¬ 
house in February, aud transplanted to the fieLd the 
first of May. At the Missouri Station, it is said that 
plants grown in this way reach as good size the first 
year as ordinary nursery-grown plants do in three 
years. _ 
PIGS IN THE ORCHARD. 
Small Sliotes Best. —I have been much interested 
in the discussion in regard to having hogs in the or¬ 
chard. I believe Mr. Woodward’s plan to be the best 
one yet brought forth. We have one acre of our 
orchard walled in ; we found, several years ago, that 
this orchard was sick, and the symptoms seemed to 
indicate that it needed nourishment. I reasoned that, 
if we ran hogs in the orchard and carried feed to sup¬ 
port the swine, they in turn, would 
enrich the orchard. These hogs were 
fed the skim-milk of from four to six 
cows. 
I like best to keep small shotes in the 
orchard, because the large ones are 
liable to reach up and get hold of the 
low branches, and shake off some of the 
apples. Large hogs will sometimes root 
too deep, and if apples are not very 
plentiful, they will eat the small roots. 
The way I plan to keep small shotes is 
to sell off the large ones first. I am 
able to do this by offering them to my 
neighbors at a little less than their real 
value. I sometimes get $40 or $50 profit 
on the hogs that run in this small or¬ 
chard duriDg the Summer. Our object 
is not to get gain out of the hogs, for 
we would gladly keep them for the 
benefit they are to the orchard. Five 
or six small shotes, weighing from 40 to 
100 pounds, will keep this orchard free 
from grass. I like to have some grass 
grow so that the pigs can have the roots 
to eat. After keeping hogs two or three 
years in this orchard, it caused the trees 
to load up so with fruit that quite a 
number of the limbs broke down. 
They Plow and Spray. —I like the 
pigs in our orchards, for they do all the 
plowing that seems to be needed. Then 
again, they have proved to be the very 
best manure spreaders that we have 
ever used. They are, by all odds, the cheapest team to 
harrow and make a dust mulch in the orchard of which 
I know. For us, they have taken the place of a sprayer. 
I can not say that there may not be better ones, for 
I have not used any other. If one cut open the 
apples that are found lying under the trees, he 
will find but few worms in them. I have tried this 
many times ; I do not refer to the small maggots that 
we find in Fall fruit, but to the fat fellow that lives 
in our hardest Winter fruit. When these wormy 
apples fall from the tree, Mr. Worm comes out and 
gets ready for more mischief, either by reproduction 
or some other way. If our pigs are nearby when these 
apples fall from the tree, Mr. Worm (in company 
with the apple) is soon on the road that leads to five- 
cent pork. By keeping the pigs year after year in the 
orchard, one will find only a small per cent of wormy 
apples. I do not allow the pigs to root too deep, and 
look out that they do not eat the bark from the trunks 
of the trees. I never have had any trouble in these 
respects, only with large hogs. m. a. chari.es. 
Maine. 
SOME OF THE NEWER CANNAS. 
“ Orchid-Flowering- Cannas.”— On page 690, 
Ruralisms erroneously credits the new Italian Cannas, 
Allemannia and Pandora, as Burbank’s productions. 
These splendid novelties really belong to a series of 
over 25 similar varieties,-including the now well-known 
and highly appreciated orchid-flowering Cannas, 
Italia and Austria, produced and sent out by the 
house of Dam man & Co , Naples, Italy. It is believed 
that all the Cannas of this class are hybrids of our 
wild southern species, Canna flaccida, with various im¬ 
proved varieties of the Crozy type. It was to be ex¬ 
pected that the outcome of a union of Flaccida, with’ 
its immense, but frail yellow blooms, with other spe¬ 
cies and varieties would infuse striking features into 
the progeny, but few were prepared for the admirable 
results embodied in these Italian varieties. 
The only Canna of this character yet sent out by 
Luther Burbank, of Santa Rosa, California, is the 
Canna Burbank, a novelty of last season, introduced 
by a Chicago seed house. This variety is almost an 
exact duplicate of Austria, except the claims of more 
substance in leaf and petal, claims which, to my ob¬ 
servation, are not born 3 out in comparative tests, in 
the eastern States, at least. 
These orchid-flowering Cannas possess great interest 
to me, as I have squandered much effort in trying to 
hybridize Canna flaccida, both in the garden and green¬ 
house, making, possibly, more than 1,000 polleniza- 
tions. Over a pint of seed was the result of these trials 
which, however, produced nothing of value, the seed¬ 
lings resembling either the species or variety used, 
according to their respective seed parentages. The 
stimulating climates of southern California and Italy 
have induced this hitherto refractory species to blend 
its characteristics with our more familiar types, and 
the horticultural world has received a valuable addi¬ 
tion to its list of truly ornamental plants. 
Grow in the South. —We have tried here in 
Ruskin most of the Italian varieties issued up to this 
time, and we find we can heartily recommend several 
of them. Damman & Co., like most Continental plants- 
men, greatly reduce their usefulness as disseminators 
of novelties, by issuing a great number of named 
varieties, so closely resembling each other that it re¬ 
quires close observation to distinguish them apart, 
even when grown side by side, This list of new Can¬ 
nas is no exception and, while all the varieties are 
good, we find it of advantage to discard all but four 
or five, which are really distinct and each excellent in 
character. 
Allemannia takes the first place with us, as with 
nearly all who have grown it, having a larger and 
better finished flower than Italia, which it resembles. 
America has handsome bronzy-red foliage, and a 
large, but somewhat flabby orange-red bloom. Edouard 
Andr6 proves a beautiful dark-red-leaved variety, with 
strong, erect growth and medium-sized brilliant flame- 
co’.ored flowers carried on a very erect truss. We 
think it a fine variety, though it has not been much 
talked about. Suevia has a very large clear yellow 
flower, much brighter than either Austria or Burbank. 
It has a few dashes of dull red in the throat, however, 
which somewhat detracts from its beauty ; foliage 
green. None of about a dozen other varieties tested 
varies enough from Italia to be grown separately, 
though one or two seem desirable on account of pro¬ 
ducing apparently fertile pollen, which may prove 
useful in further experimental work. 
I must not forget to record the satisfaction Canna 
Austria has given us. It has been little appreciated 
in the North, where it has proved a shy bloomer, but 
in this locality, it is all that can be desired in a yel¬ 
low-flowered Canna, producing its enormous blooms 
in constant succession from June to late October. Fig. 
4 shows photograph of Canna and Caladium beds as 
grown in Ruskin, showing a growth of eight feet or 
more. The Cannas to the left are chiefly Allemannias, 
but were past their blooming period when photo¬ 
graphed. W. VAN FLEET 
Dickson County, Tenn. 
INCUBATORS AND FIRE INSURANCE. 
EXPERIENCE OF THE INSURED. 
In Tue R. N.-Y., on page 836, these questions are 
asked : What about fire insurance risks on houses in 
which incubators are used ? What companies refuse 
to cover an incubator lamp in their policies ? How 
have they treated you ? 
Read Your Policy. —About two years ago, we 
decided to try our hand at artificial incubation, and 
after having made our choice of a machine, sent an 
order for one. What was my surprise when, happen¬ 
ing to read over the insurance policy, on which we 
had just paid the premium for three years, to find in 
it this clause : “ The use of any incubator or brooder 
in any building insured or containing or exposing 
property insured by this policy, will render this 
policy void. No agent has authority to give privilege 
for the use of same.” As the policy positively asserts 
that the agent has no authority to give privileges, I 
went to him and requested that he write the company 
and see whether they would allow me to put my in¬ 
cubator in the house cellar, providing I observed cer¬ 
tain precautions, i. e., to suspend sheetiron or tin 
above and at the side where woodwork was exposed. 
But the company replied that they, could not change 
their regulations to suit individuals, or something to 
that effect. 
A Hard Arrangement. —For two 
seasons, I have kept my incubator in a 
corner of the henhouse (which is not in¬ 
sured, but worth $200 or more), cur¬ 
tained off with burlap sacking. This 
arrangement, on the whole, has been 
very unhandy and unsatisfactory, as 
the hennery is quite a distance from 
the house, and a change must be made. 
We do not wish to drop insurance en¬ 
tirely, for my parents have been paying 
insurance premiums on this property 
for over 30 years. It does not seem 
that there is much risk in allowing the 
use of incubators, as most of them have 
the lamp inclosed in a metal hood and, 
too, most people wish to keep their ma¬ 
chines in the house cellar, where the 
floor and side walls are, generally, of 
masonry. Then with something like 
tin or sheetiron suspended above, there 
could be little or no danger of fire. I 
know of many who are using incubators 
in insured buildings, and I doubt not 
that some of them would find on ex¬ 
amination, that their policies forbid 
the same. In fact, I do not believe 
that more than one out of ten farmers 
reads carefully his insurance policy. 
Cayuga County, N. Y. it. e paul. 
Experience in the Bay State.— 
When I bought my farm, there was a 
policy of the Middlesex Mutual Fire 
Insurance Company (a local company), in force. 
When it expired, I inquired rates of insurance to in¬ 
clude permission for running an incubator in the 
cellar of the dwelling. I was informed that the rate 
would be one per cent additional for three years, but 
this would be reduced to one-half per cent if I would 
agree that contiguous walls should be of brick or 
stone, and that the ceiling over the machine should 
be protected by galvanized iron or zinc. I did not in¬ 
sure at these terms, but placed the risk for three- 
quarters per cent for five years, including permission 
to run an incubator. After a few weeks, I received 
notice that my policies would be canceled unless I re¬ 
moved the incubator, the policies having been ap¬ 
proved at first through some oversight. I then placed 
the risk in another company at the same rate. I have 
hydrant protection, so get a lower rate. I have found 
mutual companies more extortionate in charges and 
less accommodating than the stock companies. 
Massachusetts. e r, s. 
Incubators Not Wanted.— In January, 1893, I 
took a policy in an eastern company. The next Spring, 
I noticed in the printed policy form attached to the 
policy a statement that the insurance did not cover a 
building containing an incubator or any property ex¬ 
posed thereto. (Rather broad.) Again I took later a 
policy in the same company with items of property 
written in tne policy, including $25 on incubator 
house detached 70 feet from the barn. Word came to 
the local agent, “ Cancel that policy at once.” Finally 
it was allowed “ on incubator house. Permission to 
use kerosene lamp for incubator house, but not to 
cover therein.” White & Rice were required by the 
insurance companies to remove the incubator lamp 
GROWTH OF CANNAS AT RUSKIN, TENN. Fig. 4. 
