1898 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
83 
young brood ewes of a mutton breed. Use most of 
the bay and grain except wheat, on the farm, and 
raise the farm’s fertility by plowing under sod. Plow 
nothing but sod. shun rotation, treat it as a farm 
slayer of the barbaric ages. Sod will keep the land 
from washing, render it porous, and thereby enable it 
to absorb the raanurial properties from the elements. 
Signal, O. R. s. B. 
Potato Planting Points. —We plant our potatoes in 
drills 32 inches apart and 14 inches in the drill. We 
found, the past season, that the varieties we cut into 
the smallest pieces gave the best yield. If this were 
true every year, under all conditions, it would make 
quite a saving in seed. We believe that we should cut 
the seed according to circumstances ; the nearer to¬ 
gether the pieces are planted, the smaller we should 
cut them, but if the soil was very dry when planting, 
or they were planted deep after a heavy rain, or just 
before the rain, we would prefer large pieces. If pota¬ 
toes are planted early, and the soil is just right, 
smaller pieces will do than if planted late. If planted 
very early, when there is danger of a week or more of 
cold weather between planting and coming up, we 
prefer large cut pieces or whole seed about the size of 
hens’ eggs. It will not be so liable to decay as the 
small pieces. We don’t believe in planting early pota¬ 
toes too deep. They want the sun to warm the soil so 
that they can get an early start. We put a number of 
varieties in the sun, last spring, for several weeks, 
that they might form short, stubby sprouts for earlier 
growth. It did not pay. We prefer to allow them 
only two or three days in the warm sun just before 
planting, so that the eyes will get thoroughly warmed 
up, and we can just see the sprouts when planted. We 
put several barrels of potatoes in 
cold storage, to prevent sprouting, 
but for early varieties planted early, 
we could not see any advantage. 
Potatoes in barrels always sprout 
worse with us than those in bins. 
Connecticut, ii. g. Manchester. 
Pot Hunters and Fox Hunters.— 
Several complaints have appeared 
lately in The R. N.-Y. against pot 
hunters, and about the difficulty 
of keeping them from trespassing 
on cultivated lands. I have been 
located all my life within easy reach 
of Philadelphia, and know my neigh¬ 
borhood pretty thoroughly. Years 
ago, this region suffered from the 
same annoyance, until it became 
such a nuisance as to be intolerable. 
So the more resolute farmers banded 
together for self-protection, and in 
bodies, warned these trespassers off 
their premises, both in the local 
papers and by notices posted on 
their grounds. Of course, it raised 
a great hue and cry for a time, and 
some prosecutions had to be made ; 
but the tide was gradually deflected 
to other localities with less back¬ 
bone; and now it is rare to see a city 
chap or a country vagrant prowling 
around with dog and gun, without a permit. A few 
notices are still posted here and there in the hunting 
season, as reminders to neighboring sportsmen to be 
careful, but our civil people find no trouble in having 
a day’s sport now and then, if they go out in small 
bodies with only one or two dogs. Our laws against 
trespassing have been strengthened of late under 
pressure from the country districts, and are now ample 
for protection, if enforced. 
A greater trouble with us than pot hunters, is fox 
hunters. We have numerous so-called fox-hunting 
clubs, scattered among the villages. Few of the mem¬ 
bers are persons of much character or principle. Noth¬ 
ing but the fear of the law would prevent many of 
them from riding over grain fields in the softest kind 
of weather, and as much of their sport is carried on 
during moonlight nights when steady people are asleep, 
a large amount of damage is done to fences and crops. 
Hut even these marauders can be held at bay by a little 
determination. I know a man with a goodly-sized farm 
which he takes some pride in keeping neat, who sev¬ 
eral years ago decided to stop fox hunting across his 
premises. It was up-hill work for a while, especially 
as his property was directly on one of the regular 
routes, but he succeeded without having to resort to 
law. In fact, he never had a lawsuit in his life, 
though doing considerable business. He simply let 
it be known that, while he would be kind and courte¬ 
ous to all his neighbors engaged in any legitimate 
business, he would not allow them or their dogs to run 
foxes across his fields. To enforce the prohibition 
against the latter, he kept a trusty rifle handy, which, 
however, he didn’t have much use for, as the simple 
fact that he could and would shoot did the business. 
And now they cither pass around him or keep to the 
highway, and all are good-humored and peaceable, 
because both sides understand the situation ! 
Chester County, Pa. w. t. s. 
The Vineless Sweet Potato Again. 
In The R. N.-Y for January 1, some notes and com¬ 
ments on the Vineless sweet potato are given, which 
may be misleading if left uncorrected or without com¬ 
ment. I have had this sweet potato under test for 
four years, and have described it in two bulletins, one 
from which you quote, and in a book on Sweet Potato 
Culture for Profit. I have tested about all the varie¬ 
ties introduced in America, and I have discarded all 
except two or three, among which number I still grow 
the Vineless. The two main things which have led 
to wrong impressions are these : First, the Vineless 
sweet potato is not, strictly speaking, a vineless 
variety ; second, the vines do not grow up like those 
of the white potato. There are, also, two sports from 
the Vineless. which have vines from eight to ten feet 
long. It is very clear that it was one of these sports 
which The R. N.-Y. had under test. Vines from the 
true Vineless grow from two to four feet long. A 
mass of extremely heavy foliage is crowded very 
thickly upon these short vines, and presents a 
“ bunchy” appearance. The foliage on the two sports 
is much smaller and less dense. There is no difficulty 
at all in distinguishing the true Vineless from its two 
sports when seen growing side by side. 
The table quality is quite good when the tubers are 
grown on a sandy loam soil. A stiff heavy clay soil 
lowers the table quality of both white and sweet pota¬ 
toes. In one large city of Texas, the Vineless sweet 
potato brings more per bushel than any other variety, 
A GERMAN FARMYARD SCENE. Fig. 33 
and this is when customers want it for table use. Per¬ 
haps a more mealy variety of the Nansemond type 
would be liked best in New York, New Jersey, and some 
other northern States, People in many of the southern 
States where the soft, mushy and sweet varieties 
are liked best, often call this class of sweet potatoes 
yams. Hence the reason the Vineless variety is called 
a yam sweet potato. This is erroneous. Yams, strictly 
speaking, are not sweet potatoes at all. They belong 
to the genus Dioscorea, while the sweet potato be¬ 
longs to the genus Ipomoea. The name, yam, should 
not be used for the sweet potato because it leads to 
confusion. 
We have had the sugar content of a large number 
of varieties tested, and found that the Vineless ranks 
among the highest, but it was not “ 20 per cent more 
than other varieties.” The yield has never run up to 
600 bushels per acre with me. I have frequently grown 
at the rate of 300 bushels per acre. The Vineless is 
an early potato, but I have never obtained mature 
tubers in 60 days. The R. N.-Y. states that the larg¬ 
est tubers grown in its test were “ 12 inches long.” 
The usual length of the tubers is four to five inches, 
oval in shape. The length of tubers of sweet potatoes 
depends upon the season and soil. During an ex¬ 
tremely dry season, I have seen roots of sweet potatoes 
which had gone down into the subsoil three feet, and 
were an inch thick, thus forming no tubers at all. In 
a deep, sandy loam, the tubers are larger. The Vine¬ 
less shows a tendency to produce large roots instead 
of tubers, in dry weather, as much as any variety I 
have tested. It stands drought extremely well, hence 
is a valuable variety in parts of the country which are 
. likely to suffer from a deficiency of rainfall. 
Texas Experiment Station, R. h. i*rice; 
[Every query must be accompanied by the name and address of 
the writer to insure attention. Before asking a question please 
see whether it is not .answered in our advertising columns. Ask 
only a few questions at one time. Put questions on a separate 
piece of paper.] 
Some Lowing Over a Wood Lot. 
Ii. A. II., Winchendon, Mass.— 1. A owns a wood lot. He cuts 
and draws off 440 cords of wood and logs, drawing them through 
adjoining land and mowing belonging to B. In return for damage 
thereto, he gives B the limbs, etc., which are left on the ground. 
From these B cuts and piles about 20 cords of wood (not 
corded) all lengths. 2. A sells the land to C, not notifying B. 
C agrees to pay 150 down, but pays only $25, receiving a receipt 
therefor—no deed—dated December 15. 3. December 23, C forbids 
B drawing any more wood, but goes on and draws it off himself. 
4. Has C any right to forbid B on the land ? 5. Has C any title 
whatever to the land ? 6. Can B have C imprisoned for stealing 
the wood ? If so, would each load be a separate indictment, 
and what is the penalty ? 7. Supposing that his paper was a 
deed. How should all the above be answered ? 8. Some four-foot 
wood and seven or eight logs were verbally reserved by A in his 
trade with C. Can C forbid their removal in either case ? 9. Sup¬ 
posing that C had a deed. What could C do to B for cutting atul 
drawing between December 15 and 23? 10. Is the penalty for 
breaking and entering a man’s farm or his house, and stealing, 
the same as a dwelling? If not, why? 11. What can one do to 
rabbit hunters for tearing down walls ? What is the penalty ? 
Ans. — 1 . Where, in consideration of ingress and 
egress by A, over B’s land, the former gave him the 
limbs of the timber mentioned, the contract carried 
with it a reasonable time in which to remove them 
from A’s land. 2. The payment of $25 and taking a 
binding receipt therefor, gave C 
> an equity in the property to the 
extent of said payment, and the loss 
or damage he might have sustained 
in case A refused to complete the 
deal, or deliver possession. 3. Pre¬ 
suming that C has possession of the 
land by purchase, his right to ap¬ 
propriate timber found on the same 
could not be questioned in the ab¬ 
sence of any reservation or notice by 
the seller that it belonged to an¬ 
other. 4. C had a right to forbid 
B to enter upon the land unless 
the privilege granted by A to remove 
the wood had not been abrogated by 
the sale. If C refuses to allow B 
to remove the wood, he can replevy 
it, and thus try the rights of prop¬ 
erty in the court. 5. C has an equit¬ 
able title to the land, having paid 
a contract stipulation to bind the 
sale. 
6. A charge of larceny against C 
for appropriating limbs or wood 
found upon land purchased by him, 
would scarcely lie under the circum¬ 
stances ; yet, if C surreptitiously 
hauled off wood which he had been 
notified belonged to and was reserved 
to another, it would be theft, and he 
could be indicted for wrongdoing. A single indictment 
would be sufficient, as the particular wood in each 
load would be difficult to identify. 7. C, having made 
a payment and obtained a binding receipt and posses¬ 
sion of the land under the contract, all the rights were 
secured to him that would have been secured had a 
deed passed. 8. The wood and logs reserved by A 
upon a verbal agreement can be had by A, upon writ 
of replevin and proof of the verbal agreement as to 
reservation, ownership and identification. 9. Nothing 
more than to recover damages in the actual amount 
of the value of the wood hauled by B between Decem¬ 
ber 15 and 23 in case B failed to establish his right 
and title to the wood so hauled. The whole matter 
depended upon proof of ownership in B. If B owned 
the wood, A could not sell it away from him, neither 
could C deprive him of his property rights in said 
wood. 10. No, statutes usually make a distinction. 
The breaking into one’s dwelling house, and stealing, 
is burglary; the entering upon one’s premises, and 
stealing is theft or larceny. 11. Have them indicted 
and convicted, if possible to secure sufficient evidence, 
for malicious trespass. The penalty is defined by 
statute. 
What to do for "Blackberry Curl.” 
F. Ii., W. Hanover. Mass.— What are the cause and prevention of 
blackberry curl ? 
Ans. —The only blackberry curl that we have ever 
seen or heard about is caused by an insect, the bram¬ 
ble-flea louse (Trioza tripunctata), an insect which 
is closely related to the well-known Pear psylla. 
Whether this insect is the cause of the “curl’’re¬ 
ferred to by F. B., I cannot say without seeing speci¬ 
mens. This bramble-flea louse or psylla, causes the 
tip leaves and even the cane itself to twist and curl 
