132 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
March 6 
Not only do different kinds of orchard fruits require 
different distances between their trees, but the same 
species or the same variety often needs more or less 
space in different climates and soils. Despite all 
the manuring or cultivation we may give them, 
those planted in some localities will not attain the 
same size as they would had they been planted in 
others. For instance ; the peach trees of Connecticut 
and northern Michigan are much smaller than those 
of Delaware and Missouri. No manner of treatment 
will cause them to grow to the same size, unless those 
in the more southern locality were cut back in sum¬ 
mer time or starved, and thereby stunted. It is 
climate that does it—more warmth, more sunlight, 
and, in short, more congeniality. The apple trees of 
Michigan and New England are far larger than those 
of Texas and the tide-water sections of Virginia ; be¬ 
cause the apple delights in a climate both moist and 
cool. The gigantic cherry trees of the Shenandoah 
Valley far exceed in size those which grow in the 
richer lands of Illinois. 
Where land is dear, economy of space is an import¬ 
ant point; hence the plan that will put the most 
trees on a given area, provided they are not too 
thick, is the best. The more there are on an acre, 
the less it costs per tree to cultivate them. I give 
below several diagrams showing some of the leading 
plans for arranging trees in orchard form, each rep¬ 
resenting one acre. Fifteen feet are allowed as a mar¬ 
gin on the south and west sides in all cases, suppos¬ 
ing them to be the border lines of the orchards. 
The Hexagonal, Van Deman Plan. 
The plan that will best economize space is what is 
known as the “ hexagonal ” plan. It is a system of 
equilateral triangles, and is sometimes called the 
“triangular” system. It puts all adjacent trees 
equally distant from each other. This is the plan I 
have followed in all my own plantings, and now think 
it the best I have ever seen. I have practiced upon 
the additional idea of planting temporary trees alter¬ 
nately with permanent ones, and leaving alleys be¬ 
tween every fifth and sixth row, which I have never 
seen in any other orchards of this style ; therefore, 
I have called this part of it the “ Van Deman plan.” 
In Fig. 77, it may be seen. By the lower part of this 
diagram, there may be planted 156 trees per acre one 
rod apart, with every sixth row left out for alleys, 
which give easy access to wagons for gathering fruit 
and for any other necessity. The permanent trees 
are marked by the letter P throughout all the plans. 
These trees are two rods, or 33 feet apart, which, for 
apple trees in most climates and soils, is sufficient. 
In Michigan, Pennsylvania, New York and some other 
localities where apple trees grow to very large size, 
40 to 45 feet are none too far apart for permanent 
trees. The places for the temporary trees or “ fillers ” 
are designated by the letter F. The fillers reduce 
the distance between trees to one rod or 16% feet, 
except where the alleys occur, which are 28% feet 
wide. The fillers should be of early-bearing kinds, 
such as Wagener, Missouri or Wealthy, which will, 
usually, pay the cost of the entire orchard within the 
first 10 years. In the middle section, Fig. 77, are 104 
trees per acre, in which all the intermediate rows are 
left out; the fillers only equal the permanent trees. 
These are preferably in the rows running north and 
south, that the trees may, in some measure, protect 
each other from the force of the prevailing southerly 
winds in the prairie States, especially ; and, some 
think, from the hot sun, also. This is my favorite 
plan. It gives ample room to cultivate, and is just 
right for planting six rows of corn, which, for the 
first five or six years, is advisable. The upper section 
of the diagram contains only the permanent trees, of 
which there are 52 per acre. The rows are 28% feet 
wide three ways, and permit cultivating the trees 
accordingly. 
The Alternate Plan. 
Fig. 78 shows the alternate plan, and is, in all par¬ 
ticulars, like Fig. 77, except that the rows are fully 
33 feet apart. The trees are to be planted alternately, 
just as bricks are laid in a wall. In the lower section, 
there are 143 trees per acre; in the middle one 92, 
and in the upper, fully thinned section, are 46 per¬ 
manent trees. 
The l/Ve/lhouse Plan. 
Almost every fruit grower has heard of Hon. F. 
Wellhouse of Kansas, who is called “The Apple King 
of America”. Well may he be so called, for he and 
his son, who is in company with him, have over 1,600 
acres of apple orchard, ranging from two to twenty- 
two years planted. His trees are planted 32 x 16 feet 
apart in rectangular style, as shown in the lower 
section, Fig. 79, the wide spaces running north and 
south ; this makes 98 trees per acre. The upper 
section shows the permanent trees in exact squares 
32 feet each way, as is now the case in his older 
orchards that have been thinned, 49 trees standing on 
an acre. He has not mixed the varieties as is indicated 
in the illustration, so far as I know, but planted such 
varieties in solid blocks as would bear reasonably 
early ; but it would seem to me that, if such kinds as 
Missouri were planted in rows between the others 
and to be removed, it would be better than planting 
each by itself. But, aside from his published state¬ 
ments of the results of his enterprise, I know from a 
(NORTH.) 
P 
P P 
P 
P P 
P 
P P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
K 
P 
F 
F 
P 
F 
P 
F 
P 
F 
P F F F P 
F P F F 
P F F F P 
F P F 
P F P 
F P F 
P F I’ 
F F P F F 
P F F F P 
F F P F F 
(SOUTH.) 
ALTERNATE PLAN. Fig. 78. 
40 permanent trees, 33x 41J i feet apart; or 92 trees, 33x 16!4 feet 
apart; or 143 trees, 16*4 * 16 i 4 feet apart, leaving 
out two rows for alleys. 
long intimate acquaintance with Judge Wellhouse and 
his orchards, that they have done remarkably well. 
(To be continued.) h. e. van dkman. 
The Farmers’ Club. 
[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.] 
Pure Water ; Fill the Foul Well. 
R. F. W., Abington, Conn. —Is it possible to purify a well which 
has been contaminated with privy drainage, so that the water 
will be fit to drink again ? How can it be done, if purification be 
possible ? 
Ans.—T here is something so repulsive in the mere 
thought of using waters known to be polluted in this 
way, that, unless it be absolutely impossible to get 
another supply, the well should be filled up. No 
other source of culinary water involves such risk to 
health. Even though the surface water percolate 
through a considerable stratum of soil before it reach 
the well bottom, be then limpid, cool, and attractive 
to the palate and to the eye, it may be reeking with 
disease germs of the worst type. But situated near 
the house, as wells often are for convenience, when 
garbage and sewage are not properly taken care of, 
the purest water will, in process of time, become 
unfit for use, unless purified. This purification may 
be accomplished in many ways, the cheapest of which 
is boiling. If used only in small quantities in the 
household, this method will, perhaps, be the best. 
The water is boiled for 15 or 20 minutes, filtered 
through a porous filter to remove the flat taste by 
aeration, and when cooled, is ready for use. No 
unboiled water must be allowed in the filter, which 
must, like all other filters, be kept scrupulously clean 
by frequent, regular attention. This method entails 
considerable labor, as the quantity heated at one 
time is necessarily small. But it is the best and 
safest method, since it kills all deleterious germs, and 
renders harmless, vegetable and animal remains. 
The next best method for the home is, perhaps, the 
Chamberland-Pasteur filter, which consists of an 
unglazed earthenware cup through which solid 
(NORTH.) 
p 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
p 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
p 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
F 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
P 
(SOUTH.) 
WELLHOUSE PLAN. Fig. 79. 
49 permanent frees, 32 feet apart; 98 trees, 32x16 feet apart. 
matter cannot pass. It is even, at first, proof against 
the passage of microbes. These organisms soon clog 
the action of the filter which, at first slow, becomes 
slower. Then the bacteria make their way through 
the cup by a process, it seems, of growth, so that the 
filter itself may become a breeding chamber of the 
vilest kind. But thoroughly heating the cup, which 
for the purpose is detachable, will cleanse it and 
make it fit for use again. Other methods of purifying 
water are, as a rule, either too cumbersome or too 
expensive for private use, or are only makeshifts'and 
as such are worse than nothing. But to return to 
the well, there is nothing that can or should be done 
to it. It will stay polluted for years, even though 
the cause of contamination be removed, because the 
soil is thoroughly saturated with impurities. The 
only sure, safe way is to dig a new one a considerable 
distance from the first. Then keep its surroundings 
clean. M. 6. k. 
How to “Reduce” Bones. 
L). L. /'., Pittsburgh. Pa.— How can I reduce bones to manure, 
having no means of grinding them ? Would they lose their manur- 
ial value by being burned ? 
Ans. —The fertilizer dealers steam the bones under 
high pressure and then grind them in bone mills. 
Some farmers obtain fair results by smashing the 
bones with a sledge and then packing them in boxes 
or barrels in layers with unleached wood ashes 
packed with them. If the whole mass is kept well 
moistened with liquid manure or urine, at the end of 
two months the bones will be greatly softened. 
Where the bones are very cheap, burning is often re¬ 
sorted to. A big bonfire is made by building up 
alternate layers of wood and bone, and firing the 
whole. The result is a quantity of bone ash. This 
ash contains no nitrogen—that substance is all lost 
in burning. The ash of the wood gives potash, and 
the ash of the bone gives phosphoric acid, but it 
is not quite so available as when in the raw bone. 
Last year, a reader told us about a small bone-grind¬ 
ing mill in Massachusetts. Since then, he writes 
about it as follows : 
“REDUCING” BONK8 BY BOILING. 
The plant which I described in The R. N.-Y. for 
working up bones for fertilizers by steaming and 
grinding, was all right for a large business, but for 
a farmer of small means who wished to work up only 
a small quantity, say such as might accumulate on 
the farm during the year, it is too expensive. I will 
describe a method that I have used that does not call 
for a very expensive outlay. What holds the phos¬ 
phate of lime in the bones locked together in a vise¬ 
like grip is the grease and gelatine. When the bones 
are steamed under pressure, the steam melts the 
grease and dissolves the gelatine, and when drained 
off leaves the phosphate of lime (the body) of the 
bone as soft, and when dried, as brittle as chalk. 
Now this same result can be brought about by boil¬ 
ing the bones, only it will, of course, take somewhat 
longer than by steaming under high pressure. For 
boiling, I use a common cast-iron kettle set in brick 
masonry, filling the kettle as full as it will hold of 
raw bones, then fill with water and cover with a 
wooden cover, fire up and after the contents begin 
boiling, it does not take much fuel or attention to 
keep it going. An occasional stirring of the bones 
with a stake or shovel to keep them from burning on 
the bottom, and replenishing the water as it gets low, 
are all that is necessary aside from firing. The masonry 
helps to hold the heat, and will keep the “pot a-boil¬ 
ing” for some time after the fire is burned out. 
Although I have never timed a “charge” to get at the 
exact time required to extract the grease and gelatine, 
I think that, if the larger bones are cracked up 
with an old ax before putting in, about 48 hours of 
steady boiling would be sufficient to reduce them. 
When done sufficiently, the wet bones will have a 
dull look and will readily break. When cooked 
enough, it may be allowed to cool down and the 
grease taken off the top and then the bones drained 
out and dried. In the absence of any mill to grind 
them, they can be readily crushed with a heavy 
hammer. The grease is of no value as a fertilizer, 
and may be used for soapmakiDg or, if sweet, could 
be fed to swine or poultry for fattening. The rest of 
the liquid contents can be composted for manure, or 
if sweet, be used for mixing poultry feed; being rich 
in soluble nitrogen and phosphate, it is just what 
laying hens and growing chicks need. For fuel, I use 
dry brush, stumps, rubbish and peat from the 
meadow. I use my kettle for cooking fresh bones 
and meat from the market for my poultry, firing up 
each night and mixing the mash for the morning feed 
the night before. The bones, as they become soft, 
are taken out, dried and run through a dry-bone mill, 
and a small quantity of the ground bone mixed in the 
feed each time. f. a. putnam. 
How Much Fertility in Gram ? 
W. II. II.. Missouri Valley, la.— What amount of fertilizer is 
removed from one acre by rye straw, and what amount of 
steamed bone will replace the same ? 
Ans. —One ton of rye straw contains, in round 
figures, nine pounds of nitrogen, seven pounds of 
phosphoric acid and 16 pounds of potash. A bushel 
of rye grain contains one pound of nitrogen, one-half 
pound of phosphoric acid and about five ounces of 
potash. You can figure from this the amount of fer¬ 
tility in a crop of rye. You will notice that the 
greater part of the phosphoric acid is in the grain, 
