596 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER, 
September 11 
his bargain. I laid the coat alongside of the one I 
had offered him at the same price, and he saw at 
once that they were exictly alike. I then gave him 
the names of several perions who had bought the very 
same kind of coats for $15 weeks before he bought 
his.” 
That is the use a merchant makes of a tariff bill. 
When a tariff is raised on any article that enters 
into a manufactured product, it is used as an excuse 
for raising the price. If the rise checks sales to any 
great extent, it is soon knocked off again, and the 
same old figures prevail. Let me caution farmers 
against being humbugged by the “ account of the 
tariff” cry. Don’t pay two prices for an article be¬ 
cause the dealer says that the tariff has sent it up. 
Look around a little, and you will soon find some one 
who will sell at the old price, or very near it. It is 
the little one-horse country merchant who sings tariff 
loudest, and attunes his prices to his song. Don’t be 
misled by him. Club together and order goods a few 
times from one of the great department stores in the 
nearest large city. That will soon bring him down 
from his high horse. 
The use of substitutes is another way to fetch the 
tariff singer off his higti perch. I see that lumber 
dealers have advanced the price of shingles “on 
account of the tariff.” Don’t let lumber dealers and 
workers make you believe for an instant that shingles 
are the only, or the best, roofing in the world. There 
are iron, steel, tin and, for outhouses, several excel¬ 
lent roofing papers. If shingles go too high, use 
these substitutes, and you will find them quite as 
efficient—quite as good and, in many cases, far better 
than shingles. The production of iron and steel is 
increasing at a rapid rate, as is their use for the 
various purposes for which lumber is now used. They 
are becoming so cheap that it is evident that the day 
is not far distant when they will enter largely into 
the construction of cottages and cheap houses, barns 
and other farm buildings. Don’t let the tariff singers 
make you pay exorbitant prices for anything in the 
eating, drinking, wearing, building, or any other 
line. Don’t let the middleman rob you “ on account 
of the tariff ” 1 _ frkd grundy. 
RETURNS FROM FERTILIZER FARMING. 
BALANCE SHEET OF AN EIGHTEEN-ACRE FIELD. 
Since the article describing Mr. Lewis’s New Jersey 
farm (page 481) was printed, we have had a number 
of letters from men who wish to know more about 
the actual returns from fertilizer farming. One 
farmer in Connecticut was quite desirous of knowing 
whether that 18 acre field which was described in 
the article actually gave a profit over the cost of the 
fertilizer. This man wrote as follows : 
You see my personal conundrum is like this: I have a half 
mile of beach, from which and the river, by building a scow, 
hiring two or more men, buying 15 or 20 hogs, and working like a 
slave myself, I can make from 500 to 1,000 loads of fair manure. 
But my success with your formula, sent me two years ago, and 
my corn crib this year (300 pounds of fertilizer to the acre only) 
and only a cultivator used, make me think that my river site 
would better go to the fishes, as I got equal results with no 
weeds, less than one-half the work and care, and the expense 
cannot be nearly so much. 
Mr Lewis Has given us the figures as accurately as 
possible, so that the financial history of that field 
may be stated with reasonable accuracy. In July, 
1893, the manure from the yards was hauled and 
spread on the sod. There were eight loads of this 
manure per acre, or about 144 loads in all. This re¬ 
mained on the ground until the spring of 1894, when 
the field was plowed and planted to corn with 200 
pounds per acre of corn fertilizer applied with the 
drill. The crop averaged 45 bushels per acre, which 
was worth 45 cents per bushel. The value of stalks 
and corn was placed at $24 55 per acre, or $441 90 for 
the whole field, while the cost of the fertilizer was $72. 
In 1895, the corn stubble was plowed and the field 
was planted to potatoes, using 1,000 pounds of fer¬ 
tilizer per acre. The yield was over 5 000 bushels, 
which sold at a very low price. Including the esti¬ 
mated value of the small potatoes fed to stock, the 
crop brought $1,102, while the cost of the fertilizer 
was $473.40. 
As soon as the potatoes were dug, the field was 
worked up and sown to wheat with 400 pounds of 
fertilizer per acre. The wheat gave 34 bushels per 
acre and sold at 73 cents per bushel. This gave an 
income of $446.76 for the wheat, while the fertilizer 
cost $136 80. 
In 1897, this field is in grass, and has given not less 
than 2% tons of hay per acre which, at $8 per ton, 
represents $396. The second cutting of the grass in 
1898, will give at least two tons per acre which, at 
the average price of $10 per ton, will bring $360 All 
this gives us the following statement: 
1894. 
Corn crop. 
Income. 
. $ 441.90 
Cost of 
Fertilizers. 
$ 72.00 
1895. 
Potato crop. 
. 1102.00 
473.40 
1896. 
Wheat crop. 
.; 416.76 
136.80 
189". 
Hay crop. 
. 396.00 
J898. 
Hay crop. 
. 360.00 
Total. 
$682.20 
In other words, during the five years’ rotation, the 
cost of fertilizing for this 18 acre field averaged $136 40 
or $7 58 per acre for each year. The sales from the 
field averaged $549 33 or $30.52 per acre for each year. 
This leaves an average margin of $22 94 per acre to 
pay for seeding, labor, interest and other expenses 
through the whole rotation. 
We take the five different crops in this way, since, 
under this system, it is hardly fair to figure any 
single one. The fertilizer for the potato crop cost 
$473 40, or $26 30 per acre, yet by rights, that should 
be divided by three, since it also produced two crops 
of grass. This year’s expense in the hay field will be 
but the cost of cutting and handling, yet it would 
not be fair to say that the hay cost nothing for fer¬ 
tilizer. In a rotation of this sort, one crop works 
into another and helps it out, so that it is difficult to 
figure on the cost of any single crop. 
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.l 
Starting Peach and Plum Pits. 
G. E. M., Concord, Mass .—What is the best way to plant plum 
and peach stones to be sure that they will come up ? I have tried 
planting them (always in the fall) an inch in the ground, and on 
top of the ground, and 1 cannot get them started. 
Ans. —The main thing in getting peach, cherry 
and other stony seeds to germinate is to keep them 
moist from the time they are taken from the fruit 
until the time for them to sprout the next spring. 
However, they will endure considerable drying with¬ 
out losing their vitality, especially when first gath¬ 
ered, and while the kernels are sappy. If kept at a 
low temperature, such as in a refrigerator or cold 
storage room, they will be good almost indefinitely. 
It is a common notion that peach and other like 
seeds need freezing to cause them to sprout, but this 
is a mistake, for they sprout in Florida and other 
places where the soil does not freeze. The mois¬ 
ture, in time, dissolves the glue that holds the two 
parts of the shell together, and makes it easy for 
the dormant germ of the kernel to absorb more water, 
and expand in growth until the radicle and plumule 
come out of their little cage, one into the soil, and the 
other above into the air. 
If G. E. M. has been putting his seeds in the ground 
in the fall in a healthy condition, I cannot see why 
they fail to come up. Sometimes, I have had peach 
seeds heat and spoil in a pile, when they were not 
dried on the outside before piling. Although I have 
planted in the fall with good success, my usual plan 
is to bury them about two or three inches deep soon 
after collecting, and in a moist but not wet place. 
About two layers deep of seeds give room for the 
young seedlings to grow for a few weeks, if need 
be, before planting in the nursery row ; but I prefer 
to take up the seeds as soon as they begin to burst 
in early spring, and drop in the row. If this plan be 
followed from beginning to end in Massachusetts or 
almost anywhere in this country, being careful to 
apply a little water in very dry times or climates, I 
think success is quite certain. h. e. van deman. 
Some Questions About Cherries. 
G. F., Ontario, Can.—I send samples of a cherry that ripens a 
week later than Early Richmond. I would like to know its true 
name. What are the best sour kinds to plant in southern Ontario 
that will yield a crop every year—one early, one medium, and one 
late? Is there any better than Early Richmond? Do cherry 
trees require different kinds to be planted in the same block to 
pollenize each other? 
E. D., Aurora, 2V. Y .—I have a Black Tartarian cherry tree 
15 years old, which blooms full every year. The cherries form on 
the stem, then all drop off, except three or four quarts, which 
ripen and are very nice. Can I do anything to make it bear, or 
would it be best to graft it ? The tree seems to be thrifty. 
Ans —The cherry sent for identification by G. F. 
seems to be Montmorency, which is one of the best of 
the second early sour kinds. Not seeiDgthe tree, but 
only two small twigs with leaves and fruit attached, 
it is, perhaps, impossible to tell to a certainty just 
what variety it is. The tree of Montmorency, the 
kind commonly grown under that name in western 
New York and elsewhere, is more upright than is that 
of Early Richmond. It is a French variety, and is 
accurately described and much praised by Leroy, 
who is one of the greatest pomologists of France. 
The fruit is more roundish and not so oblate as that 
of Early Richmond. The juice is colorless instead of 
red, like that of the Morellos. In flavor, it is quite 
sour. No cherry will yield a crop eveiy year. Of the 
very early kinds, there is, perhaps, none that has 
proved itself better for market or home use than 
Early Richmond, although there are some growers 
who prefer the Dyehouse. It is larger and fully as 
good as Early Richmond in every other way, so they 
say. Montmorency comes next in season, although 
Louis Philippe is a close rival. Same think it prefer¬ 
able, wfrich it certainly is in quality. For a late, 
sour cherry, there is none better at present than 
English Morello. It is somewhat heart-shaped, and 
nearly black in color when fully ripe. Up to date it 
has not been demonstrated, so far as I know, that 
varieties of the cherry can be made more fruitful by 
planting them alternately ; but it may yet be proved 
to be so. E D. complains of Black Tartarian failing 
to hold its fruit. I have not seen or heard of this 
trouble being more common with this variety than 
with others. It is almost universally commended for 
its productiveness in such places as suit the sweet 
cherries. All that I can advise is to be sure that the 
tree is true to name, and if it persist in casting its 
fruit, graft it or dig it up and plant another kind. It 
might be well to set a few grafts of some other kind 
in this tree as a test. h. e. v. d 
Old Land for Cherries. 
./. M. G„ Bradford, Tenn. —I wish to plant an orchard of sour 
cherries. I have two elevated sites, one on old land and rather 
thin clay soil, the other on fresh land. On which would you 
plant ? If I were planting apples, I would choose the fresh land, 
but if peaches, I would select the old land. Will the cherry suc¬ 
ceed root gra fted, or is it necessary to bud it ? 
Ans. —The old land, if well fertilized, would be 
equally as good as, if not better than, the new, as it 
would be free from roots and stumps, unless the lat¬ 
ter were thoroughly grubbed. Nothing should in¬ 
terfere with the frequent use of shallow cultivators. 
Some new land is not very rich, and cherry trees 
must be in fertile land to bear well. I have never 
set a cherry orchard in new woodland, but I have in 
new prairie land, and with good results. I do not 
think that there is anything harmful to the roots of 
cherry trees in new land. It is better to bud than to 
graft the cherry. I have root-grafted a few success¬ 
fully, but, generally, they did not seem to unite very 
well. The temperature of the cellar seemed to be too 
warm for them. h. e. v. d. 
Blackberries and Crandall Currant. 
J. S., Gloversville, N. Y. —I. What is the earliest hardy black 
berry, and best for market for this State? 2. My Crandall cur¬ 
rants bear only a few scattering berries. What is the matter? 
3. My Tree blackberries, set three years (called hardy), have 
never borne a berry. They winterkill, are verv thorny, and show 
no tree shape at all. Are they genuine ? 
Ans —1. Early Cluster. Early Harvest is some¬ 
what earlier, but not as hardy. 2. Many different 
seedlings have been sent out under the name of Cran¬ 
dall ; doubtless you have one of them. 3. Probably 
they are genuine. The variety is not hardy at the 
Rural Grounds, and the thorniest variety we have 
ever tried ; they assume no more of a tree shape than 
any other blackberry. 
The Hairy or Sand Vetch. 
G. F. C„ Rockingham County, 2V. //.—Can The R. N -Y. tell us 
anything about the forage plant, the seeds of which the Agricul¬ 
tural Department is sending out under the name of Vicia villosa ? 
Ans —Vicia villosa is the Hairy, Sand or Winter 
vetch. It is often sown with rye, which gives it sup¬ 
port. It grows to a height of about three feet, and 
may be cut twice during the season. It is hardy and 
nutritious, and thrives well on poor soils. That is 
about the whole story. 
A Corn-Eating Maggot. 
J). J. S., Aitkens Ferry, P. E. /., Can .—A neighbor planted corn 
on June 5, about three inches deep. Very little of it showed above 
ground, and on examination, these plants proved to be infested 
with Green aphis. On digging up the row, it was found that 
most of the corn had sprouted and almost reached the surface, 
but the kernel contained one to three little maggots similar to 
those found on the stem and roots of cabbage. I have always 
read that these maggots in cabbage were the larvie of a certain 
fly and, of course, eggs had to be deposited at sometime. The 
question in this case is, How were the eggs deposited in the corn, 
and were these maggots responsible for the non-appearance of 
the corn ? Will the Green aphis kill corn ? Our spring was very 
wet and cold. 
Ans —Yes, there is a maggot—first cousin to the 
one working on cabbages—which sometimes destroys 
sprouting seeds of corn under ground. In our bulletin 
(Bulletin 78 from the Cornell Experiment Station), 
we named this insect the Fringed anthomyiian from 
the fact that the male insect has a peculiar friDge of 
bristly hairs on its hind legs. Its scientific name is 
Phorbia fusciceps. It has recently been discovered 
that this insect includes an astonishing array of food 
in its m6nu. The maggots have been found eating 
sprouting seed corn, the eggs of grasshoppers, the 
roots of cabbages, radishes, onions, beans, and hedge 
mustard. It is thus not a strict vegetarian like its 
near relatives ; and, when sucking locust eggs, it is a 
very beneficial insect. There is only one case on 
record of the insect having done very noticeable 
damage to corn ; years ago, a New Jersey crop was 
practically destroyed by the maggots. 
But little is known of the life history of this insect. 
There seems to be but one brood each year, the mag¬ 
gots working in June and July and the flies being 
developed in August or later. How or where the 
eggs are laid, no one has discovered. Possibly, they 
are laid on the ground around the stems of cabbages, 
radishes and onions, when the insect selects these 
plants as its food. But how it knows where to put 
its eggs when the young maggots are to live upon 
