568 
AUG. 3o 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
the Willamette Valley, but the meager transportation fa¬ 
cilities and the utter lack of cultivation, pruning, thinning, 
etc., in the orchards, together, broke down the enormous 
profits, and this, coupled with the active, aggressive spirit 
of California pomologists, soon drove Oregon fruit culture 
to the wall. Then, for 20 years or more, a few earnest, 
patient toilers strove to keep the natural advantages of our 
State for this work before the people, to show that in time 
our transportation facilities would be the best, and that 
all that was necessary to hasten this period was to main¬ 
tain the vigor of our orchards, and to infuse into our people 
a love for the work; but it availed little save to keep 
smouldering the fires of a disappointed enterprise. Within 
the past few years, however, a goodly spattering of new 
blood has been brought into the State and now the whole 
is alive with a new spirit. Two years ago the legislature 
passed an act creating a State Board of Horticulture whose 
duty it is to disseminate information relative to insect and 
fungous pests, with the best remedies and preventives for 
them; to enforce certain laws requiring all orchardists to 
use all means to destroy whatever pests are found in their 
orchards, and various allied duties. The State Horticul¬ 
tural Society and the State Experiment Station have both 
been active factors in bringing about this new condition of 
things. 
During the past year more prune, peach, pear and apple 
trees were set out than for a period of 10 years during 
the ’70’s and ’80’s, except perhaps in ’87, ’88, ’89, which 
were three very active years. This, no doubt, has been 
largely due to the fact that horticultural discussions at in¬ 
stitutes, conventions and through papers have been very 
vigorous, while the number of Eastern horticulturists 
that have lately come to make their homes here is a very 
important factor in the matter. More old orchards have 
been renovated this year than for 20 years previous—yes, 
than for the whole time during which attention has been 
given to the subject in the State. But this is not all; 
many begin to feel that when these old orchards are reno¬ 
vated they will hardly meet the needs of the people. In 
many cases the varieties are only the most ordinary kinds 
—good in the market 30 years ago, but of little value to¬ 
day. True, those old trees can be grafted, but it is a ques¬ 
tion whether that would pay. In nearly every case the 
trees are trimmed high, a practice long out of date with 
the best cultivators on this north-west coast. Tops grafted 
on to these trees would be too far away. We want our 
fruit near the ground. The chief aim is to get a tree whose 
fruit can be picked by a person standing on the ground or 
on a short stool at most. Then, trees grow so fast in this 
climate that one can have a generous bearing orchard in 
four or five years. And as we hardly know what alternate 
bearing seasons are, these young trees go right on, giving 
good, easily-gathered crops each year. This, together 
with the fact that the appearance of such an orchard is in 
finitely better than that of an older one regrafted—a matter 
of no small figure in the account—is ample reason for 
many to doubt the wisdom of renovating old orchards, es¬ 
pecially in the Willamette Valley. 
Our leading horticulturists can be counted on the side 
of progress. They are men, in nearly every case, liberally 
educated, earnest students of Nature, keen in business— 
not a few of them having large estates—ardent readers of 
our horticultural journals and original thinkers. These 
are our leading horticultural spirits. Not many to be 
sure; but men that are doing grand work for Oregon. Wo 
have a far larger number that are not abreast of these, 
and, unfortunately for us, their words are only too often 
heard and taken as an index of our position. (Note Rural 
for May 17, 1890.) 
At the recent meeting of the State Horticultural Society 
more real progressive and scientific spirit was manifested 
than at any previous meeting. The way in which the dis- 
cnssions were carried on would have done credit to much 
older bodies. The habits and life histories of some of our 
orchard pests were critically examined and reported upon ; 
while remedies were discussed and re-discussed till it 
seemed as if every insect that had even the semblance of a 
pest had been through the “mill.” The work for future 
experimentation was briefly but fully outlined, and the 
manner in which our average orchardist manifested in¬ 
terest would betoken an unusual activity in home experi¬ 
ments during the coming year. Entomological field-work 
by our fruit growers has received an impetus that can but 
avail us great profit in the near future. Two scores of 
careful observers and experimenters scattered throughout 
the State will give results of inestimable value and soon 
enable us to be on a fair footing with some of our older 
States in fighting these horticultural pests. E. B. LAKE. 
SOME OF THE RESULTS—FAILURES AND SUC- 
CESSES-OF CROSSING PLANTS DURING 
THE PAST SEVENTEEN YEARS. 
(Mr. Carman’s address before the Society of American Florists.) 
I am going to take this rare chance to say a word upon a 
subject of importance to our young people in connection 
with the study of botany. It is really one of the simplest 
studies in the world. That is, there is of necessity very 
little that is difficult about it. This simple, fascinating 
science of vegetable life is rendered repulsive to many 
young people because of the absurd, irrational, preposter¬ 
ous words which botanical authors have chosen to express 
simple methods, simple ideas, simple functions. 
I am not going outside of my subject to illustrate this 
absurdity. We must, of course, recognize the necessity of 
a plant nomenclature that may be studied effectively in 
every language, and it is therefore indispensable that a 
single language—Greek or Latin, preferably—be selected 
as the standard, the same as it is desirable we should have 
a standard of weights and measures, or of money denom¬ 
inations. But when we come to study the physiology, the 
organography, the morphology of plants, the simplest and 
shortest woids should be employed ; and there is nothing 
that stands in the way of this but the hifalutin’, bombas¬ 
tic proclivities of botanical authors. Let me illustrate this 
in a familiar way : The way in which the sexes of plants 
meet and mate is as simple as the way in which animals 
meet and mate, and the process does not need to be defined 
by long words difficult to remember. In a familiar way, it 
may be said, the stamens are the fathers, the pistils the 
mothers and the floral envelopes (calyx and corolla) the 
houses in*which they live. But the two do not always live 
in the same house, which simple fact is described botanic- 
ally by such hard words as Diclinous, Dioecious, Monoeci¬ 
ous, Polygamous, Monoeciously or Dioeciously Polygam¬ 
ous, Gynodioecious, Androdioecious, etc. 
Now, inasmuch as they do not always live in one house 
and have no means of locomotion, the males have to do 
their courting by proxy. The simple go-betweens, with¬ 
out which mating would be impossible, are given the un- 
romantic qualifying names of Anemophilous, Entomophil- 
ous, Aquamophilous and Ornithophilous, as the love-agent 
happens to be the wind, an insect, rain or a bird. 
Again, it happens with many flowers that the male or fe¬ 
male is not in love simultaneously with the other. To 
accurately define this uncongeniality botanists use the 
words Dichogamy, as a class or generic word, and Proter- 
androus, Proterogynous and Synanthesis as specific 
words, meaning simply that the anthers mature before or 
after, or with the stigmas. By such abominations, I say, 
young people are prejudiced against the most simple, 
fascinating and God inspired science known to man. 
I have often heard of Kits, or outfits for crossing pur¬ 
poses, as if a variety of tools and special devices were re¬ 
quired. They are of just about as much use as costly 
manicure sets are for the nails. In my practice a sharp 
pair of scissors, a pointed piece of wood or even a wooden 
toothpick, a box for the flowers or pollen, sheets of firm 
tissue paper and a little strong yarn answer every purpose. 
A camel’s-hair brush is rarely of service. If pollen can be 
gathered in quantity, as from rye, roses, honeysuckles, 
etc., it may be collected in boxes and applied from the 
point of a knife, or by placing the ripe anthers themselves 
in contact with the receptive stigma. 
You will not care to have me dwell upon processes. It 
is a thrice-told story. I would merely impress upon all the 
necessity of thorough work and of abhorring all guess¬ 
work, Open the bud, remove the green anthers, tie up the 
bud in close, fine tissue. Open it only to apply foreign 
pollen to the stigmas, and at once again protect them from 
the possibility of contact with any other pollen. If then 
fruits and seeds develop we know that the seeds are cross¬ 
breeds. We should be as confident as to the parentage of 
our seedling progeny as we are of that of our finest horses 
and cattle. Disregard of such teachings has led to endless 
confusion, as well as to well-grounded doubts, on the part 
of the public, that the parentage of many of our fruits and 
flowers is such as the originators claim it to have been. 
(To be continued.) 
Womans Work. 
PRACTICAL AND ECONOMIC COOKERY. 
RACTICAL efforts to aid in bettering the condition 
of people of moderate means multiply. The Amer¬ 
ican Public Health Association has lately put forth a $599 
prize essay of some 209, 12 mo. pages,on Practical, Sanitary 
and Economic Cooking, for which it asks the fullest of 
publicity through the press. We are glad to aid in giving 
it this publicity, inasmuch as it follows out, in certain 
lines, some of the ideas of Mr. Atkinson, noted in a late 
issue; and the more so that it is the most thoroughly 
sensible, simple and valuable work of the kiud that has 
ever come to our notice. Perhaps no prize was ever more 
worthily won than that gained by the present essayist, 
Mrs. Mary Hinman Abel. 
Though dealing with scientific cookery, the work dis¬ 
cusses in simple, direct fashion, and in a manner to be 
understood even by the unscientific, the nutritive value of 
all the various food-products. These are classed under 
three important heads: the proteids, the flesh foods, or 
body-builders; the fats, the heat foods; and the carbo¬ 
hydrates, the work foods, of all of which the proteids are 
the most costly. These three the writer calls the “ real 
working constituents” of our food. Besides these, consid¬ 
erable attention is given to what the Germans call 
“ pleasure-giving things,” for which our best word is 
flavorings or seasonings, and which may include things 
that tickle the palate, that rouse the sense of smell, etc., 
from spices and herbs to fruit flavors, coffee, and even 
fruits themselves. 
It may be asserted without fear of contradiction, that 
among those who do not understand the comparative 
food-and-health values of certain materials, both foods and 
methods of furnishing them may be believed to be eco¬ 
nomical which are really quite the reverse—even extrava¬ 
gant. Mrs. Abel defines the scope of true household 
economy as follows: “ Its scope lies : First, In furnishing 
a certain food principle in its cheap, rather than its dear, 
form ; for example, the proteid of beef, instead of that of 
chicken, the fat of meat instead of butter. Second, Hav¬ 
ing bought foods wisely, in cooking them in such manner 
as to bring out their full nutritive value; for instance, 
making a roast juicy and delicious instead of dry and 
tasteless. Third, In learning how to use every scrap of 
food to advantage, as in soup-making, and Fourth, if we 
add to these the art of so flavoring and varying as to make 
simple materials relish, we have covered the whole field of 
the household economist so far as the food question is con¬ 
cerned.” She believes, with Mr. Atkinson and many other 
thoughtful reformers, that we, in this country, spend too 
much money on our food, as compared with what we use 
in other dii’ections. Mrs. Helen Campbell, noted for her 
studies into the condition of the poor, and her efforts to 
better that condition, declared that among the poor 
sewing women of New York none were really skill¬ 
ful in cooking their little ration, except the Ger¬ 
mans and the Swiss; and travelers say that if our 
laborers knew how to make as much of their large 
wages as the pauper laborers of Europe do of their small 
pay, they might live in luxury. And how often do we hear 
it said : “ If only we did not have to eat, how many things 
we could have the inference being that it is impossible 
to save in this direction. Mr. Atkinson has given us some 
idea of the saving that is possible in fuel alone; Mrs. Abel 
treats more of the saving that may be accomplished 
through judgment in selection, and through making the 
most of everything, by allowing absolutely no waste, either 
in nutritious properties or in food unused. Regarding 
soups, she says that they should be regarded neither as a 
luxury, nor as the last resort of poverty, but as a necessity 
with every dinner, and she further asserts that the neces¬ 
sity of taking part of our food in this form is absolute, if 
we are to do the best possible with a certain amount of 
money. She says plainly that we, as a nation, have yet 
two great arts to learn : the art of soup making and the 
art of soup eating, and disposes of the plea so often heard : 
“ Our family do not like soups,” by saying : “ Have you 
tried them for a considerable time, so that you have be¬ 
come skilled in making them and your family used to their 
taste ?” She declares, however, that soups need not be 
made of good cuts of meat, or indeed of meat at all; but 
that if they are made from meat, that meat must not be 
thrown away as useless, but with the help of the chopping- 
knife and the herb-bag must give its valuable proteids, 
which the soup has not taken, to help build up our bodies. 
“Gelatine” soups from bones “ boiled three times,” are 
not highly recommended for nutritive value. In this Mrs. 
Abel differs from the great majority of household writers. 
Much stress is laid upon flavorings and seasonings. “ The 
bulk of our nourishment must be made up of the flesh of a 
few animals, a half-dozen grains, and as many garden 
vegetables. The skillful cook can make of them, with 
the help of other flavors, an endless variety of dishes. The 
economical housekeeper who would throw out these things 
because they contain but little food, would make a great 
mistake. She may know just what cuts of meat to buy, 
what vegetables are most healthful and economical, but if 
she does not understand how to make the ‘mouth water,’ 
her labor is largely lost.” 
This essay is neatly bound in cloth, and is sold at a price 
barely above cost. It is put forth solely with the object of 
bettering the condition of the homes of all who should econo¬ 
mize, but even the rich might profit by its study. The 
price of a single copy in English is 40 cents; in English and 
German (on opposite pages), 60 cents. Besides giving in¬ 
formation of every sort about cooking, it contains a com¬ 
plete list of practical recipes for all sorts of low-priced and 
palatable dishes, just such a variety of recipes as every 
housewife needs for daily use. We hope soon to give 
another article on Mrs. Abel’s practical notions of real 
economy, and perhaps notes on other points which may be 
valuable to our readers. 
SEVERAL SCONES. 
Recoin mended by the Glasgow Cooking School. 
Potato Scones. —Take any boiled potatoes left from the 
dinner; bruise them nice and smooth on the table or baking- 
board; add salt to season; then shake some flour over them 
or work it in, roll out very thin, prick with a fork, and cut 
in three. Bake on not too hot a griddle. 
Scalded Scones. —One pound flour, one-half tea spoonful 
salt. Mix the flour and salt together, and add boiling 
water enough to make a good, firm dough, then divide it, 
and roll out very thin on the baking-board sprinkled with 
flour. Cut in three and bake on not too hot a griddle. 
|Ui£ccUancou.$ f Julvati.oing. 
In writing to advertisers, please mention The R. N.-Y. 
Sunburn, 
Chafing, 
Ivy Poisoning, 
J C"> ' 
Bites and Stings, 
Prickly Heat, 
And Irritations of the Skin common in Summer 
are speedily relieved by 
Packer’s Tar Soap. 
“The Best for Baby’s Bath.” 
A Luxury for Shampooing. 
A Delightful Balsamic Cleanser. 
25 Cents. All Druggists, or 
THE PACKER IYIFG. CO. 100 Fulton St. N. Y. 
