742 
NOV. i 
FARMERS’ CLUB—DISCUSSION. 
Canadian Hens May Still Cackle. 
J. D. Roberts, Ontario, Canada.—As 
there seems to be a good deal of wonder 
now where our surplus eggs are to be sold, 
I send The R. N.-Y. a copy of a letter re¬ 
cently received from J. G. Curry, perhaps 
the largest dealer in dairy produce in Lon¬ 
don, England : “ I have been associated 
with the trade for the last 25 years, both 
here and in connection with our French 
house in Laigle, France. I am constantly 
handling goods (eggs) from France, Italy, 
Germany, Hungary, Russia, etc. Time oc¬ 
cupied in transit of goods from Russia is 
at least 10 days, and as yours would reach 
us in less than that time there is no doubt 
of their being in good condition for sale 
here, and I can place any quantity of 
Canadian eggs weekly on the London mar¬ 
kets if sent fresh and properly packed. 
From samples of 185 cases of Canadian 
eggs which I placed in our market here the 
universal testimony of the buyers places 
them on an equality with the finest of 
our home products, and if goods of this 
character can reach us properly packed 
and uniform in quality in regular and 
weekly consignments, there is practically 
an unlimited field for them, and a brilliant 
future before the senders, as they will 
always command top prices. Some idea 
can be formed of the capacity of this 
country for absorbing the products of other 
nations by the inclosed extract relating to 
imports of eggs, butter and margarine. In 
fact we could absorb all your Canadian egg 
produce with the greatest of ease, so 
that your people need not be alarmed 
about the effect of the McKinley tariff. 
The principal things to be avoided are bad 
straw, loose and careless packing and 
handling in transit. The straw best suited 
for packing is oat straw and husks, thor¬ 
oughly dry, and one should by no means 
use barley straw.” 
The Hospitable Barn Door. 
C. M. Lusk, Broome County, N. Y— I do 
not like T. B. Terry’s experience with barn 
doors. Never before have I heard of doors 
sagging up. I believe he must have stood 
on his head and thought the bottom of the 
door was the top. Then again, his idea of 
a lath being one-eighth of an inch thick I 
Whoever heard of a lath being so thin? 
Laths are calculated to be three-eighths of 
an inch thick. This past summer I built 
for J. W. Merchant, a barn with a capacity 
of 100 cows, with two silos capable of hold¬ 
ing 300 tons of silage each. In it I have put 
eight doors, each 7x14 feet. I built them 
just as Mr. Terry built his. I did everything 
possible to Keep them from sagging down, 
not up. I crowded the lower hinge back 
as tightly as I could and drqw the upper 
and middle ones to the door on the back so 
that there could be no “give” when I 
sawed the doors apart, the braces were put 
on before sawing. Thecleats were 10 inches * 
wide, and the boards for the doors from four 
to six inches and matched. Each cleat was 
nailed on with three wrought nails which 
were clinched. In spite of all the pains 
that I had taken, when I had sawed the 
doors apart, they sagged down, not up. 
Mr. Terry does not speak favorably of 
rolling doors. I have seen just the kind he 
speaks of. If he will have his doors prop¬ 
erly made, use Lane’s anti-friction rollers 
and Lane’s steel track with a good handle 
on the door, and put at the bottom a guide 
that will not be moved by driving over it, 
he will never go around to some other door 
when he takes hold of the handle. It will 
open so easily that he will want to go in and 
out olten. He will take his neighbors in to 
show how easily the door will open. He 
willsay: “ Did you ever see the like of that? 
I hardly touched the handle and the door 
almost opened itself. Give me rolling doors 
every time if they can be put in.” Some 
one may ask why I put in the eight doors 
in the Merchant barn. There was no room 
for the doors to roll. They all open into 
the barn. 
I was well pleased with a former piece in 
The Rural written by Mr. Terry in regard 
to his partnership with his family. His 
views on this subject accord with mine. I 
believe each member of the family should 
have some means of obtaining money, and 
these means should be on the farm and not 
off it. My wife and children have the hens, 
the strawberry and the black raspberry 
patches (each containing half an acre), to 
furnish money. I supply the grain for the 
hens; they feed them. The hired man helps 
to ho.- and pick the berries. My wife and 
children (two girls and one boy) have all 
they can get by these means. They enjoy 
the thing ahd so do I. 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
Commercial Iron-Clad Apples. 
T. H. Hoskins, Orleans County, Vt.— 
The New England Fair reporter of The R. 
N.-Y. calls upon me for a report or Rus¬ 
sian apples. I have been too busy in the 
orchard to respond to this call very 
promptly; but I can say this, that when 
the' great commercial apples utterly fail, 
the iron clads are found going on as usual 
in the bearing year. My orchard has been 
loaded with fruit as fine as ever went to 
market. As an evidence I quote from my 
commission merchant’s letter : “ The 
packing of the apples, as well as the stock, 
is a credit to the party who did it,”—and I 
may add that the returns from this car¬ 
load of Oldenburghs were equally satisfac¬ 
tory to the consignor. Previously, the 
local market had taken between 80 and 100 
bushels of Yellow Transparent, with vari¬ 
ous other early sorts—Tetofsky, St. Peter, 
etc.—and continues to demand more than 
can be supplied. But the Massachusetts 
market is so bare of fruit that I find it 
profitable to ship there, and am now pack¬ 
ing a car-load of Wealthys, as fair and 
handsome fruit as ever grew, to be fol¬ 
lowed, the last of October, by Scott’s Win¬ 
ter, unexcelled as a keeping apple even by 
Roxbury Russet. 
And yet, notwithstanding the fact that I 
find the growth of iron-clads profitable in a 
locality where the people, 24 years ago, 
seemed to think it an insult to them that I 
should try to grow apples after they had 
failed. I am still ready to admit that in all 
the points of a commercial fruit we cannot 
yet meet the great standards of Southern 
New England, — the Gravenstein, the 
Baldwin, the R. I. Greening and the Rox¬ 
bury Russet. The Wealthy is a full 
match for the Nodhead (Jewett’s Fine 
Red); but will not keep, on the average, 
with ordinary handling, as well as the 
Baldwin or Greening, while Scott’s Win¬ 
ter, though a handsome red apple, better in 
quality than Roxbury, is lacking in size. 
Among the new Russian apples of the 
Budd-Gibb importation there is still good 
hope that we shall find some valuable 
winter fruit. It is not yet time to expect 
positive conclusions, since we have had 
these sorts only six years; but we know 
that there is a considerable number of 
keepers among them. Until we can test 
them by the barrel, under the ordinary 
conditions of trade, we cannot know how 
well they will keep; but we can already 
determine something in regard to other 
points. Antonooka is a fine yellow apple, 
of the Grimes’s Golden style, which I find 
an excellent bearer, while the fruit is large, 
fair, and handsome, but probably not a 
better keeper than Wealthy. (By the way, 
Mr. Gideon’s Peter, a seedling which al¬ 
most duplicates the Wealthy in other 
points, seems to be a much better keeper, 
perhaps as good as the Baldwin). A very 
promising keeper among the newer Rus¬ 
sians is Bogdanoff, a handsome red- 
streaked apple on a handsome, vigorous 
and early-bearing tree. 
As The Rural goes everywhere, I want 
to note in its columns the existence of a 
Russian iron clad apple, the Anisette, of 
the Oldenburgh type, which is considerably 
hardier than that variety, and, what is of 
considerable importance, much better in 
dessert quality. It looks so much like the 
Oldenburgn that so expert a fruit-man as 
Mr. Tuttle, of Wisconsin, once thought (ac¬ 
cording to the late Charles Gibb) and per¬ 
haps still thinks it identical. But it is cer¬ 
tainly not so, as proved by its superior 
hardiness, and equally by its far better 
flavor, and its distinct though not very 
much greater endurance. It is now (Oc¬ 
tober 8) still good after standing in a warm 
room nearly two weeks. Oldenburghs had 
all fallen and rotted before this was gath¬ 
ered from the tree. The young trees, up to 
two or three inches in diameter, are notable 
for the grtenness of their bark, while that 
of the Oldenburgh is a dark brown. 
Longfield pleases me better every year. 
Unlike most sorts, its size increases as the 
trees get old. I have had, this year, a good 
many specimens three inches in diameter. 
I do not hesitate to pronounce it a very 
good—almost “ best ”—dessert apple. Its 
season is about that of the Fameuse 
(“Snow”); it is always fair, a conical 
apple, greenish-yellow, with a red cheek. 
Every one who sees it speaks of its beauty. 
Prolific Sweeting has no superior among 
American sweets in size, beauty or quality, 
a pure sugar-sweet, without after-taste. 
It is from one to two months a better 
keeper than the Oldenburgh. 
We should remember, iu treating of the 
Russian apples, that there is no man in 
America who is yet able to express a positive 
opinion regarding the important qualities 
of one quarter of the varieties that have 
been imported. Prof. Budd, of Iowa, has 
the only complete, or nearly complete set 
of these varieties; but even with him they 
have not been in bearing long enough to 
have been thoroughly tested as regards 
size, quality, productiveness or keeping. - 
Ten years, at least, must elapse before they 
can be properly sifted ; and even then many 
that fail in Minnesota and Dakota may 
succeed in Northern New England; for the 
Northwest, though no colder than the 
Northeast, is much more trying to tree 
fruits. I feel sure we shall find some good 
and profitable long keepers among these 
Russians, before we get through with 
them. I send The Rural herewith spec¬ 
imens (average) of Longfield and Bogdanoff 
—see Figures 330 and 332. Though not yet 
produced in sufficient quantity for reliable 
testing, the latter is clearly a considerably 
longer-lived apple than Wealthy. 
Keep Fruits Away From Line 
Fences. 
T. M. Ryan, Erie County, Pa.— On page 
684, D. H. asks a question about growing 
fruits along line fences. For nearly 40 
years I have had experience in this matter. 
Fifty years ago or more the ancestors of 
the present owners of the farm adjoining 
mine, set out fruit trees along the line 
fence, which is nearly 80 rods in length. 
They were mostly seedling apples, pears, 
cherries and peaches. They were set pretty 
close to the line rail fence which we have 
tried to keep in place ever since ; but it is 
hard adequately to describe what an eye¬ 
sore and nuisance those trees have been 
to me ; for the old apple trees that are still 
living have spread their roots and branches 
far over my side of the line, shading and 
robbing my soil to produce almost worth¬ 
less fruits, hardly fit for cider. While one 
or two generations of the pear and cherry 
trees have died out, their suckers and roots 
have filled the fence corners with suckers, 
many of which are from five to ten or 
fifteen feet in bight. These all help to give 
protection to weeds, peaches, raspberries, 
blackberries, sumach, wild carrots, etc., 
which furnish a harbor for woodchucks,rab¬ 
bits and similar vermin, very annoying to a 
farmer. Let D. H. just think how pleasant 
it is for a man who wants to keep his fence- 
rows clean, to have the line fence occupied 
in this way by his neighbor, who cares 
nothing for looks or anything else, wanting 
only to take the world easy. Then again, 
let him imagine how nice it must be to try 
to pasture cattle in the fields along such a 
fence, where they will be tempted to reach 
over for the bushes or worthless fruits, 
until the fence gives way and lets them 
through to be “ dogged ” out into the pub¬ 
lic roads. In this pasture I raised a pair 
of colts which were dogged away from 
these worthless apple trees by the owner’s 
dog until they became so afraid of dogs 
that myself and family have often met 
with narrow escapes while riding after one 
of them, as he has now a dreadful fear of 
dogs. Only to-day have I been obliged to 
get my cattle out of the public highway 
and fix up the line fence between me and 
another neighbor because he let the elder¬ 
berry bushes grow in the fence corners on 
his side of the fence. I do not keep breachy 
cattle nor have I ever quarreled with my 
neighbors about what they grow on their 
side of the line fence ; but I have known 
men who did quarrel and come to blows 
and lawsuits over such matters. Therefore, 
I would recommend any one to plant grape 
vines and all kinds of fruits somewhere 
else rather than close to the line fences, if 
he wants to avoid perplexities and quarrels 
with his neighbors. 
“Those Railroad Robbers.” 
Cassius M. Clay, Whitehall, Ky.—I 
have not got through my hay-harvest yet. 
Formerly when I could rely on honest trade, 
I closed out my meadow in June. Now 
when my mower gets out of order, and new 
pieces are ordered, the builder in Central 
Ohio receives instructions. He makes a 
profit. Then he sends my order to his agent 
in Cincinnati and he makes a profit. Then 
the agent in Cincinnati sends the repairs to 
his agent in Richmond, Ky. and he makes 
a profit. Then my merchant in Richmond 
lets me know, after more than a mouth, that 
my work is done; and he cannot serve me 
without pay. Iu the meantime my hay on 
40 acres of clover and Timothy has rotted 
on the ground, and a new crop of waste 
wild grasses has grown up, and I am yet 
stacking that godsend. When I get through 
with my hay I may go down to Frankfort 
and take a look at those traitors who are 
trying to perpetuate the railroad tyranny in 
our State 1 Help me ! 
Dr. W. J. Beal, Ingham County, Mich. 
—I notice what the editor says iu The 
Rural on the admirable arrangement for 
crossing tecoma. It reminds me of what I 
read at a meeting of the A. A. A. S. in 
Detroit in 1876, on “Sensitive Stigmas an 
Aid to Cross Fertilization.” I have studied 
it out in mertynia, tecoma, catalpa, 
mimulus and utricularia. The article, 
somewhat abridged, was printed in the 
Buffalo Courier and copied in the Amer¬ 
ican Journal of Science and Arts, p. 308, 
1876. 
WAR ON THE BEARD. 
The editor of the N. Y. Journal of 
Commerce gives a curious bit of history 
which will probably be new to most of our 
readers. A prominent clergyman, the 
editor says, announces his intention to in¬ 
augurate a crusade against beards until all 
of his profession shall enter their pulpits 
with faces cleanly shaven. He especially 
denounces the hair on the upper lip as a 
hideous deformity unbecoming to any 
gentleman. He has been severely criticised 
for his opinions, but they are by no means 
novel, nor is the date very far back in the 
calendar when the great body of our coun¬ 
trymen entertained a similar opinion. It 
is true that side whiskers were tolerated 
50 years ago, and the favorite English 
mutton-chop style was permitted, although 
even this was considered by most sober- 
minded men as an exhibition of personal 
vanity. But if the upper lip and the chin 
and throat were shaven, people came to 
forgive the innovation upon the smooth, 
hairless countenance, and these side whis¬ 
kers came at last to attract little attention. 
Then a medical writer of no little renown 
came out in a stirring article denouncing 
the removal of the beard from the throat, 
and after that date so many followed the 
new custom that whiskers which conformed 
to the horseshoe line, leaving a clean sur¬ 
face for the upper lip and for the space 
under the mouth down to the poiut of the 
chin, were permitted without remark. 
But it was to the moustache that public 
opinion objected. A young man in the 
spring of 1850 came to this city with strong 
letters of recommendation from influential 
people at the South, and applied to several 
large jobbing establishments, one after 
another, for employment. He could influ¬ 
ence a large amount of trade, and supposed 
that he would have no difficulty in secur¬ 
ing a situation. The answer wherever he 
called was short, sharp and decisive; no 
one wanted him or would have him on any 
terms. He could not understand it until 
he called on Bowen, McNamee & Co., then 
a leading jobbing house iu the dry goods 
trade, and was kindly told, in answer to 
his inquiry why with all the influence and 
undisputed qualifications he presented, he 
could not obtain a place, that no firm they 
knew of would give employment to a 
salesman with such a hideous-looking 
face. The young man wore a moustache 1 
He called on the editor after this rebuff, 
and was advised to use a razor; he did so 
and found employment at once. 
It was many years after before the com¬ 
munity as a whole tolerated the beard. 
About 1858 a young man obtained the posi¬ 
tion of corresponding clerk in the well- 
known banking house of Duncan, Sherman 
& Co. He had never shaved, but the growth 
of hair was so tardy and slow that it re¬ 
mained for a year or more unnoticed. At 
last the moustache began to show, and the 
head of the bank noticing it one day, told 
him that he must shave it off or leave the ser¬ 
vice. These incidents are recalled to show 
that our clerical friend, although he may 
now stand alone iu his prejudice against the 
hairy covering of the lip, cannot secure a 
patent for his dislike as if it were the inven¬ 
tion of his own brain. Whether the Mosaic 
prohibition against marring the corners of 
the beard was designed, as some think, to 
prevent conformity to a fashion which then 
distinguished a heathen community, or ouly 
to deter any dudish attempt to interfere 
with the Creator’s purpose of distinguish¬ 
ing the sexes, we can not say, but we think 
for sanitary reasons alone every man will 
do well to leave the razor perpetually un¬ 
used, and let his beard grow according to 
Nature’s benevolent design. 
-Orange County Farmer: “Over¬ 
taxed farmers are beginning to ask if they 
are really getting the benefits of just gov¬ 
ernments which they pay for.” 
