1896 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
i9 
notwithstanding- much care and caution were used. 
One-fourth acre's product was weighed and placed in 
barrels, and the rest of the crop estimated by the 
number of barrels filled. The result was 1,140 bushels 
upon three measured acres. The proportion of tubers 
smaller than three ounces is not exactly known now, 
but is believed to be less than 10 per cent. None was 
found weighing over 20 ounces, and but very few that 
weighed a pound. A considerable portion of the field 
yielded at the rate of 430 bushels per acre, but this 
was offset by the sward land which went as low 
as 298 bushels. The capacity of this potato to yield 
is only equaled by its beauty, the snowy whiteness 
of its flesh, and superior quality when cooked. 
I am afx-aid that I have made a very long story, but 
I have written only in answer to your request as to 
the “how.” dr. jabez fisher. 
Worcester County, Mass. 
WHERE TO BUD PEACH STOCKS. 
THE QUESTION. 
Which is preferable, to bud peach stocks close to the ground, 
or high up, say, 2J4 or 3 feet ? Why is this so ? 
THE ANSWERS. 
From the nurseryman’s point of view, it is prefer¬ 
able to bud close to the ground, because the young 
stocks are larger there, and more easily worked. It 
is also cooler and moister near the ground, and the 
buds “take” better. From the orchardist’s point of 
view, I can see no possible advantage in high budding, 
for occasionally, the entire top of the tree gets 
broken off, and new sprouts come out and form a new 
top. Even on trees five or more years old, if budded 
high, these sprouts would come from the seedling 
stock and be valueless. I know of no good argument 
to be advanced in favor of high budding of peaches. 
Connecticut. J. h. hale. 
The proper place to set buds in peach stocks, is 
from two to four inches from the ground. I cannot 
see any reason for “high” buddiug unless it is desired 
to top-work an occasional tree that has grown two or 
more years. H. E. van DEM AN. 
Virginia. 
We invariably bud peach trees as close to the ground 
as possible, for the following reasons : 1. Many of 
the stocks are too small at one year old to bud high 
up. 2. Iligh-budded stocks are liable to make an ugly 
union. 3. Low-headed trees are, for several reasons, 
more suitable to this part of the country. 4. If the 
tree should be injured or broken, it would, in high- 
budded trees, be likely to be injured below the bud. 
5. A high-budded tree, would, when the ground is 
thoroughly watersoaked, as at present, be likely to 
blow over with a moderate wind, and damage the 
roots. 6. With low-budded trees, the bud is likely to 
receive some winter protection. Artificial protection 
might be used if necessary. wm. jackson. 
Illinois. 
In this climate, peach stocks (which must be grown 
from seed planted in the spring), will not make 
growth enough to admit of being budded at the pro¬ 
posed height during the following August or early 
September ; and I know no good reason for budding 
at that height. Straighter trees will be secured by 
budding near the ground, so that the crooks formed 
by cutting away the stocks above the buds, will be so 
near the surface as to be scarcely noticeable. 
Michigan. T. T. Lyon. 
We consider it preferable to bud peach trees as 
close to the ground as the stock can be conveniently 
worked. It makes straighter and more shapely trees. 
The buds during the winter are better protected. 
The nearer the ground the union, the less danger 
there is of their being blown off by the wind. 
Ohio. THE STORES <fc HARRISON COMPANY. 
I believe that a peach stock should have the bud as 
near the ground as it is convenient to put it. There 
is less liability to sprout or sucker than if budded 
higher. Then, again, varieties differ so that we would 
have a very irregular growth if worked higher. When 
budded low, the top is one entire variety, and if broken 
off, it will make a new head of the same kind, which it 
could not do if budded high and broken below the 
bud. This is liable to occur after wind storms, es¬ 
pecially if trees are headed high, and have a big top. 
By budding low, the bud, as a rule, grows straight 
up ; but with varieties like Jacques Rareripe, ilin- 
man, or some others, if budded high, it would very 
likely grow out at right angles with the stock, mak¬ 
ing an unsightly and unsalable tree. On the other 
hand, some varieties of the apple, plum and pear must 
be top-worked, if anything like a straight line is to 
be secured. This is done by using a straight, upright¬ 
growing variety for the stock, and placing the graft 
or bud at a regular height. If peach trees were worked 
in this way, it would in addition to the other objec¬ 
tions named, give a dark-colored bark below the bud, 
making at least two feet of the tree very unsightly, 
if nothing else. Charles weight. 
Delaware. _ 
/S MILK A SUBSTITUTE FOR MEAT 
IN A HEN’S RATION ? 
The following question has been asked by one of our readers: 
Do hens that have milk constantly before them, and also have 
the morning mash mixed with milk, require any meat? The hens 
have free range. 
Hens having free range under the conditions men¬ 
tioned, would not, I believe, require meat during the 
summer months; but I do not know that it has ever 
been definitely ascertained whether the feeding of 
meat under similar conditions might not be of some 
advantage. I have known hens that had no meat or 
bones fed them, and had only a limited supply of 
skim-milk, to lay much better than the average ; but 
their range included the borders of a brook and 
patches of underbrush. When hens, even on free 
range, show a decided preference for cut bones or 
meat at feeding time, it will, I think, pay to add 
something of the sort to the ration. Fowls having 
about 60 per cent of their ration skim-milk (about 15 
to 18 per cent of the dry matter in the food coming 
XANTHOCERAS SORBIFOLIA. (Reduced Hade.) Fig. 11. 
See Ruralisms, page 23. 
from the skim-milk) have done well; but so large a 
skim-milk ration is too laxative in cold weather to be 
safe. For laying hens during freezing weather, meat 
in some form should be added to the ration. 
Geneva Experiment Station. wm. p. wheeler. 
Milk furnishes nearly all the animal food required, 
though I would use a little ground beef scrap in con¬ 
nection with it, for variety’s sake. j. RANKIN. 
Massachusetts. 
If the hens receive cut clover, and also milk, they 
will require meat less frequently than when milk and 
clover are not used. Milk is not a substitute for 
meat, however, as the hens cannot drink enough of it 
in a day to receive from it the same proportion of 
solids as can be derived from meat, milk consisting 
largely of water. A ration of meat at least three 
times a week, will give good results, no matter what 
the other foods may be, provided a variety is allowed. 
New Jersey. p. h. Jacobs. 
Under the conditions named, I would expect hens 
in small flocks to do well without meat. If the flock 
is large—100 or more—I would prefer some form of 
meat with a fair proportion of fat, provided the milk 
was closely skimmed. o. w. mapes. 
New York. 
Under these conditions, I would hardly think meat 
necessary ; though, as a matter of choice, I would 
prefer to alternate the milk with an occasional feed 
of meat or green cut bone, especially during the win¬ 
ter season when fowls cannot depend on insects and 
worms for their supply of animal food. I am inclined 
to think that milk fed constantly, both as drink and for 
mixing the morning mash, might cause bowel 
trouble ; at least, that has been my experience. 
Michigan. geo. j. nissly. 
If the milk is not skimmed, I do not think that they 
would need any meat; but if skim-milk is used, I 
think that meat will be needed, as there is nothing 
left but casein, sugar and water after the cream is 
taken off. jambs ii. seely. 
New York. 
I would say that hens having milk to drink con¬ 
stantly before them, and having the morning mash 
mixed with milk, would not require any meat. Milk 
is a complete food in itself, and fowls having enough 
of it to satisfy their bodily need, would require little 
else excepting green food. A. f. hunter. 
Editor Farm Poultry. 
I would not think that the quantity of milk that a 
hen could drink, or would eat in a mash, would be a 
substitute for meat, and particularly when the meat 
contains bone. Having a free range would make no 
difference except for a short season during the year, 
and even then, I would make no difference in the 
meat ration, as the hens are likely to be doing their 
best at that time. I would depend more on a free 
range to furnish green food than I would to furnish 
meat. In regard to the color of eggs, when I was 
feeding oats and wheat at night, I had a complaint 
from Boston that my eggs were light-colored ; immedi¬ 
ately I made the feed one-third corn, and I haven't 
had any trouble since. Green food may influence the 
color, but I think that it would be similar to drink¬ 
ing milk to get meat—they would have to eat a pile 
Of it. V. E. IIASERICK. 
New Hampshire. 
From experiments made in feeding milk to laying 
hens, and from the testimony of several successful poul- 
trymen who make a specialty of fresh eggs, I believe 
that it is safe to say that meat is not required so long 
as abundance of milk is at hand. The morning food 
should be mixed with milk, and milk be given to the 
fowls to drink. It is understood, of course, that a 
proper grain ration is provided, so that it will not be 
necessary to balance up what otherwise would be a 
carbonaceous ration, and make it a fit ration for egg 
production. The milk may either be whole or skim- 
milk. The skim-milk will prove equally efficient, and 
a great deal more economical. It will be necessary 
to exercise good judgment in feeding this milk, par¬ 
ticularly at the start, otherwise, cases of diarrhea are 
likely to occur. geo. c. watson. 
Pennsylvania Agricultural College. 
WHAT SAY? 
Leather-Chewing Habit. —My young saddle horse 
causes me much annoyance and trouble because he 
chews up the hitching strap and bridle reins when¬ 
ever the opportunity offers. Can any one give me a 
“sure cure” for this leather chewing habit? j. b. e. 
Green Grove, Miss. 
Painting Hams. —Will you give a recipe for paint¬ 
ing the covers on smoked meat ? Is it best to put 
cloth on meat before it is smoked ? s. f. b. 
Asotin, Wash. 
It. N.-Y.—We have had so much help on the salt 
pork question, that we hope to have our readers put 
the above meaty question in their heads and smoke it. 
How to Kill Rats. —How can I rid my barn and 
corn barn of rats ? I have trapped and poisoned them, 
and for every one I kill, there are two to take its 
place. f. w. ii. 
Savannah, N. Y. 
R. N.-Y.—Let us hear from rat-ridden farmers. 
What shall it be—dogs, cats, traps, ferrets, or poison, 
and how shall they be used ? 
What Crop for a Mulch? — I have planted a pear 
orchard of 1,000 trees in rows one way. I intend to 
grow a crop of some sort between the rows to mulch 
the trees. What crop will be best ? Is corn good, 
drilled thickly in rows, or will it make a harbor for 
mice and rats to gnaw the trees ? Has any of The R. 
N.-Y. readers had any experience with mulching, and 
with what success ? c. A. g. 
Lyons, N. Y. 
R. N.-Y.—Let us have some experience. 
Strawberries on Muck Soil. —How will straw¬ 
berries succeed on a well-drained muck soil, from one 
to fourteen feet deep ? l. w. f. 
East Benton, Pa. 
Millet for New Jersey. —How early will it be safe 
for me to sow Hungarian grass for hay in this lati¬ 
tude ? 1 have been trying to secure a crop of oat and 
pea hay, followed by Hungarian ; but this year I 
would like to sow Hungarian first, and follow it with 
Medium clover, sowed alone in August. Will the 
Hungarian come off in time for me to kill the weed 
seeds before sowing the clover ? Can I count with any 
