98 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
February 15 
PLANTING FIVE-YEAR-OLD TREES. 
I have an opportunity of buying some apple trees grown by a 
neighboring nurseryman, and of the desired varieties; but they 
will be five years old in the spring. They seem to be very vigorous, 
and mostly healthy, though some are affected with blight, while 
others immediately next to them show no signs of it. These trees 
show such a vigorous last year’s growth, and have such a 
healthy appearance, that I feel tempted to set them out in con¬ 
siderable quantity, though I have read so much upon the advisa¬ 
bility of putting out two and three-year-old trees. I have thought 
that, perhaps, the main reason for putting out young trees, is be¬ 
cause of the impracticability of getting trees shipped from a dis¬ 
tance with plenty of roots. Now, in getting these five-year-olds ) 
I would be allowed to dig them myself, selecting only such as I 
wish, and would be .able to secure trees with most of their roots. 
Large holes have already been blown out with dynamite, for the 
frost to work in during the winter, and I would take great care in 
setting them well. In this way, I would hope to get fruit a couple 
of years sooner than by setting young trees. Would I better reject 
these trees for younger ones, and are the healthy-looking trees 
probably affected by blight, which certainly shows all through 
the nursery, and among all of the varieties? a. m. t. 
Colorado. 
If A. M. T. will be as careful in moving the three- 
year-old trees as he expects to be with the five-year- 
olds, he will not lose two years in fruiting. I would 
prefer the three-year-olds clear of blight, as it is easier 
to prevent blight than to exterminate it after it has 
possession of the trees. H. m. engle. 
Pennsylvania. 
If the trees are of desirable varieties, they can be 
profitably set in the orchard by taking great care in 
digging them, keeping the roots moist, setting them 
firmly, and cutting back about half of the last year’s 
growth. Yet, if thrifty, two-year-old trees are set 
with the same care, in 10 years they will prove to be 
thriftier and more fruitful than the older trees, and 
involve far less expense on the start. Yet specimens 
of fruit will be picked from the older trees before the 
younger ones show a blossom. [prof.] j. l. budd. 
Iowa. 
For myself, I would never plant a five-year-old 
apple tree. I would much prefer the one-year-old, as 
I believe that five years from planting, the one-year- 
old tree will be larger and better in every respect 
than the older one referred to. This on general 
principles. Now in regard to the trees in question, 
inasmuch as a portion of the trees in the block seem 
to be diseased, I would be inclined to look with more 
or less suspicion upon those that remain, although 
there is nothing to indicate that they may not be per¬ 
fectly healthy. I would certainly buy two or three- 
year-old tiees in preference if I could obtain them, 
even if five-year-old trees were given me outright. 
New York. s. d. willard. 
Assuming that you know how to make the best pos¬ 
sible use of the privilege of selecting, digging and 
handling the trees to be planted, this is certainly an 
important advantage ; but, assuming as I do, that 
these large trees have been grown where they stand, 
for the entire five years, without root-pruning, it 
will doubtless prove impracticable, even with the 
utmost cai'e, to dig them without the loss of a very 
larg 6 proportion of the small, fibrous feeding roots. 
A tree in such condition, even though planted in the 
best possible manner, especially in the dry climate of 
Colorado, will be more likely to fail than a younger 
and smaller one with a larger proportion of feeding 
roots saved in digging ; while the younger tree will 
overcome the shock of removal so much more rapidly 
and certainly, that, very probably, the younger tree 
will come into successful bearing quite as early as, if 
not even earlier than, the older ones which perchance, 
may never fully overcome the severer shock due to 
its removal. If the sound trees only be selected, and 
all blighted twigs be cut away as they appear, there 
will, probably, be little ultimate difference between 
the older and the younger trees in this respect. 
.Michigan. t. t. lyon. 
There is no other difficulty about the safe trans¬ 
planting of healthy trees, five years old, than the 
amount of care and work and time which it requires. 
If well done, with the pruning also skillfully done, 
there will certainly be earlier fruitage. The previous 
preparation of roomy holes, or a wide bed of soil well 
mellowed by the dynamite and frost, is a great advan¬ 
tage. The trees should be dug as early in the spring 
as practicable, all the roots being followed up and got 
out without any fracturing ; cut none off that will 
not be likely to heal over in one season—say, of the 
size of the little finger. The fibrous roots are of less 
importance, and are really better trimmed off within 
an inch or less of their issue. Ram the soil close and 
compactly into contact with all the roots, but leave 
the surface open. Prune the top so as to leave only 
a stem as high as wanted ; or, besides the stem, only 
three or, at most, four branches to become the frame 
of the future top. It is best not to allow any central 
stem above these—it will only be in the way in gath¬ 
ering fruit and in pruning. Such trees will hardly 
need a stake, but a mulch over the roots during hot 
weather, and even a shading of the bark of the stem 
with straw or paper, tied on, is very beneficial. A 
good growth the first year, is decisive. The roots 
must not dry much in transit. w. 
Pennsylvania. 
Judging from my dearly-bought experience, I would 
not take those trees as a gift, on account of age and 
the blight with which they seem to be affected. Yet, 
by digging and planting them himself, and cutting 
the tops back severely, they might do very well. 
The blight on these trees might have been caused by 
a too rapid growth the past year, and might not 
occur again. Better by far plant trees not to exceed 
three years old from the graft, whose branches should 
also be cut back, but not so severely as recommended 
on the five-year-old trees. The advantage of getting 
apples a year or two sooner, is of small consideration 
compared to the risk he would take. The holes blown 
out by dynamite would do as well for the young as 
for the older trees. N. ohmer. 
Ohio. 
I have often transplanted trees older than those 
spoken of, and with entire success. Before digging, 
I remove all of the last or current year’s growth of 
wood, except a few buds on each limb. Then I have 
the holes dug for the trees, wide and deep ; more or 
less so, according to 
the size of each tree. 
In thus preparing the 
holes, one must be 
sure that they are 
made wide and deep 
enough, and to spare. 
For average five-year 
nursery trees, the 
holes should be 8 to 10 
feet across, and two 
feet deep. Be patient 
and careful in the 
digging, using sharp 
and strong nursery 
spades, and loosening 
the earth around the 
cut roots as carefully 
as possible. The job 
is harder, of course, 
in proportion to the 
vigor of growth with 
each tree and patient 
skill tells greatly 
upon the final results. 
Take out enough soil 
so that the digger can 
easily get into the 
hole, and can use 
his spade freely all 
around. Be patient, 
careful, don’t hurry. 
Have the spade 
gi’ound, so that it red CROSS CURRANT. Fig. 38. 
will cut and not crush See Catalogue Reviews. Page 102. 
the ends of the roots. 
Dig deep enough and wide enough, and spare all 
needless injury to any and every root. Don’t pull 
very hard, and especially don’t “ yank ” on the 
roots. If they are yanked, they almost invariably 
tear out from the trunk, instead of breaking at the 
end. Three years ago, I had to transplant a four- 
years-planted tree that had been planted as a nursery 
tree three years old ; it thus being seven years old 
from the original root graft. It had borne two or 
three fruits that year. It was taken up and carried 
two miles, re-set, and the next spring bloomed freely, 
but was not allowed to set any fruit. The next year 
it bloomed, and was allowed to bear one apple, which 
matured. Last year it bloomed full, made a free 
growth, and was allowed to mature half-a-dozen 
apples. There is no difficulty in any similar case in 
getting a similar result by the same means with any 
kind of deciduous tree, so far as my observation goes 
in the matter. t. h. hoskins. 
Vermont. 
Ten-Doi.lar Land for Fruit. —I can secure stump 
land, within two miles of the railroad station, in 
central Pennsylvania, for $5 per acre ; grubbing costs 
§5. The land produced 21 bushels of rye as a first 
crop last summer. The land adjoining produces 
apples, cherries, quinces, peaches, and pears of fine 
quality. Will it pay to purchase this land and set trees 
for commercial purposes ? The land is well drained, 
level, but will need fertilizing to produce yearly crops. 
Lewisburg, Pa. G. G. G. 
R. N.-Y.—There’s a good chance for an argument. 
THE CHEAPEST COW FOOD KNOWN. 
ENSILAGE ANI) BRAN ALONE. 
One year ago, The R. N.-Y. gave an account of the 
dairy of George N. Glass of Washington County, Pa. 
Mr. Glass keeps Holstein cows and sends milk to 
Pittsburgh. That is, he did, but now he expects to 
start a local milk route. The unusual thing about 
Mr. Glass’s dairy was that he fed his cows nothing but 
ensilage or pasture grass and bran. No hay whatever 
is fed. When this article was printed, some of our 
learned dairymen were asked for an opinion as to the 
wisdom of leaving all the hay out of a cow’s ration. 
They argued against it, giving various reasons. After 
another year of such feeding. The R. N.-Y. asked 
Mr. Glass to give a further account of his herd. His 
reply follows, and we think that it will greatly 
interest dairymen. Mr. Glass gives the cows all the 
ensilage they will eat, and one quart of bran for each 
quart of their milk. 
Has No Use for Hay. 
A year ago, I advocated the feeding of ensilage and 
bran only, and The R. N.-Y. seems to think that it is 
a feed somewhat remarkable for simplicity. That is 
just what I think, and that is one of the main 
reasons why I adopted it. I am asked the following 
questions : 
“ Do you still feed the same ?” 
Yes, I still feed ensilage and bran, and those only, 
as I have no reason to wish to change because the 
feed is simple, and this is no small item when one 
must depend on hired help exclusively to attend the 
dairy. Beyond this, it is a safe feed, as we feed all 
the ensilage that they will eat, and there is little 
danger of bran hurting cows if they do get more than 
the regular amount. 
“ What has been the result of such feeding ?” 
I have been now in the business seven years ; the 
first two years, I fed ensilage, hay and bran, but I 
dropped the hay and for the past 5 years, I have fed 
only ensilage and bran, unless I ran short of ensilage 
in the spring, and then I had to substitute hay. I 
have enough ensilage this year to feed to May 1, and 
have some left over for the summer when the grass 
gets short. As to results, there have been none except 
at the milk pail. I have some of the cows that I had 
when I started ; some of them are 13 years old, have 
eaten this feed for seven years, and they are as 
healthy and are doing as well as they were at first, 
notwithstanding that they eat nothing else but this, 
and are not out of the stable for six months of the 
year. 
“ Do you think that these two feeds give your cows 
all they need ?” 
I will say that I don’t know, but I do know that it 
is all they get from me, and they do good work as the 
result. They would eat some hay if they got it, but 
not much. Only about one ton of hay grew to the 
acre here last year, and about 15 tons of corn ; the 
acre of corn will keep a cow seven or eight months, 
and the ton of hay is worth .$17. The hay wouldn’t 
do any harm, but it won’t pay. 
“ Do they seem to thrive on it ?” 
They do. These are two of the most healthful feeds 
of which I know; the bowels are kept in normal con¬ 
dition, the cattle will shed their hair two months 
earlier than if fed on dry feed, will milk more regu¬ 
larly, and are not so liable to go off their feed. 
“ Have your sales been equal, the past year, to those 
of the previous year ?” 
No, my sales were not quite so good. Last year 
was the worst to produce milk in the summer, that I 
have ever experienced ; we had really no grass the 
after part of the summer. My shipments for the year 
have been 22,240 gallons and I received for it $2,747.07. 
About 500 gallons of surplus were made into butter, 
and 500 fed to calves. I had 25 cows last year in place 
of 23 the previous year, which would make the aver¬ 
age somewhat lower. geo. n. glass. 
GIVE THE SEEDS A FAIR CHANCE! 
HOW THEY GET OFF THE TRACK. 
The directions given by Jos. Meehan about seed 
sowing, in a recent R. N.-Y., are worthy of attention 
by all readers. The points given may be observed 
with profit when sowing vegetable seeds in house or 
greenhouse. In this connection, I give a few points 
gained by experience. I well remember when a boy 
(at least a smaller boy than now), watching the 
irregular “ uprising” of tomato plants which were al¬ 
ways in the south windows, in February or March of 
every year. Generally, about a dozen would boldly 
appear and reach a height of an inch before others 
came struggling along ; these, in turn, to be followed, 
a week or so later, by the “ main crop.” The latter 
were generally pretty much exhausted by the heavy 
lifting which they had done, and after looking up at 
their tall neighbors awhile, usually died of sheer dis¬ 
couragement. I used to figure much on the “ why” 
