364 
blowing directly in, when all we had to do was to 
lower the sash a notch or two. It is great for babies 
as well as all the rest, as it gives no draughts, though 
plenty of freshness, excepting only the close and 
muggy night. When we can use two windows we 
feel sure it will prove a perfect system. One point 
which is easily overcome is the slatting of the cloth 
even when stretched tight. We simply tacked three 
laths across and two perpendicular, fastening cloth, 
thus breaking up the larger area; if used on a front 
window it could be fastened to a regular screen and 
removed if necessary in the daytime. For the sick it 
seems almost indispensable. J. E. p. 
Massachusetts. 
THE TROUBLE IN THE APPLE MARKET. 
“The Heart of a Barrel of Choice Baldwins,” Fig. 
107, R. N.-Y., page 253, is an object lesson. It is a 
complete explanation of present conditions of the 
apple market at home and abroad. In the accom¬ 
panying letter there is the question, “Is there no way 
to spot the man that packs this fruit?” The writer, 
as an apple grower in a small way, for his own guid¬ 
ance in handling his crop has talked with a large 
number of apple growers, and learns from them that 
in most instances they sold all their apples—every 
apple in the orchard—and that the buyers did their 
own packing; that in many instances practically all 
the apples went into the barrels. This answers “Who 
is responsible?” A canvass of 25 retail grocery stores 
in Brooklyn and Manhattan showed that apples were 
retailed at from 10 to 15 cents per quart (“Fruit- 
man’s Guide,” March 14, 1908, page 3) ; $10 to $15 
per barrel, because they were not able to get the 
usual number of quarts out of a barrel, so many 
apples in the barrel were unsalable, and they were 
forced to get the high price for those they did sell. 
The folly of it! Paying for barrels packing fruit, 
freight, and all other charges, on fruit to throw 
away, and loading all this on the small proportion 
actually sold, thus cutting off any use of this fruit 
by people of moderate means, and the free use by 
all. 
In justice to the wholesale apple trade in general 
it must be said that most of the well-known houses 
have for years protested against packing any but 
number one apples, and in their own purchases con¬ 
fine themselves strictly to this practice, and are now 
realizing the benefit, for choice apples at£ now com¬ 
manding good prices. Apple growers are now shrug¬ 
ging their shoulders over the prospects for prices for 
the coming crops. None realize better than they that 
it is the especial province of the apple dealer to dis¬ 
tribute the crop of apples, and that many of such 
dealers have hurt themselves seriously, and still more 
hurt the reputation of New York State apples. Let 
every apple grower insist that the apples that go out 
of his orchard in barrels are strictly number one, 
and the future is assured. These suggestions are 
offered The R. N.-Y. for such use as it may deem 
best, to quiet the apprehensions of apple growers 
everywhere, so that they may go on with confidence 
in every effort to produce the finest possible fruit, 
and to point out that the trouble with the apple 
market, right now, is not over-production or hard 
times, but restricted consumption, because really 
marketable apples have been loaded with the cost of 
worthless stuff thrown away by the retailer. 
Niagara Co., N. Y. G. G. lansing. 
PRUNING DWARF AND STANDARD TREES. 
Dwarf-grown standard apple trees and dwarf 
apple trees are attracting some attention in the hor¬ 
ticultural press and from some prominent horticul¬ 
turists. Prof. S. A. Beach, of Iowa, was the first 
recent horticulturist of note to bring this question up 
in New York State, and he was always very cautious 
in recommending the dwarf trees except experi¬ 
mentally. The dwarf-grown or trained standard 
apple tree is being grown by a number of good fruit 
growers in New York State with satisfactory results, 
both in cultivated and sod mulch orchards. Grant 
Hitchings, Albert Wood, W. T. Mann and C. R. Shons 
are successful apple growers who are practicing these 
methods. They are getting results not by any system 
of Summer-pruning, but 'by following a system 
of non-pruning from time tree is planted, except that 
crossed rubbing branches are removed. That this 
practice will result in earlier bearing orchards under 
either cultivation or sod culture has been demon¬ 
strated by different growers. I doubt if any system 
of Summer pruning will make standard apple trees 
bear earlier than I have seen varieties like Northern 
Spy, Greening, York Imperial, Pewaukee, Rome 
Beauty, Ben Davis, Wealthy, etc., bear under a 
strictly adhered-to system of non-pruning until trees 
were in full bearing. What effect this non-pruning 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
will have on the future development of the tree I 
know not, but have noticed that only comparatively 
few main branches are produced, and believe that 
after trees are in full bearing a judicious and gradual 
thinning out of branches around base of tree will 
not overbalance the fruit-producing habit enough to 
throw it into wood growth, but will only tend to in¬ 
vigorate the tree. A very severe pruning at this 
stage might stimulate a very vigorous wood growth 
and result in several barren years with some var¬ 
ieties. At one time I had this result when I rented 
for three years an apple orchard sadly in need of 
pruning. We thoroughly and severely pruned it, and 
harvested a fine crop of fruit that year, and had a 
vigorous wood growth, but little fruit was produced 
for the next two years. Severe Winter or early 
Spring pruning produces much more wood growth 
than Summer pruning, and I have watched for the 
past four or five years some 25 to 35-year-old apple 
orchards that have been quite severely pruned in 
Summer, and cannot see that they have been any 
more productive than adjoining orchards pruned in 
Winter. This question is yet to be settled definitely, 
and the more one studies different orchards, local con¬ 
ditions and results attained under those conditions 
one comes to the conclusion that local conditions or 
environment will be the most important factor in 
governing cultural methods. b. d. v. b. 
IS RYE INJURIOUS TO FOLLOWING CROPS? 
The question of E. S. W., of New Monmouth, N. J., 
on page 101, and his statement with regard to ill ef¬ 
fects of rye on following crops of cow peas, probably 
deserves wide attention. In truck farming compar¬ 
ative results have recently come under my observation 
that indicate that green rye plowed under is injurious 
to some and perhaps all crops directly following; also 
that this ill effect is in some mysterious wav connected 
HOW ASHES START FIRES. Fig. 150. 
with the rye itself rather than with unfavorable me¬ 
chanical conditions of soil due to its presence. When 
I first began trucking, with its continuous cropping, I 
looked about for a satisfactory cover crop. Finding 
rye generally* recommended, easily grown and with 
no apparent reasonable objection to its use, I unsus¬ 
pectingly used it almost exclusively. Heavy fertiliza¬ 
tion and high culture produced great crops of vegeta¬ 
bles, as I now think, in spite of the ill effects of the 
rye, which under the circumstances was credited as 
being very beneficial. With this explanation I plead 
guilty to having myself highly recommended rye as a 
humus-producing cover crop in The R. N.-Y. about 
two years ago. During the Fall of 1905 most of my 
crops coming off in time to permit early seeding, to¬ 
gether with subsequent favorable weather, resulted 
in the best growth of rye over a large proportion of 
the farm that I have ever had, and I thought I had 
secured a fine foundation for exceptional results the 
following year. In early Spring, as usual, the ground 
was plowed and thoroughly compacted and pulverized 
by repeated alternate use of roller and harrow. About 
30 bushels of lime per acre had been applied the year 
before. Now for results. All crops started very 
tardily, matured late, and were below the average in 
yield. An acre of early tomatoes, planted where the 
rye had been at its best, was especially disappointing, 
although plants and other apparently requisite condi¬ 
tions were of the best. I was loath to believe the rye 
at fault, but after making all due allowance for un¬ 
favorable weather and every other consideration, 
imaginary or otherwise, I came to the conclusion that 
the rye would, bear watching. The next season, last 
Summer, an acre of early corn was planted on a plot, 
about half of which was covered with a heavy growth 
of rye similar to that just spoken of, and the rest 
practically bare. Fertilization the previous year was 
practically the same. This tract was plowed the latter 
part of March, about 30 bushels of lime were applied 
broadcast, and the soil thoroughly prepared. One- 
half ton of high-grade fertilizer analyzing 5-8-10, was 
April 18, 
applied before planting. The rye had turned over like 
a stiff sod. The soil, literally filled with fine roots, 
certainly seemed ideally adapted to corn, but before 
the crop was six inches high it was plainly evident 
that the section where rye was turned down was at a 
disadvantage, the difference showing distinctly to a 
row. At maturity the difference in average height of 
stalk was nearly a foot in favor of the section with 
no rye. The size and lack of uniformity of ears was 
still more marked. Now while, owing to unfavorable 
season and consequently high prices, even the injured 
section was profitable and without comparison would 
have been considered satisfactory, the comparison 
showed the use of the rye to have been an expensive 
mistake. 
In accord with these observations, I have recently 
noticed an incidental result in the report of an exper¬ 
iment conducted at the Maryland Station some years 
ago. In a detail of the experiment, 12 one-tenth-acre 
plots were planted for three successive years in corn, 
followed by wheat followed by grass, five crops in all. 
During the years corn was grown four of the plots 
were sown to Crimson clover as a cover crop, four 
were left bare, and four were seeded to rye. All other 
treatment was identical. The hope of the experiment 
was to prove that with the proper supply of humus, 
insoluble forms of phosphates could be economically 
used in general farming. The report seems to prove 
the last part of the proposition to be a fact, but fails 
to show that the cover crop was any aid to that end, 
as the clover alone made a favorable showing, which 
may well be attributed to other cause. Be that as it 
may, the point that is of special interest in this con¬ 
nection is that the average yield of corn, for the whole 
period, on the plots where rye was sown, was about 
eight per cent less than on the plots without it, while 
the yield of wheat and hay were almost exactly the 
same. It is important, too, to note that as the cover 
crops were sown among the corn, the ill effects of 
plowed down rye were probably absent in the first crop 
of corn, also that it had probably passed away before 
the wheat was sown. The report of the experiment 
as it came to my notice appears on page 62 of Bulletin 
No. 94, entitled “Phosphates,” issued by the Pennsyl¬ 
vania Department of Agriculture, and was prepared by 
Ii. J. Patterson, then director and chemist of the 
Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station. 
In the discussion of results Mr. Patterson says of 
the rye: “The disadvantage rested probably in the 
rye decomposing slowly and thus producing a bad 
physical state at times, and making the corn crop 
suffer from dry weather.” This is the usual plea in 
defense of rye, when occasionally bad effects are re¬ 
ported, but in view of all the evidence it does not 
appear to cover the case. I am convinced that with 
the use of lime and the care with which my land was 
prepared, neither soil acidity, in the usual sense, nor 
imperfect contact with stores of subsoil moisture, is 
responsible for the trouble. Neither can it be success¬ 
fully urged that the effect is due to fertility being ex¬ 
tracted from the soil and held by the rye, for it seems 
impossible entirely to correct it by the additional use 
of fertilizers. Then there is another curious feature 
that deserves notice. Every year I have allowed a 
few acres of rye to grow until the bloom drops, about 
June 1. It is then cut for straw, and the land pre¬ 
pared for late tomatoes and cabbage. I have not been 
able to detect any ill effects on this stubble land; crops 
always starting promptly and vigorously. All things 
considered, I am inclined to think the ill effects are 
due to some injurious principle contained in the green 
rye itself, or developed in its decay, acting much in 
the same way that plants of certain species injuriously 
affect plants of certain other species when growing 
near each other, out of all proportion to their com¬ 
petition for space, fertility and moisture. Evidently 
this subject is of great importance wherever rye is 
grown as a cover crop, and worthy of general obser¬ 
vation and report. d. l. iiartman. 
Pennsylvania. _ 
A YANKEES IN SENECA CO., N. Y.—As a New Eng¬ 
land inau accustomed to believe that our eastern apples 
were the right thing, I want to say that the Baldwin 
apple here is as good as the best I have known ; and I 
am inclined to think that the fertility and lime soil, 
possibly climate, too, as a factor, gives a better dessert 
quality, at. least seeming to my taste less acid in char¬ 
acter. The King and Esopus are better than we grow 
them East. Quite naturally, to a Yankee, the farming 
methods seem' antiquated. The straw stacks and animals 
out around them on cold days, the manure thrown out 
and thus made out, the general use of dry stalks and 
straw instead of silos, and the comparatively small num¬ 
ber of milch cows kept, although butter here brings a 
New England price, are among the challenging points. I 
have not seen a silo hereabouts, and know of but few 
barn cellars, and of these have not seen them used as 
storage for manure as is the rule back east. Upon the 
other hand, the bulk of the land is under the plow, and 
from large area cultivated and natural fertility the aver¬ 
age farmer here is affluent, in strong contrast with the 
straitened circumstances of New England farmers. 
YANKEE. 
