310 
THE RU K.-A.lv NEW-YORKER 
“I find that I can carry more head of Columbians 
than I could of Holsteins on the same amount of fod¬ 
der and hay with no more grain feed, and get a larger 
net return per head, too. The Columbians are good 
coarse feed eaters; they will eat anything that my 
Holsteins did, but not in so large a quantity; and they 
get more butter fat out of it, too. 
“Another characteristic of the Columbian that I 
like is the disposition of dry cows to take on weight 
and build up rapidly with little or no grain feed. 
Thus not only is the cost to keep less than with the 
other dairy breeds which are not so disposed, but 
the cows are in better shape to endure the calving 
ordeal without costly special pre-calving feeding. 
And from my own and other breeders’ experiences 
I believe they recover to their normal condition more 
quickly than does any other breed—or at least any 
other dairy breed. 
“Aside from these purely business reasons for my 
keeping the Columbians there are others—sentimental 
reasons, let me call them. But these sentimental rea¬ 
sons I have always kept in secondary place. The 
Columbians are not only an American breed—the only 
established American breed of cattle, I believe—but 
they were developed here in this Otsego country that 
is home to me. In my boyhood I roamed the same 
hills that they have, and we have traveled the same 
bad roads when we got beyond our own homes.” 
he added, smiling sardonically. “Then I like their 
appearance, too—trim head, bright eye, slim limbs 
and striking color. They are, I think, an exceptionally 
handsome and striking animal, too striking, perhaps, 
for their own proper advancement. Many people— 
farmers included—who have seen the Columbians at 
fairs have not looked them over at all, but seeing 
their striking markings have jumped at the conclu¬ 
sion that the animals were the result of some studied 
‘freak’ cross-breeding, and have gone home with the 
idea that the peculiar markings were the breed’s chief 
—if not sole—claim to designation as a breed. This 
is all exactly wrong. While the antecedents of the 
present Columbian breed were being improved by 
selection, those selections were dictated wholly by a 
calf’s dam (and sire’s dams) milk-giving perform¬ 
ances (and the cream-rising quality of such milk) and 
not on the score of the calf’s markings. There was 
no aim, so far as I can discover, with those early 
breeders to originate a peculiarly marked breed. The 
object sought was to increase the productiveness of their 
herds, inconsiderate of the markings of the animals. 
The lineback marking was taken because the calves 
largely came colored that way. The calves of the 
best cows were raised and that these cows and many 
of their calves were marked with a lineback was 
merely a coincident of the early unstudied breeding— 
like the fifth toe on the Dorking—and not the end. 
It was in the natural course of things, that of the 
selected calves those having a lineback predominated. 
And these animals nearly all proving better producers 
than their ancestors, the lineback came to be recog¬ 
nized as one outward indication of good blood in a 
calf and naturally this marking became more and 
more the favorite. But during all this period of devel¬ 
opment, the increasing of butter production was the 
end being striven after—not the color fixing. The 
lineback, however, seems to have gone along with the 
butter-producing quality in the majority of cases. 
There were no attempts in crossing and breeding to 
fix color or marking—so far as I can learn—at least 
not in the breed’s beginning. As for that matter, 
there is little, if any, to-day. The Columbian Cattle 
Association only gives five points to markings. Five 
points may be too small an allowance for marking, 
as many outside breeders claim; but I would rather 
have it too small than too large, thus avoiding tempting 
breeders to sacrifice utility to marking, as for in¬ 
stance seemingly has been done in the Dutch Belted 
breed.” L. G. brown. 
Schenectady County, N. Y. 
DOES IT PAY TO MIX VARIETIES IN 
PLANTING AN ORCHARD ? 
Part II. 
All this was done by Dr. Fletcher on the pear and 
peach trees operated on. Some whole trees were en¬ 
closed entirely with sheeting and some with cheese¬ 
cloth coverings to insure that no pollen from other 
trees might get to the flowers. In some cases a 
branch or two were left outside to act as a proof of 
the experiment inside the covering. On other trees 
small paper and cheese-cloth bags were used to cover 
single flowers or clusters. In one case two Bartlett 
pear trees 18 years old were enclosed with muslin cov¬ 
erings, except two branches that were left protruding. 
Inside the covering 48 blooms were emasculated be¬ 
fore they opened and were enclosed at once in paper 
bags, and when in the receptive stage their pistils 
were fertilized with pollen from Lawrence blooms. 
The coverings were all taken off after the flowers had 
dropped their petals. The result was 17 pears aver¬ 
aging 2*4 ounces on those parts of the two trees be¬ 
neath the sheeting, except that from the 48 flowers 
pollinated with Lawrence eight large pears were 
grown. The two branches that were outside at bloom¬ 
ing time, and that were visited by insects with for¬ 
eign pollen on them, were loaded with pears aver¬ 
aging 3j4 ounces. In another case “3,081 Bartlett 
blossoms, carefully emasculated and pollinated with 
Bartlett pollen, produced only six small fruits.” In 
contrast with this, “7,170 blossoms pollinated with 
Lawrence, Anjou, Duchess and Kieffer pollen pro¬ 
duced 763 fruits.” Two other large Bartlett trees en¬ 
closed in mosquito netting bore a few good pears on 
the outside where bees doubtless pollinated the flow¬ 
ers, and 90 blooms emasculated and hand pollinated 
with Lawrence pollen bore 29 pears averaging 3)4 
ounces. 
As the result of three years’ tests at Martinsburg, 
West Virginia, on Kieffer trees, from 1,268 blooms 
emasculated and pollinated with Kieffer pollen five 
pears were grown, or one in 253. On the same trees 
2,363 blooms fertilized with Bartlett pollen gave 446 
pears, or one in five, and several more tests on the 
same trees with LeConte, Lawrence, Anjou, Clairgeau 
and Garber pollen showed about an average of one 
in six. 
In the Gold Drop peach experiments there were 
2,939 blooms pollinated, some with Gold Drop pollen 
MISS ADDIE BLANCHE RAGAN, A CHAMPION CORN 
GROWER. Fig. 113. 
and the rest with that from St. John, Crawford and 
Lewis trees; they gave about one peach in six blooms 
and showed no benefit from foreign pollen over that 
of its own flowers. Hence, from all these experiments 
it is learned that Bartlett and Kieffer pear trees 
should not be planted in large blocks but interplanted 
with other kinds; and that the Gold Drop peach is 
self-fertile and may be planted alone. 
EXPERIMENTS IN VIRGINIA.—The Depart¬ 
ment of Horticulture of the Virginia Experiment Sta¬ 
tion has for many years past been conducting system¬ 
atic observations on the blooming periods of all the 
orchard fruits grown there, and this includes a large 
number of varieties and of several species. It was 
planned and begun by Prof. Wm. B. Alwood, and be¬ 
fore and since he left the institution it has been 
mainly done by Prof. H. L. Price. In Bulletin 155 
of this station are the records of 10 years’ observa¬ 
tions of plums, cherries, pears, crabapples and apples. 
These records are arranged in tables that are very 
easily seen and understood. It is the most concise 
and comprehensive report on varieties that I have 
seen, and to my mind the most useful to orchard 
planters that I know. The deductions are quite con¬ 
vincing and may be followed with much safety, if not 
with complete confidence. While the individual affini¬ 
ties have not been sought out and paired there have 
been some experiments made that lead to the follow¬ 
ing conclusions of Prof. Price: “In a number of pre¬ 
liminary hand cross-pollinations with apples at this 
station the results indicate that the female parent to 
the cross is quite indifferent to the kind of pollen 
offered so long as it is of another variety of apple 
March 9, 
and is in good condition; but our trials have not been 
sufficiently extensive to draw positive conclusions.” 
And it is a most satisfying fact that nearly every 
variety of apple reported upon, and this includes 
about all that we usually plant, bloom within the 
space of two weeks. This gives ample opportunity 
for natural cross-pollination. h. e. van deman. 
SEEDING OATS WITHOUT PLOWING. 
I notice P. J. D. of Pennsylvania asking about work¬ 
ing corn stubble for oats. Last Spring I had 21 acres 
of corn stubble I sowed in oats; used a double-disk 
Cutaway harrow first, which cut it up fine, then used 
the smoothing harrow on it, which made it in fine con¬ 
dition. I sowed with the oats 300 pounds high-grade 
fertilizer per acre, and it made the finest piece of oats 
in the county; everyone who saw the field had some- * 
thing to say about it. We had a very dry season in the 
beginning, very hard on the oats, but after all this 
bad season they made 40 bushels to the acre. If the 
season had been a good one I think there would have 
been 50 or 60 bushels per acre, which would be fine 
for this section. I never saw a cleaner or finer lot 
of straw; think the straw paid well for seed, labor, 
etc. I would not think of plowing corn stubble for 
oats; disk it well and then use smoothing harrow, 
make it in fine shape for oats, make them free from 
weeds and straw fine. I expect to sow 25 or 30 acres 
of corn stubble to oats this Spring; will give the same 
treatment to the land and sowing that I did last Spring. 
I believe in rotation of crops; will always try to plow 
piece of sod for corn. The next Spring sow it to oats, 
then plow and sow to wheat and grass, using high 
grade fertilizer on each crop, and if you have manure, 
put it on the sod and plow under for the corn. The 
fertilizer on the corn will make it grow quickly, ripen 
early and when the roots reach the sod and manure, 
will grow so fast, if good season, that you can almost 
see it grow. It all takes work; do not be afraid you 
will do too much in the preparation and cultivation. 
This rotation will improve your land, add lots of 
humus to the soil and give good crops. 
West Virginia. w. w. carder. 
A NORTH CAROLINA GIRL FARMER. 
The Boy’s Corn Club contest, in Durham County, 
N. C., was not looking for a girl to be the winner, but 
it turnjs out that a county lassie, 16 years old, has 
made herself famous by showing the opposite sex, the 
old as well as the young, how to farm with decided 
results. The picture, Fig. 113, is that of Miss Addie 
Blanche Ragan, 16 years old, the daughter of Mr. J. A. 
Ragan, himself a farmer of Lebanon township, Durham 
County, N. C. Miss Ragan raised 70 bushels of the 
finest corn seen in this section on one acre of land, 
by her own efforts, and the assistance of a kindly 
disposed mule. The expense to Miss Ragan was one 
sack of fertilizer, 16 per cent goods. As no provision 
had been made in the Boy’s Corn Club for girls, 
the patriotic men made up a purse equal to the prize 
the champion boy got, and presented it to the fair 
young winner, and gave her quite an ovation. She 
says she is going to do better next time. She is an 
interesting farmer, and knows how to farm in a man¬ 
ner that brings desirable results. She, with her sister, 
two years her senior, planted three-fourths of an acre 
in tobacco, which when sold on the Durham market, 
netted them $73.31. These young girls help their 
father on his farm, and he gives them a patch of 
ground to tend as they see fit. They are making rec¬ 
ords as successful farmerettes, and the boys will have 
to look to their agricultural laurels, or the Ragan girls 
will leave them in the furrow way" behind. 
North Carolina. j. a. robinson. 
THE “MISFIT” TREE QUESTION. 
I note your article on grafting, page 185. The or¬ 
chard on farm was bought for Baldwins, one 
block of 200 has one Blenh.eim, one Northern Spy, two 
Baldwins, 195 R. I. Greenings, all bought for Baldwins. 
Next lot bought 90 Baldwins—some of them now 
bearing as Wealthies. Next lot bought for Baldwins, 
some came labeled Elberta peaches, and from the 
heads of trees I feel sure they are not all Baldwins; 
some appear to be Spys, but have not borne yet. Buy¬ 
ing trees seems to be simply guessing. The nursery¬ 
men are not inclined to refund the money. Wealthy 
may be as good as or better than Baldwin, but if 
I order The R. N.-Y. and you sent the Boston Daily 
Globe it might not suit as well. I now have over 200 
trees, but wouldn’t dare to say what kinds. J. T. M. 
New Hampshire. 
R. N.-Y.—These trees came from three different 
“reliable” nurseries, all considered responsible. Such 
experience is driving men into the nursery business to 
the extent of growing their own trees. If they start 
they will soon be growing trees for their neighbors. 
Then some bright young man will begin to make 
contracts for growing certain special varieties in large 
numbers. All this will eat into the nursery business 
as now conducted, and the careless or dishonest nur¬ 
sery dealers who have sent out “misfits” will be re¬ 
sponsible for the loss of this trade. 
