THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN. 
109 
Major Frank Holsinger of Rosedale, Kansas, would, other 
things being equal, plant apple trees three or four years old. 
N. F. Murray, of Oregon, Missouri, says two-year-old apple 
trees do better than small one-year olds, but well grown one- 
year-olds have many advantages and will gi\e satisfaction in 
planting new orchards. Prof. John Craig, of the Iowa Agri¬ 
cultural College, is not very definite in his statement and evi¬ 
dently believes that it depends upon other conditions whether 
it is better to use one-year-old or two-year-old trees. 
Peter Youngers, Jr., of Geneva, Neb., prefers trees two 
years old. J. C. Evans, of North Kansas City, Mo , would 
make no difference as the advantages just about offset each 
other. F. Wellhouse, of Topeka, Kansas, prefers two-year old 
trees. Prof. Whitten, of the Missouri Agricultural College, 
ordinarily prefers to plant trees two years old, but knows a 
good many successful horticulturists who prefer first-class 
yearlings. Silas Wilson, of Atlantic, Iowa, says that yearling 
trees are all right if the land on which they are planted is 
planted in some kind of a hoed crop, but if the ground is to 
be sowed with oats of wheat or planted with corn,two-year old 
trees should be used. Prof. Budd recommends yearling trees 
and so does T. T. Lyon. H. E. Van Deman likes a one-year-old 
tree. W. L. Hall, of Anthony, Kansas, would plant yearling 
trees if he could secure those which had made vigorous growth. 
R. J. Bagby prefers trees one year old, but says that the finest 
trees are those which are cut back at the end of the first year 
and then allowed to grow another year in the nursery, giving 
a one-year top on a two-year root. Stark Bros, prefer strongly- 
rooted, well-grown ,one-year budded trees. Mr. Butterfield’s 
choice is a medium-si-zed two-year-old tree. 
The foregoing opinions all relate to apple trees. In the case 
of plum, peach and cherry trees when any preference was ex¬ 
pressed, it was for trees one year old. 
AMERICAN POMOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 
For fifty years the American Pomological Society has 
worked earnestly for the advancement of horticulture in 
America. Europeans learn with amazement that fruit is not a 
luxury in this country ; that the poor and the rich alike 
enjoy its use. This result has been brought about by the 
American Pomological Society which held its twenty-sixth 
biennial meeting in Philadelphia last month. The attendance 
was unusually large, the fruit exhibit the best shown by the 
society in years. 
There was a formidable programme of papers on subjects 
more or less directly connected with pomology. The college 
professors and the experiment station men were much in evi¬ 
dence on the programme. Some of them admitted what was 
quite generally felt—that there may be too many papers by 
these men on a horticultural programme. It was this feeling, 
freely expressed at the annual convention of the American 
Association of Nurserymen in Chicago last June, that resulted 
in the determination to have fewer long papers on the pro¬ 
gramme and more discussion incident to the opening of a ques¬ 
tion box. 
Prominent nurserymen took prominent part in the Philadel¬ 
phia meeting and C. L. Watrous, Des Moines, la., was re¬ 
elected president. The next meeting, in 1901, may be in Buf¬ 
falo. 
THE PASSING OF THE SCALE SCARE. 
It is with much satisfaction that the National Nursery¬ 
man notes the comment upon all sides of the decadence of 
the San Jose scale scare. Two years ago we were told that 
by the end of 1899 the country would be overrun with this 
pest and that unless restrictive legislation were secured in the 
states and at Washington, the orchards of the Union would 
be doomed. Certain over-zealous entomologists went so far 
as to meet in Washington and prepare a bill for introduction 
in Congress which was to strike a deadly blow at the nursery 
trade on the first of July following. The National Nur¬ 
seryman instantly and vigorously objected to any legislation 
in which the nurserymen of the country were directly interested, 
without an opportunity for the nurserymen to be heard in the 
matter. That bill was dropped and its promoters were 
obliged to meet the nurserymen in annual convention and 
listen to the opinions of representative men in the nursery 
trade. The result was a federal bill of far different mien. 
Then the matter proceeded orderly and as it should. 
And wherever the hydra headed enemy of the legitimate 
nursery trade appeared, this journal instantly turned the light 
of publicity upon it, believing that the only way to fight it effec¬ 
tively was to fight it openly. There was no attempt to stop 
the making of San Jose scale laws ; but we contended con¬ 
stantly that in the making of such laws, due regard should be 
had for the interests of one of the most important industries 
of the country. 
We have waited in vain for some indication that the San 
Jose scale was spreading rapidly from state to state and that 
whole orchards were being devastated. That was what we 
were promised. We have admitted that there might be con¬ 
ditions under which the scale would spread rapidly, but we 
have maintained that the nurserymen could be trusted to pre¬ 
serve their trade to such a degree that those conditions would 
not result. 
Two or three entomologists started the scare and continued 
it. To the credit of the profession it should be said that some 
of the most prominent entomologists discounted these efforts, 
almost from the start. And now at the close of 1899, Presi¬ 
dent C. L. Marlatt, at the recent convention of the Association 
of Economic Entomologists in Columbus, O., said: 
The last few years have witnessed a most remarkable expansion of 
the policy of organized warfare against insect pests, which is mainly 
due to aroused public attention to the ravages of a single insect—the 
San Jose scale. Is not the fight against insects comparable with the 
historic royal command to the tide to cease its rising ? In a state of 
nature, we find plants and insects flourishing together for ages, and 
this suggests that nature may establish a balance of forces without the 
assistance of man, and leads us to inquire whether repressive measures 
may not be to a great extent futile, and that a laissez faire policy may 
be more generally applicable than some suppose. Instances of special 
damage by injurious insects are rare, in comparison with the large 
number and variety of such insects. Special plant cultures have en¬ 
dured for thousands of years without serious injury from insects, e. g. 
olive trees, grapes, citrus trees. It is only a question of time when 
the apparently exterminated insect returns. Local control is the "best 
system of economic entomology. General and governmental effort 
may assist the operation of natural law by introducing parasites, and 
to some extent excluding pests, but for the most part local control is 
preferable. 
The National Nurseryman, it may be argued, is prej¬ 
udiced in the interests of the nurserymen and against restric¬ 
tive laws. But what say the journals devoted to the interests 
