307 
blight, and those which did not kill them had nothing to do with the 
disease. 
He thinks high cultivation favors the disease. ‘‘I think it is a true epi- 
demic which attacks, as in animals, the grossest feeders and enfeebled con- 
stitutions, in preference to the hardy and temperate subjects.” ‘Uf left to: 
itself a line of demarcation is f)rmsd and a separation of the living and dead 
parts ensues.” He is in doubt, judging from his observation, whether it is. 
the same disease as occurs in Ohio and New York, where the trunks and 
limbs of the trees are usually first affected, instead of the ends of the shoots. 
1854. Ernst, A. H. (Cincinnati, O.) Pear blight. Horti- 
cultural Review, vol. 1x, 1854, p. 170. [84 col. | 
He does not think blight to any large extent is due to insects or exhaus- 
tion of the soil, but rather to sudden changes, or winter temperature, or 
“excessive summer sun.” Former often slow in action, but the latter ‘‘gen- 
erally rapid and instantancous.” The sap is ‘‘scalded and vitiated, a chem- 
ical process of decomposition takes place, its poison is soon carried to and 
mixed with other portions of the tree.” The only remedy is to lop off until 
sound wood is reached, and thus prevent the disease spreading. It should 
be called sun blight, or fire blight. Prevention is to shorten in the present 
year’s growth toward the end of the season, and compel full ripening of 
wood. Hardy new varietics from secdling stock recommended as better able 
to withstand blight. 
1856. Wuirr, WILLIAM N : (Georgia.) Gardening for the 
South, 1856, p. 360. [2 pages on blight. | 
‘(Causes not known.” Lowell and Turner’s insect hypothesis not deemed 
to be sufficient to cover all cases. Van Buren, ‘‘one of our best pomologists,’”” 
ascribes it to an insect, puncturing the trunk and larger limbs. In all forms. 
of blight, cut away the diseased part. ‘‘Examine daily” and ‘‘cut promptly.” 
Best preventive is not to feed too highly with ‘‘nitrogenous manures.” 
1863. Sauispury, J. H. and C. B. Apple blight. Rep. 
Ohio Agric. for 1863, pp. 450, 469. [84 pages. | 
In 1862 the blight began to affect apple, pear and quince trees in centrak 
Ohio about June 12, and was active about a month. The fungi found in 
connection with the blight at this time are described at length, and abun- 
dantly but crudely illustrated. They belong to various species common upon 
dead or dying limbs—Oidium fructigenum, Macrosporium sp., etc., together 
with debris from the tissues. These are all referred to one species and the 
name, Spherotheca Pyrus, Salisb., given to it. The fungi are believed to 
emanate from low wet ground, from whith the spores rise into the air and 
attack the trees. This is spoken of as a discovery of the cause of blight. 
In 1863 the blight appeared in central Ohio on May 31, during warm weath- 
er, but made slow progress in the following month, owing to dry weather. 
1866. Mrrnan, THomas. (Germantown, Pa.) Diseases of 
the pear. Gard. Monthly, vol. vir, 1866, p. 77. [2 col. 
on blight. | 
Fire blight is divided into two classes: (a) insect blight, (b) frozen-sap 
blight. The insect blight occurs in June and July; it is not common. 
Frozen-sap blight is made synonymous with fire blight. The branches ‘die 
away as suddenly as if they had been stricken by fire.” No worse now than 
it was ‘‘a hundred years ago.” Suspects it is in some way connected with 
