the first of any importance which were undertaken in England, yet they were not begun until four years after the value of the copper compounds had been known there. Messrs. Sutton and Sons undertook a similar work. These first trials were not so successful as had been hoped, and undoubtedly prevented, to a certain extent, the more general adoption of the remedies.

The French authorities were almost exclusively quoted until 1891. By this time the work in America had assumed such proportions that much information of a very varied character was continually appearing. This was freely abstracted by the English journals, and during 1890 and 1891, doubts regarding the value of the copper compounds as fungicides were partially removed from the minds of English gardeners. But faith came slowly. The Highland and Agricultural Society made experiments which were discouraging in their results, and as a rule the first trials were not followed by such marked benefits as were reported from continental Europe. As the methods of making the application improved, however, the growers became encouraged, and during the last two or three years potatoes have been very generally treated with copper compounds for the blight by the more progressive growers. The successful issue of experiments made in the United States has, no doubt, materially assisted in bringing about this result.

The new insecticides have been adopted by English gardeners even more slowly than were the fungicides. Although the value of kerosene for the destruction of insect life has long 2 been known there, its use is still very limited. This, in all probability, is due to the fact that the remedies already at hand are so effective that little demand is felt for others, -a condition of affairs upon which English gardeners are to be congratulated.

The arsenites also are very rarely applied, not only in England but throughout Europe. Their use is not so imperatively demanded as in America, and as there is a certain amount of danger in having them upon the premises, they have not been looked upon with favor. The use of arsenic for the destruction of insects is by no means a novelty in England. Mr. Gordon, the superintendent of the ornamental department of the

1 The Garden, 1892, Feb. 6, 133, based upon an article appearing in the Morning Post.

2 Gard. Chron. 1882, July 15, 85. Also known as Paraffine in England.

"1

garden of the London Horticultural Society, says that "small brown ants are also very troublesome [to orchid growers], but they may be destroyed by placing sugar and arsenic, ground to an impalpable powder, on bits of card near the places they frequent." A fear of poisoned fruit following the use of arsenic has also been expressed, and this, although perfectly groundless, has worked against the introduction of such remedies. But nevertheless, spraying has now become the rule and not the exception in some parts of England.2 This applies particularly to" the various fruit farms around Evesham and Pershore and may also be true of other localities. The benefits derived from the practice are being appreciated, and eventually all growers must see the necessity of its adoption.

V. IN AUSTRALASIA.

Plants suffer from disease wherever they may be grown. If they are introduced into a new locality, the old diseases follow them. Such has been the case in Australia and Tasmania. These countries have recently taken a prominent position as producers of fine fruit, but here, as elsewhere, the horticulturist must be constantly on the alert to save his crop from some other claimant. The spray evidently did not meet with much opposition in those far-away lands, but it was welcomed as an agent which would assist in the production of more perfect crops. As early as 1886, F. S. Crawford experimented with ferrous sulphate and later he recommended its use at the rate of one pound to ten gallons. It was only to be applied to dormant wood. The following compounds are also mentioned, all but the first two being quoted from American publications: carbolic acid emulsion, copper sulphate, eau céleste (Audoynaud process), eau céleste (modified formula), Bordeaux mixture, sulphatine, sulphatine (Davenport's modification), and David's powder.

1 George Gordon in a paper, "Notes on the Proper Treatment of Epiphytal Orchids," Jour. of the London Hort. Soc. iv. 19, communicated in Nov. 1848. 2 Jour. of the Royal Hort. Soc. 1895, Jan. 185.

3 Extract from a paper by F. S. Crawford, read at the Congress of the Central Bureau of Agriculture of South Australia, held in Adelaide, 1890, March 4-7. Cited in Gard. Chron. 1890, July 19, 69.

Tasmania has been remarkably vigorous in fighting insect and fungous pests, and the government has passed a law (52 Vict. No. 16) which makes it a finable offense for a grower to neglect cleaning his orchard:

"The Colony of Tasmania is divided into thirty “fruit districts" to make better provision for the destruction of the codlin-moth. Every person who sells, or offers for sale, any fruit infected with the moth is liable to a penalty of five pounds.

"Bandages to be placed upon the trunks of the trees not later than December in each year.

“Farmers shall remove all rough and scaly bark from trees, and burn or otherwise effectually destroy such bark as soon as removed.'

"Similar methods are in use in Australia. There are persons appointed by the Agricultural Bureau in each district (I believe there are eighty odd districts in Australia, and over thirty in Tasmania) to see that the law is not evaded."1

1 Jour. of the Royal Hort. Soc. 1895, Jan. 185.

CHAPTER III.

SPRAYING IN AMERICA.

I. IN THE UNITED STATES.

Spraying for Leaf-eating Insects and the Codlin-moth.

Ir was not until about 1860, when a ravenous insect - the currant worm had been introduced into the Eastern States, and another — the potato beetle into the Western, that American farmers fully realized the necessity of discovering some materials which would be more energetic in the destruction of insect life than any at that time in common use. Hellebore was only partially successful in treating the currant worm, as the fresh article could not always be obtained, and it was of little value after having been long exposed to the air. The insecticidal value of kerosene had long been known, but the use of the oil was not understood, so that it was only sparingly applied. In the Eastern States, therefore, the progress of the currant worm was not very seriously checked, and the majority of the plants were defoliated year after year.

Since the insecticides then known were of so little value in exterminating a soft-bodied, chewing insect like the currant worm, how much less would be their effect upon such a vigorous and well-protected individual as the potato beetle! This insect, a native of the Rocky Mountains, began to travel eastward when potato culture had extended so far to the west that the plant was grown in the territory occupied by the beetle. It then left the plants upon which it had been feeding, and attacked the potato vines. The march to the east then followed. In 1859 the insect had "reached a point one hundred miles to the west of Omaha City, in Nebraska." In 1868 it extended

1 Riley, "Potato Pests," 1876, 12.

to central Missouri and southern Illinois. In July, 1870, the insect was found in Ontario, Canada; and in 1872 it arrived in central New York. Two years later, it reached the Atlantic coast, having crossed nearly two-thirds of the continent in the short space of fifteen years.

The insects ate as vigorously as they traveled. Potato fields were stripped of every vestige of foliage; desolation could everywhere be seen; and as this increased, the yield of tubers decreased. At first, it seemed as if nothing could stop the ravages of the pest, and it threatened the entire potato industry of the country. All known remedies failed, and the future must have appeared dark to the Western planters, until some remedy could be found that would destroy the beetles, and save the foliage of the vines.

Fortunately, this remedy was not long in coming; but who first suggested it, and who first used it for the destruction of the potato beetle, will perhaps never be told. Paris green appeared upon the scene sometime between 1860 and 1870. The use of this deadly poison may have originated with several persons; for some poison of this nature was evidently needed to destroy such a voracious feeder. The use of Paris green as a standard insecticide undoubtedly began in the Western States, and there the applications to the vines were considered as of primary importance in securing a crop. The use of the poison was, to a limited extent, checked by the possible dangers connected with its careless handling. It is also very injurious to foliage, when applied pure, especially in large quantities, and this may have exerted a certain influence in preventing its general adoption. But the weight of these objections was soon overcome by the absolute necessity of treating the vines in order to save them.

In 1868 the value of the poison appears to have been fairly well known,1 one man going so far as to obtain a patent upon a mixture of one part Paris green and two of mineral paint.2

1 American Entomologist, 1869, July, 219, citing from the Galena (Ills.) Gazette. The editors of the Am. Ent. also carried on experiments in 1868. See, also, an account of the experiments made by Saunders and Reed, in which were tested Paris green, arsenious acid, copper sulphate, bichromate of potash, powdered hellebore, carbonate of lime, and ashes mixed with air-slaked lime; none of these, except Paris green, were found to be of value. Canadian Entomologist, 1871, July, 41. 2 Riley, U. S. Ent. Com. 1880, Bull. 3, 57.