Chapter II: Part 2

As a member of the National Nut Growers Association I was this year chairman of the committee on orchard records. I sent out blanks, with lists of questions, to many prominent nut growers to see if I could secure data upon which to base a report to the association. The replies I received showed the existence of some very promising young orchards of small size, well cared for, but they also showed that there was no such thing as an intelligent report upon which reliable data as to the bearing records of orchards could be based for any future calculations. There are two reasons for this. First, most of the figures we have are based upon the records of a few pet trees around the dooryard or garden, grown under favorable conditions. Second, the young groves are not yet old enough for anyone to say, with any degree of accuracy, what the results will be. Therefore, the alluring figures printed in these pamphlets are only guesses.

Furthermore, what of the contract of these concerns? What does it specify? You would be surprised to know the legal construction of one of these contracts, together with their guaranty bond. In most cases they advertise to plant, and properly cultivate for a period of five to seven years, orchards of the finest varieties of budded or grafted pecan trees, with Satsuma oranges or figs set between. But the guaranty company is usually wise enough to have lawyers who are able to advise them of their liabilities, and about all they actually guarantee is that, after a period of five years, provided all payments have been promptly met, there will be turned over to the purchaser five acres of ground with trees upon it. Five years old? No, they may not be one year old. Budded or grafted? No, they may be mere seedlings. Oranges set between them? No, the orange has passed out of the proposition before the bond stage. The companies generally print a copy of the bond, but usually in such small type that the victim does not read it, though the heading is always prominent. It thunders in the index and fizzles in the context.

Moreover, suppose suit is brought on one of these contracts and bonds? What is the measure of damages? What basis has any court or jury for fixing damages? And be it remembered that courts do not exist for the protection of fools against their folly. The principle "caveat emptor" is as old as the common law itself, and it means that the buyer must beware, or in other words, that he should inform himself, and that he cannot expect the courts to protect him where he has failed to exercise due caution and diligence. Therefore, as a lawyer, I should very much hesitate to take on a contingent fee the suit of one of these various victims against a promoting orchard corporation.

However, in any jurisdiction where there is a criminal statute against fraudulent representation and obtaining money under false pretenses, I should not hesitate, if I were the prosecuting attorney, to indict every member of such a corporation, and, to sustain the case, I would simply present to a jury of honest men the representations in their advertising literature, and then have the court instruct the same jury as to the validity and limitations of their contract. Their advertising is brilliant enough to dazzle the sun. Their contract is as dull as a mud pie.

In addition to all of this comes the question of orcharding by proxy, and the success of the unit or acreage system, and many other similar questions; and let me say that I doubt if there is today in the United States one large development scheme, either in pecan or apple orchards, that will prove of ultimate financial profit and success to the purchaser. The promoter may get rich--he has nothing at stake. In most instances he has the price of the land in his pocket before there is a lick of work done on it, and the payments come in regularly and promptly to take care of his salary and the meager and unscientific development.

Of course I would not be understood as saying that pecan or apple orchards cannot be made profitable. I am of the opinion that reasonable sized orchards in proper locations and proper soil, of proper varieties, with proper care in handling, are good investments, and, as proof of my confidence, I am planting orchards both in the north and south. The adjective "proper" which I have used here may seem insignificant at the start but, believe me, before you have begun to clip the coupons off your orchard bonds this adjective will loom up as important as Webster's Unabridged Dictionary. In fact you will wonder how it has been possible for anyone to forecast in one word such comprehensive knowledge. Think of a man a thousand miles away putting money into the hands of some unknown concern, for five acres of unknown land, to be set in unknown varieties of trees, to be cared for by unknown individuals. Can he not see that, in keeping with all the other unknown factors, his profits must also be unknown?

We look at a great industrial enterprise, such as the steel trust, and marvel at its success. But it must be remembered that this industry started many years ago, and step by step built furnace after furnace and mill after mill, after the owners had tried out and become familiar with all the factors of that industry, and after great corps of trained experts had been developed, and after science had given to this industry many of the most marvelous mechanical inventions of the age. These facts are overlooked, however, when some fellow steps up and proposes to put a steel-trust-orchard on the market in twelve months. In most industrial enterprises there are well-known and established factors to be considered. In horticultural enterprises, however, no man knows what twelve months hence will bring. I read the other day with great interest the prospectus of a great pecan orchard started several years ago by a very honorable and high-minded man, and the promises of success were most alluring. What are the facts? The boll weevil came along and wiped out his intermediate cotton crops. The floods came later and destroyed acres of his orchards, and, if he were to write a prospectus today, it would no doubt be a statement of hope rather than a statement of facts. He would no doubt turn from the Book of Revelations, where at that time he saw "a new heaven and a new earth," and write from the Book of Genesis, where "the earth was without form and void."

How many people have been defrauded by these various schemes, no one knows. How many clerks, barbers, bookkeepers, stenographers, students, preachers, doctors, lawyers, have contributed funds for farms and future homes in sections where they would not live if they owned half of the county. How many people have been separated from their cash by literature advertising rich, fertile lands in sections where the alligator will bask unmolested in miasma for the next fifty years, and where projects should be sold by the gallon instead of by the acre.

Some time ago it was reported that inquiries in reference to the feasibility and profits of various orchard schemes had come in to the Bureau of Plant Industry of the Agricultural Department, at Washington, in such numbers that the officials of that Bureau had considered the advisability of printing a general circular, which they could send to the inquirers, advising them to make due investigation, and giving a few general suggestions about proxy farming and orchard schemes. I was advised by a friend in the middle west that the contemplated issuance of this circular by the Bureau of Plant Industry had aroused a number of protests throughout the country, and that various Senators and Members of the House of Representatives had entered strong protests with the Secretary of Agriculture against it. A number of these protests have come to my notice, and they take various forms of opposition, but are all unanimous against the Department of Agriculture offering to the prospective purchaser any information. Various reasons for their stand were given by the protestants, but how flimsy and ridiculous they are when analyzed. Congress for a number of years has been appropriating money and authorizing certain work by the Department of Agriculture. It is the people's money, and the people's Department, and the information gathered by the experts in this Department ought to be the people's information, and it ought to be possible for any citizen to write the Department a letter about any proposition that he has received from any of these various promoters, and have the advice of those who know most about it.

I suppose the Department of Agriculture has entirely too many duties to perform to undertake a work of this kind, but what an inconsistent position it is for a Member of Congress, who has been voting for appropriations to carry on this work, to appeal to the Secretary of Agriculture to suppress such information in order that some exploiter may get somebody's money under false representations. I think if it were possible today to know the list of concerns and companies who registered, directly or through agents, their opposition to this proposed warning circular, you would have a correct index of the concerns good to let alone. For no honest, reputable individual or company need be afraid of the work or suggestions of that great Department. I have the pleasure of knowing many of the officials in the Bureau of Plant Industry, and never anywhere have I seen a body of men so conscientiously engaged in the work of promoting legitimate horticultural and agricultural knowledge. It is the very life of that great Department, and its officers and employees above everyone else are most interested in seeing the land produce the most and best that it can be made to produce, and they are best qualified to pass upon these matters.

Most of the questions in these various schemes are questions of soil and horticulture. One letter in opposition to the Agricultural Department's attitude, that was brought to my attention, stated that crops varied under different conditions, and that no one was able to tell what a certain soil would or would not produce throughout a period of years, and intimated that the Department of Agriculture might mislead the public; and yet the concern that sent it printed columns of figures guaranteeing returns from pecans and Satsuma oranges in a section where orange growing is of very doubtful possibility. Boiling down these objections by the promoters, they come to simply this: That the Agricultural Department, with no motive but to tell the truth, and with its corps of trained experts, might mislead the public, but they (the promoters) could not possibly be mistaken in their fabulous figures compiled for the purpose of getting money from some misinformed victim.

Proxy farming never was a success and I do not think it ever will be. One of my friends told me a short time ago of a very successful young pecan orchard on the gulf coast. Upon inquiry I found that it was of reasonable size, nine years old, and that the owner had lived in it nine years. It was not 500 acres in extent, or 1,000 acres, or 2,000 acres, but about 20 acres. Last summer I went into a beautiful apple orchard in Southern Indiana and saw about forty acres of trees bending to the ground with delicious Grimes Golden apples. On that particular day there were great crowds of people walking among the trees and admiring the fruit. I too walked among the trees a short time, but of greater interest to me than the trees was the old, gray-haired man who had made the orchard. The trees could not talk, but he could, and he told the story of the years of care, and diligence, and work, and thought, and patience, that showed why it is not possible to cover the mountains of a state with orchards bringing almost immediate and fabulous incomes.

Some time ago I stood talking to the old superintendent of the Botanical Garden in Washington--William R. Smith, now deceased--and while discussing with him the requisites for tree culture, he said "Young man, you have left out the most important one of them all," When I asked him what I had left out, he said "above all things it takes the eye of the master." So it does, and the master is he whose vigilance is continual, who watches each tree as if it were a growing child--as indeed it is, a child of the forests--who has the care and the patience, and who is not dazzled by the glitter of the dollar, but who loves trees because they are trees.

Theoretically, one can figure great successes in big horticultural development propositions, but these figures rest upon theory and not fact. It would be difficult to state all the reasons why I have a firm conviction that such big schemes of every kind will fall, but I believe this conviction is shared by the foremost thinkers in the horticultural world. A four-year-old boy was once taken to see the animals in a circus. He was very much interested, but, when shown the tremendous elephant, shook his head and said "he is too big."

A small grove properly handled ought to be an excellent investment. The various uncertainties and vicissitudes involved can, in a degree, be compensated for by great care; and I suppose it would be possible even with some of these big schemes--by placing enough money behind them--to insure a fair degree of success. It must be borne in mind, however, that these promoters, of whom we have been speaking, are not so much concerned in the successful orchard as they are in big salaries and profits, and, if one has money enough to pay big salaries and profits, and still pay for the proper care of the orchard, then he does not need an orchard. Most of these promoters charge too much for a proper and honest development alone, and too little for the proper development plus the profits and salaries of the promoters. I wish it were not so. I wish the old earth could be made to smile bountiful crops without such expensive tickling, but this is one of the checks and balances that nature places upon her great storehouse of wealth.

* * * * *

The Chairman: This is a matter of very great importance and I hope we shall have a good discussion, from a practical point of view, by men who know about fraudulent promotions and their effect. We ought to go on record in this matter right now. I know of numbers of teachers, doctors and other poor people who have put money into nut promotion schemes without knowing anything about the ultimate prospect of profit.

Mr. Hutt: One noticeable thing about the promoter's literature is that he never knows anything about crop failure, and in the agricultural and horticultural world that is a thing that is painfully evident to a man who has been in business a great length of time. In the promoter's literature it is just a matter of multiplication; if one tree will produce so much in a year, a hundred trees will produce a hundred times as much. I got a letter the other day from Mr. S. H. James, of Beaumont, Louisiana, and he said, "I have been very fortunate, I have actually had two good crops in succession," and when you come to compare that with the promoter's literature--why he knows no such thing as crop failure. Anybody who knows anything about agricultural or horticultural work knows that we have winter and floods and everything else to contend with.

The Chairman: Someone might tell us about failures they happen to know of in promotion schemes.

Mr. Smith: I would like to ask if Mr. Littlepage isn't going to open up that barrel of actual facts that he has about yields?

Mr. Littlepage: Mr. President, I didn't know that I had a whole barrel of actual facts. When I started in several years ago a barrel wouldn't have held all of them, but I think that now I could put the actual facts in a thimble. I've got several barrels of good pecans, however, I'd like to open up and let Mr. Smith sample if he wants to.

The Chairman: Let's hear about frauds from someone who knows how the land was managed and how the trees were managed and how it actually occurred.

Mr. Van Duzee: Mr. President, I feel that I ought to say something, first in commendation of the paper itself. It is a question how far we, as an Association, are responsible for the care of our fellowmen, but at this period when the industry is new, I feel that it is a very legitimate thing for us to do a little work to try and prevent these people from preying upon our fellowmen. The president remarked this morning that something was an evidence of the tremendous waste in Nature. It is true, Nature, in building a forest, wastes a vast amount of time and energy. These people who are preying upon the nut industry today find as their victims the weaklings which Nature buries in the forest. Those things are incidental and we must expect them, but I feel that a paper of this kind, at this time, is a very valuable thing and I hope it will receive wide publication. We cannot say too much to discourage this sort of thing. Now, to respond, in a measure, to the President's request for actual facts, I am confronted with this proposition, that some of the men who have made the greatest failures are men who have done so through ignorance. They are honest men, they are personal friends of mine. I don't care to go too much into details, because they are just as sorry today as I am, but I have seen this done. I have seen hundreds of acres of nut orchards in the South planted with the culls from nurseries bought at a very low figure. I have seen these trees neglected absolutely, not in one case but in many cases. I have seen the weeds as high as the trees at the time when a telegram was received by the the local agent that a carload of the purchasers of these tracts was about to leave to look over their property. I have seen the local manager hustle out, when he got that telegram, and hire every mule in the community to come in and, with a plow, throw a furrow or two to the rows of trees so that they could be distinguished from the weeds they were growing among. As Mr. Littlepage has said, there can be no success in such operations; and I feel, looking at it in a very broad way, that this is a very good time to emphasize the point that those of us who have the greatest experience in the growing of nut trees do not feel that these enterprises are legitimate, or that they promise very much success. (Applause.)

Mr. Pomeroy: I live just a short distance from Buffalo. A few months ago--I got it on the very best authority--there was some salesman in Buffalo who didn't have time to call on all those who wanted to give him money for pecan propositions. He didn't have time, Doctor, he just had to skip hundreds of them, he said; he was just going from one place to another, making his collections. Buffalo is a city of only about 450,000 people and there must be some money being collected and sent in to somebody.

The Chairman: Very glad to hear of that instance; let's hear of others.

Mr. Littlepage: I would like, if possible, to answer Mr. Smith's question. I didn't know that he referred to facts about these promotions, I thought perhaps he meant facts about nut growing.

Mr. Smith: You said you had made inquiries as to nuts, harvest yields, orchard yields; it was those, particularly, that I had in mind.

Mr. Littlepage: Oh well, I could give those to you readily. There are some very promising orchards, making a good showing under investigation, handled under proper conditions and of proper size. I would not want to say that those things are not possible. Talking specifically of these overgrown schemes, one of them is recalled to my mind, a development company in southern Georgia, that advertises very alluringly. It set out one year a lot of culls; they all died. I am told that they went out the second year and, without any further preparation, dug holes and set out another lot of culls. They too died; and then they went out the third year and planted nuts, and those trees, at the end of a year's growth, were perhaps six or seven inches high, and the salesman from that company, I understood, took one of the prospective purchasers over into a fine grove owned by another man on the opposite side of the road, and let him pick out his five acres from the orchard across the road. That's one type I could multiply indefinitely.

Mr. W. C. Reed: I think this is a very important matter. As a nursery man who has sold a great many trees to promoting companies, I want to say that I have never, with one exception, seen an orchard that has been a success, but I have seen hundreds of failures, some of them where they have set out orchards of 150,000 trees and sold them off in one and ten acre tracts, and in only one case have I seen a success. I think these promotions should be avoided by the nut growers of the North.

The Chairman: This is very valuable information, coming from a dealer.

Mr. Van Duzee: I have found this in the yields of my orchards. Six or seven or eight years ago, I discounted every source of information that I could have access to, as to yields, brought them to a conservative point, submitted them to the best informed men in the United States, and then divided those figures by five as my estimate of what I might hope to accomplish as my orchards came into bearing. I have since been obliged to find some excuses for failing to even approximate those conservative figures. I had this year in our orchard, a 35 acre plot of Frotscher trees which is one of the most promising varieties, six years of age, and there were not five pounds of nuts in the whole plot. I have had an orchard of 36 acres, mostly Frotscher and Stewart, go through its sixth year with less than 200 pounds of nuts to the entire orchard. I have another orchard of 30 acres which in its sixth year has produced less than 100 pounds of nuts. Now many of these promoters guarantee to take care of these orchards, which they are selling, for 10 per cent or 20 per cent, or even half the proceeds of those orchards, from the fifth year. You can see readily that the entire crop of such orchards as I have been able to produce, would not begin to pay their running expenses the sixth and seventh year.

The Chairman: You took good care of yours?

Mr. Van Duzee: I think so. I think there are many gentlemen in the audience who have been through them, and it is conceded that my orchards are at least fairly good representatives of what can be done under normal conditions.

Mr. Corsan: Are yours southern orchards?

Mr. Van Duzee: These pecan orchards are in south-western Georgia.

Mr. Corsan: The Northern Nut Growers Association, as I understand, is a collection of men who are interested in finding out what we can do in the way of growing nuts for the North. We go to the markets and see baskets of cocoanuts, Brazil nuts, California walnuts, but no nuts growing for the market around our neighborhood. In my own city, Toronto, I can see some nut trees because I look very closely at everything, but the average person cannot see them because they are very few. I have a number of experiments on hand. If I succeed in even one of these experiments, I am satisfied to spend my whole life at it. I am not nervous, I can watch a hickory tree grow. (Laughter.) I want to grow some nuts for the next generation. I haven't the slightest thought of making a copper of money out of it but I am going to enjoy the thing, and that's the idea of the Northern Nut Growers Association, or else I have made a mistake.

The Chairman: Is there any further discussion on the matter of frauds? Does anyone else wish to speak on this subject?

Mr. Littlepage: It is indeed very gratifying to hear the President of the National Nut Growers' Association, Col. Van Duzee, speak on this subject and to have the honor of having him with us as a member of our Association. It is gratifying to have him come out in such strong terms on this question. It has always been his policy and his reputation, so far as I have heard, to stand for what is best and squarest in nut culture.

The Chairman: The paper of Mr. Littlepage is one of very great importance, because the number of frauds associated with an enterprise is an indication of the fundamental value of the cause. These fraudulent nut promoters capitalize the enthusiasm of people who want to get back to the land, just as porters at the hotels capitalize the joy of a newly married couple. (Laughter.) We have in this "back-to-the-land" movement, a bit of philosophy of fundamental character which includes the idea of preservation of the race. Preservation of the race!--why so? Nature made man a gregarious species and, being gregarious, he has a tendency to develop the urban habit. Developing the urban habit, he fails to oxidize his proteins and toxins. Failing to oxidize his proteins and toxins, he degenerates. Recognizing the degenerating influence of urban life, by means of his intelligence he has placed within his consciousness that automatic arrangement, as good as the automatic arrangement which turns water on to a boiler, which says to him, "go out and oxidize your proteins and toxins." That is what "back-to-the-land" means. You've got to begin from this fundamental point. Now then, if this represents a fundamental trait in the character of our species and we are acting in response to a natural law, then must we be doubly careful about having our good intentions, our good methods, halted by unwisdom. That brings to mind the point made about our present Secretary of Agriculture. I am very glad this has been made a matter of record here, for I am sorry to say that in connection with another subject--(health matters)--wherever there has been opportunity for the Secretary to act, he has decided as a matter of policy on the side of capital and against the side of public interest. Almost every time, so far as we have a record of the action of the present Secretary of Agriculture and of Dunlap and McCabe, his assistants. We ought to state here, in connection with fraudulent nut promotions, that he has acted in favor of capital and against the public interest if it is true. It ought to go as a matter of record from this Association. We may be bold in this matter, but we should be righteously bold because we are speaking for the public interest ourselves. We have nothing to gain; there is nothing selfish about this organization. We may be kindly and say that the Secretary is at the mercy of shrewder men.

Mr. Corsan says that we are interested in scientific work only. That is true at the present time, because all progress must be from a scientific basis. If our care in managing experiments is such that we cannot avoid getting rich, we will accept the result. (Laughter.) I am glad that in connection with this discussion Mr. Corsan made one epigrammatic remark,--that he was not nervous and could watch a hickory tree grow. I tell you there's a lot of wit in that.

Mr. Littlepage: He has good eyesight, Mr. President.

The Chairman: The reason why we have so many fraudulent promotions is largely because of our American temperament; we are so nervous that we can't watch a hickory tree grow. In matters of public health, our Secretary of Agriculture has prevented actual criminals from being brought to justice--he made that his policy.

I think those are the points that I wish to make in commenting upon Mr. Littlepage's paper and if he will make any concluding remarks we will be very glad to hear them. In regard to Mr. Hutt's suggestion that we cannot count on crop success or crop failure mathematically--now, there are fortunes to be made from the proper management of good nut orchards. We know of orchards where very large incomes are at present being made, and I am very glad that the sense and sentiment of this meeting is against quotation of that feature. I have not heard here one word in quotation of orchards which bring incomes of $10,000 a year or more from various kinds of nuts, and we know there are many such orchards. It is the failures upon which we should concentrate our attentions right now, and the reason for failure is not that nut growing is not going to make progress but that we cannot count on our nuts from a mathematical basis. One of my friends, an old Frenchman, became very enthusiastic about raising poultry. He sent out requests for circulars to every poultry fancier who published circulars, and I will wager that he got 50 per cent of answers to his requests for circulars about fancy poultry. He began to raise chickens, and my father-in-law met him on the street one day and asked how he was getting on with his pullets that were going to lay so many eggs. "Oh," he said, "Ze trouble is with ze pullet; she no understand mathematique like ze fancier. If I have one pullet, she lay one egg every day; if I have two pullet, _perhaps_ she lay two egg every day, and if I have three pullet, she _nevaire_ lay three egg every day." (Laughter.) Now I think that the remaining time this morning we had better devote to the executive session, then we had better meet at two o'clock for the election of our committee. The meeting then is at present adjourned, with the exception of those who will take part in the executive session, and we will meet again at two P. M. There is one point I wanted to make in connection with Col. Van Duzee's remarks that a certain number of really honest men have allowed their names to be used in connection with promotion propositions. Men who are quite skillful at learning the use of names, have gotten men of good intentions and kindly interest, I know, to lend their names as even officials of nut promotion companies. Besides that, a good deal of garbled literature of recommendation has gone out in their circulars. I have had a number of circulars sent to me quoting abstract remarks that I had made relative to nut culture in general, and this has been applied concretely in circulars; the context did not go with it. I asked a lawyer what I could do about it, and after going over the question he said that I probably was powerless.

After announcements by the Secretary, the convention took a recess until 2 P. M., at which time it was called to order by President Morris and the regular program was resumed as follows:

The Chairman: The executive session will be held after the meeting, as many are here to hear the paper on the chestnut blight, so we will proceed at once to the order of business and listen to the first paper by Mr. Rockey.

Mr. Rockey: This paper deals more particularly with the work that has been done in Pennsylvania. But what has been done here may be considered to be typical of what has been done elsewhere.

RECENT WORK ON THE CHESTNUT BLIGHT

KELLER E. ROCKEY

Forester in charge of Demonstration Work, Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission

The history of the blight, briefly outlined, is as follows:

In 1904 the diseased condition of the chestnut trees around New York City was noted and an examination of them showed that they were being attacked by a disease at that time unknown. Investigations since then have shown that the blight had been at work there and elsewhere for a number of years before that time, but it has been impossible to determine just when it first appeared or where. The disease was studied and described at that time.

On display here are specimens and photographs showing the appearance of the blight so that I will not go into that part of the subject in detail. I hope that you will notice, however, the symptoms by which the disease is recognized: 1st. The small red pustules which produce the spores and, on rough barked trees, appear only in the crevices. 2nd. The peculiar mottled appearance of the inner bark of the canker. 3rd. The discoloration of the outer bark. 4th. The danger signals, such as withered leaves in summer or persistent leaves or burrs in winter, suckers which develop at the base of cankers, and the yellowish cracks which soon appear in the bark over the cankers.

Workers in the Bureau of Plant Industry, Washington, D. C., have been studying the blight since 1908. In the Spring of 1911, a bill creating the commission for the investigation and control of the blight in Pennsylvania was passed, and the active work began in August 1911. The method upon which the Commission is working is outlined in Farmers' Bulletin No. 467, of the Department of Agriculture, and consists briefly of determining the area of blight infection and in removing diseased trees west of a certain line, with the purpose of preventing the western spread of the blight.

This Commission has ascertained as accurately as possible the amount of infection in the various parts of the state and the results are given in a map on display here. The state is divided into two districts by a line drawn along the western edge of Susquehanna, Wyoming, Columbia, Union, Snyder, Juniata and Franklin Counties, which is approximately the western line of serious blight infection. West of this line a large portion of the state has been scouted, and the remainder will be finished early in 1913. We have learned by experience that in the winter, after the fall of the leaves, the best scouting work can be done. Persistent leaves and cankers along the trunk are readily seen, and more and better work can be accomplished than in the summer, except when the snow is very deep.

Blight infections have been found in counties adjacent to this line: also in Fayette County, near Connellsville, in Warren County, near Warren, and in Elk County, near St. Mary's. These three infections were directly traceable to infected nursery stock, and in one case the blight had spread to adjacent trees. A large area of diseased chestnut in Somerset County illustrates the harm done by shipping infected nursery stock. The centre of this infection is a chestnut orchard where about 100 scions from an infected eastern orchard were grafted to native sprouts in 1908. The percentage of infected trees in the orchard from which the scions were obtained, according to a count made this Fall, averages 80 per cent. Evidently these scions brought the disease into this region, for the grafts have all been killed by the blight and every tree in the orchard is killed or infected by disease. On adjoining tracts over 5,400 infected trees have been cut, and there are a number of others in process of removal, radiating in all directions from the orchard as a center to a distance of three miles. Another infection of 143 trees was found in Elk County. It is thought that three trees at the centre of infection were diseased in 1909, although it is possible that one of these trees was already infected in 1908. In 1910, 27 additional trees were infected; in 1911, 50 additional trees, and in 1912, 228 additional trees. The disease spread in all directions from the center of infection to a distance of 700 feet.

These infections are interesting in showing the rate at which the blight may travel in healthy timber.

These infections have all been removed and it is the expectation that by the end of January 1913 all scattered spot infections will be removed from the territory west of the line previously mentioned, and that, to the best of our knowledge, these western counties will be free from blight. In 1913 the field force will be concentrated on the advance line and the work will be carried eastward. The Commission has the power to compel the removal of infected trees. In the western part of the state this power has been exercised in the few cases where it was necessary. As a rule, however, the owners are not only willing but anxious to get rid of the infected trees, and our field men are given hearty support by individuals, granges and other organizations. The timber owners of Elk County had printed and posted an announcement that the chestnut blight had been found in the locality and warned the people to be on the look-out for it. In addition the Commission has had a man, for a short time at least, in each of the eastern counties of the state, and their time has been taken up principally by those who requested inspections of timber with the view of determining the percentage of blight infection and the best method to be pursued in combating it and realizing on their timber. Our men are all deputy wardens, with the authority which is attached to this office, and are instructed to do their utmost to prevent fire damage.

An exhibit which consists of specimens showing the blight in various stages together with photographs, literature, etc., was placed in about 30 of the county fairs throughout the state. The appreciation of the public has been so clearly shown that next year it is the intention of the Commission to continue and perhaps increase this phase of the work, and to place large permanent displays at the Commercial Museum, Philadelphia, the State Capitol, Harrisburg, and other places.

Many of the Annual Teachers' Institutes have been reached with a display and lecture. We have arranged also to have a speaker at fully one hundred of the Farmers' Institutes this winter. We are also arranging to have a permanent display at many of the public schools, normal schools and colleges, where instruction on the blight is given. An effort was made last winter to enlist the service of the boy scouts and we are indebted to them for considerable work, chiefly in an educational way. The successful outcome of all our work will depend in a large measure upon the owners themselves, and it is our purpose to give them all the information possible upon the whole subject.

The Commission established a Department of Utilization which is collecting information on the various industries which use or might use chestnut wood, listing the buyers and owners of chestnut wood, thus assisting owners of blighted chestnut trees in marketing their timber to the best advantage. The Department is trying to increase the use of chestnut wood by calling attention to its many good qualities, and thus utilize the large quantity which must necessarily be thrown upon the market. There has been more or less discrimination against blighted chestnut timber. This has been in many cases unjust, since the blight does not injure the value of the wood for most purposes for which it is used. However, the owners sometimes fail to realize that the blight cankers are the most favorable places for the entrance of the borers, and that where a large number of trees are being considered, a percentage of them will be materially injured by insects which follow blight infection. Where telegraph poles are barked, it is often seen that borers have attacked the wood under blight cankers, and have not touched any other part of the tree. All blighted timber should be cut before death to realize its best value, since insects and wood-destroying fungi cause the very rapid deterioration of dead, standing timber. There has been a good market in almost every locality for poles, ties and the better grades of lumber. Cordwood presents the difficult problem of disposal. The best market for this is in the central part of the state, at the extract plants. The Commission has secured from the Pennsylvania R. R. a special tariff on blighted chestnut cordwood so that this product may be profitably shipped from greater distances than before.

The Commission has inspected all chestnut nursery stock shipped from nurseries within the state and has also provided for inspection of all chestnut stock entering the state. This should prevent a repetition of infections in the western part of the state which might destroy millions of dollars worth of timber.

From time to time publications have been and will be issued by the Commission, which are obtained free of charge upon request, or they may be consulted in the leading libraries throughout the state.

An appropriation for $80,000 was given by the last Congress for scientific research work upon the blight disease and work is being carried out in cooperation with the various states. Several of the Government investigators are now at work upon our force. Some of the most important unsolved scientific problems of the blight, as given by Secretary Wilson, in his message, to Congress, are as follows:--

First, the relation of the disease to climate.

Second, the relation of the parasite to the varying tannin content of the tree.

Third, the origin of the disease.

Fourth, relation of birds and insects to the dissemination of the disease.

Fifth, the nature and degree of resistance of the Asiatic species. Another problem in relation to tree treatment may be added, that is, the relation of spores and mycelium to toxic agents.

The Pennsylvania Commission maintained laboratories during the summer at Charter Oak, Centre County, and at Mt. Gretna, Lebanon County. The latter has been moved to Franklin and Marshall College, Lancaster, for the winter. We have also had a laboratory at the University of Pennsylvania, which has been greatly enlarged this fall.

The number of people who informed us that they had discovered a sure "cure" for the blight made it necessary to obtain an orchard near Philadelphia where all such discoverers were given an opportunity to demonstrate the efficacy of their remedies. It might be noted that in every case the blight is thriving as usual. These cures consisted largely of an injection of a toxic principle by some means into the circulation of the tree. In some cases this was accompanied by a fertilizer of some kind, and this fertilizer may account for the apparently improved condition of the tree in some cases, after such remedies were used, since the growth was increased and the leaves and branches had a healthier appearance. This increased growth has not had any appreciable effect upon the rapidity of spread of the blight mycelium. As the experiments are not officially finished and recorded it is too early to give any further data. Our pathologists have also conducted experiments in this same line but no medicinal remedy or fertilizer has yet been found.

The varying chemical constituents of chestnut trees, principally tannic acid, have often been suggested in regard to the origin and spread of the blight. Investigators are now working along this line and we hope, for valuable results before long.

The origin of the disease, as already stated, is something of a mystery, and there is as yet no generally accepted theory, although many people have very pronounced views on the subject. Many puzzling facts have been noted since investigating the disease in Pennsylvania, among them being the large percentage of infection in eastern York and southern Lancaster counties, the relative small percentage in certain localities around which the blight is generally prevalent, and recent infections found in Warren and other western counties, a great distance from what is known as the western advance line of the disease.

Our pathologists have reported some very interesting facts in regard to the dissemination of the blight. In the preliminary report of the summer's work at our field laboratories the results tend to show:

First, the prolific ascospore stage is very important in causing the spread of the blight, the spores at this stage being forcibly ejected from the pustules and borne through the air for some distance. This ejection of spores takes place under natural field conditions only when the bark has been soaked by rain, but the expulsion of spores is also dependent upon temperature conditions and ceases entirely at temperatures from 42 to 46 degrees F. and below.

Second, the wind plays a large part in local ascospore dissemination.

Third, birds and insects (except ants) are apparently of very little importance in the dissemination of the blight except in providing wounds. Further investigations of the importance of ants is being made during the present winter.

Several kinds of beetles have been observed eating the pustules and are in this way beneficial, since tests show that they digest and destroy the spores. It has also been suggested by workers in the Bureau of Entomology that such beetles, which are of several kinds, may be of value in the attempt to control the disease. These are perhaps the only natural enemies discovered to date.

The proper classification of the chestnut blight fungus has also been the subject of much discussion. Last winter specimens of what in external characteristics appeared to be Diaporthe parasitica were found in western Pennsylvania, Virginia and elsewhere, growing upon chestnut, oak and other species. This condition was puzzling and the subject of some controversy. It has been found, however, that this fungus, called the "Connellsville fungus," is a distinct species closely related to the true blight fungus, being, however, entirely saprophytic. Cultural distinctions are apparent and the ascospores differ in size and shape so that no further confusion need occur.

Upon the question of immunity of certain kinds of Asiatic stock, there is very little to report beyond what was known one year ago. In the investigations made the work has been hampered by the fact that much of the so-called Japanese stock is in reality a hybrid of European or American species. In 1909, 45 Japanese seedling trees were set out at Gap, Lancaster Co., for experimentation along this line. A recent examination showed that 90 per cent are infected. Concerning the variety or purity of this stock, I have not been informed. Our force as well as others are at work upon the problem which will require many years' study.

Previous investigations seem to show that certain pure strains of Japanese and Korean chestnut are resistant to the blight. Blight cankers may be found upon them but they are less easily infected and suffer less than the more susceptible varieties. With this as a working basis, considering the results that have been attained in other fruit by selection and hybridization, the situation is hopeful. Prof. Collins said at the Harrisburg Conference in February that "There is no reason to doubt that we may eventually see an immune hybrid chestnut that will rival the American chestnut in flavor and the Paragon in size".

In southern Europe chestnut orcharding is a well established and profitable industry. In the United States chestnuts have been considered a marketable commodity ever since the Indians carried them to the settlements and traded them for knives and trinkets. The demand has always exceeded the supply and at the present time about $2,000,000 worth of nuts are imported from Europe annually. With the development of the better varieties of the American nut has come an increased activity in the United States and the chestnut orchard industry promises to become one of very large importance. It has an added advantage that the trees can be grown upon the poorer types of soil which are not adaptable for farming or the raising of other fruit.

At the present time there are in what is known as the blight area of Pennsylvania, or eastern half of the State, about 100 orchards ranging from 12 trees up to 400 acres in extent. These orchards are in varying stages of blight infection, some of them being almost entirely free, due to the attention which has been given them. In order to protect such orchards the Commission is compelling the removal of infected trees within a certain radius of them.

As you know the blight has been a very serious factor in this industry. Some of the orchards have been completely annihilated and the income reduced from several thousand or more dollars per year to nothing. Whether or not the blight will completely wipe out the orcharding industry is a subject of large importance. Personally I believe that chestnuts will be raised commercially in Pennsylvania in increased abundance, and as the various phases of the blight subject are brought to light, keeping the disease under control can be more easily accomplished. At the present time this is being done in certain orchards by the present methods of examining the trees often, treating each infection, or removing the tree. If this policy is successfully pursued for several more years it will demonstrate conclusively that chestnuts can be grown in spite of the blight and this will mean an opportunity to use vast areas of waste land in Pennsylvania and in the other states, in a highly profitable manner.

* * * * *

The Chairman: The subject of the next paper is Some Problems in the Treatment of the Chestnut. It will be presented by Mr. Pierce, after which we will have a general discussion of the entire subject.

Mr. Pierce: Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen: I see that, as we wrote our papers separately, some of the things I had in mind will be similar to those Mr. Rockey had.

SOME PROBLEMS IN THE TREATMENT OF DISEASED CHESTNUT TREES

BY ROY G. PIERCE

Tree Surgeon, Pennsylvania Chestnut Tree Blight Commission

The problems that present themselves to the growers of chestnut trees concerning the present disease may be summed up under three heads: first, what the disease is, how it is caused, and how it may be recognized; second, what is to be done with diseased trees to bring them to health or to prevent them from infecting other healthy trees nearby; third, what means in the future can be undertaken to keep a tree healthy, that is, to prevent reinfection.

First, what the disease is, how it is caused, and how it may be recognized. The disease known as the chestnut tree blight is caused by the fungus, _Diaporthe parasitica_, which usually finds entrance to the tree through wounds in the bark. The mycelium or mass of fungous filaments gradually spreads through the bark in much the same manner as mold spreads over and through a piece of bread, even penetrating the wood to a depth of sometimes five annual rings. The spread of the fungus, resulting in the cutting off of the sap flow, is the immediate cause of the wilting and dying of the leaves and branch above the point of girdling. This wilting of the leaves, followed later by the death of one branch after another as the fungus spreads, has given rise to the term "blight" of the chestnut trees.

The danger signals which the chestnut tree displays when diseased are not a few. In summer, when the tree is first affected, the leaves turn yellow-green and wilt, later turning brown. Small burs and withered leaves retained in winter are some signs of the diseased condition of the tree. At the base of the blighted part a lesion, or reddish brown canker, is usually found. This lesion may be a sunken area or, as is frequently the case, a greatly enlarged swelling, known as a hypertrophy. After a branch has become completely girdled sprouts or suckers are very apt to be found below the point of girdling. In old furrowed bark on the main trunk of the tree the presence of the disease is seen in the reddish brown spore-bearing pustules in the fissures. In determining the presence of the fungus in the furrowed bark of old trees, one must learn to recognize the difference between the light brown color characteristic of fissures in healthy growing bark, and the reddish brown color of the fungus. When the disease has been present several years the bark completely rots and shrinks away from the wood, and when the bark is struck with an axe a hollow sound is produced.