arable land for the ordinary rotation of farm crops. The soil is a
sandy loam 9 or 10 in. deep, resting on a bed of Oxford Clay. Although
it contains a large proportion of sand, the land would generally be
termed very heavy, and the water often used to stand on it in places
for weeks together in a wet season. The tillage to which the ground
was subjected for the purposes of the fruit farm much improved its
character, and in dry weather it presents as good a tilth as could be
desired. Chemical analyses of the soil from different parts of the field
show such wide differences that it is admitted to be by no means an
ideal one for experimental purposes. Without entering upon further
details, it may be useful to give a summary of the chief results
obtained.
Apples have been grown and treated in a variety of ways, but of the different methods of treatment careless planting, coupled with subsequent neglect, has given the most adverse results, the crop of fruit being not 5% of that from trees grown normally. Of the separate deleterious items constituting total neglect, by far the most effective was the growth of weeds on the surface; careless planting, absence of manure, and the omission of trenching all had comparatively little influence on the results. A set of trees that had been carelessly planted and neglected, but subsequently tended in the early part of 1896, were in the autumn of that year only 10% behind their normally-treated neighbours, thus demonstrating that the response to proper attention is prompt. The growth of grass around young apple trees produced a very striking effect, the injury being much greater than that due to weeds. It is possible, however, that in wet years the ill-effects of both grass and weeds would be less than in dry seasons. Nevertheless, the grass-grown trees, after five years, were scarcely bigger than when planted, and the actual increase in weight which they showed during that time was about eighteen times smaller than in the case of similar trees in tilled ground. It is believed that one of the main causes of the ill-effects is the large increase in the evaporation of water from the soil which is known to be produced by grass, the trees being thereby made to suffer from drought, with constant deprivation of other nourishment as well. That grass growing round young apple trees is deleterious was a circumstance known to many horticulturists, but the extent to which it interferes with the development of the trees had never before been realized. Thousands of pounds are annually thrown away in England through want of knowledge of this fact. Yet trees will flourish in grass under certain conditions. Whether the dominant factor is the age (or size) of the tree has been investigated by grassing over trees which have hitherto been in the open ground, and the results appear to indicate that the grass is as deleterious to the older trees as it was to the younger ones. Again, it appears to have been demonstrated that young apple trees, at all events in certain soils, require but little or no manure in the early stages of their existence, so that in this case also large sums must be annually wasted upon manurial dressings which produce no effects. The experiments have dealt with dwarf trees of Bramley, Cox and Potts, six trees of each variety constituting one investigation. Some of the experiments were repeated with Stirling Castle, and others with standard trees of Bramley, Cox and Lane’s Prince Albert. All were planted in 1894–1895, the dwarfs being then three years old and the standards four. In each experiment the “normal” treatment is altered in some one particular, this normal treatment consisting of planting the trees carefully in trenched ground, and subsequently keeping the surface clean; cutting back after planting, pruning moderately in autumn, and shortening the growths when it appeared necessary in summer; giving in autumn a dressing of mixed mineral manures, and in February one of nitrate of soda, this dressing being probably equivalent to one of 12 tons of dung per acre. In the experiments on branch treatment, the bad effects of omitting to cut the trees back on planting, or to prune them subsequently, is evident chiefly in the straggling and bad shape of the resulting trees, but such trees also are not so vigorous as they should be. The quantity of fruit borne, however, is in excess of the average. The check on the vigour and growth of a tree by cutting or injuring its roots is in marked contrast with the effects of a similar interference with the branches. Trees which had been root-pruned each year were in 1898 little more than half as big as the normal trees, whilst those root-pruned every second year were about two-thirds as big as the normal. The crops borne by these trees were nevertheless heavy in proportion to the size of the trees. Such frequent root-pruning is not, of course, a practice which should be adopted. It was found that trees which had been carefully lifted every other year and replanted at once experienced no ill-effects from the operation; but in a case where the trees after being lifted had been left in a shed for three days before replanting—which would reproduce to a certain extent the conditions experienced when trees are sent out from a nursery—material injury was suffered, these trees after four years being 28% smaller than similar ones which had not been replanted. Sets of trees planted respectively in November, January and March have, on the whole, shown nothing in favour of any of these different times for planting purposes. Some doubt is thrown on the accepted view that there is a tendency, at any rate with young apple and pear trees, to fruit in alternate seasons.
Strawberries of eighty-five different varieties have been experimented with, each variety being represented in 1900 by plants of five different ages, from one to five years. In 1896 and 1898 the crops of fruit were about twice as heavy as in 1897 and 1899, but it has not been found possible to correlate these variations with the meteorological records of the several seasons. Taking the average of all the varieties, the relative weights of crop per plant, when these are compared with the two-year-old plants in the same season, are, for the five ages of one to five years, 31, 100, 122, 121 and 134, apparently showing that the bearing power increases rapidly up to two years, less rapidly up to three years, after which age it remains practically constant. The relative average size of the berries shows a deterioration with the age of the plant. The comparative sizes from plants of one to five years old were 115, 100, 96, 91 and 82 respectively. If the money value of the crop is taken to be directly dependent on its total weight, and also on the size of the fruits, the relative values of the crop for the different ages would be 34, 100, 117, 111 and 110, so that, on the Ridgmont ground, strawberry plants could be profitably retained up to five years and probably longer. As regards what may be termed the order of merit of different varieties of strawberries, it appears that even small differences in position and treatment cause large variations, not only in the features of the crop generally, but also in the relative behaviour of the different varieties. The relative cropping power of the varieties under apparently similar conditions may often be expressed by a number five or tenfold as great in one case as in the other. A comparison of the relative behaviour of the same varieties in different seasons is attended by similar variations. The varying sensitiveness of different varieties of strawberry plants to small and undefinable differences in circumstances is indeed one of the most important facts brought to light in the experiments.
Fruit Culture in Ireland.—The following figures have been kindly supplied by the Irish Board of Agriculture, and deal with the acreage under fruit culture in Ireland up to the end of the year 1907.
| 1. Orchard Fruit— | Statute Acres. |
| Apples | 5829 |
| Pears | 224 |
| Plums | 223 |
| Damsons | 138 |
| Other kinds | 129 |
| Total | 6543 |
| 2. Small Fruit— | |
| Currants, black | 234 |
| Currants, red and white | 159 |
| Gooseberries | 675 |
| Raspberries | 374 |
| Strawberries | 994 |
| Mixed fruit | 2470 |
| Total | 4906 |
It therefore appears that while Ireland grows only about one-thirty-third the quantity of apples that England does, it is nevertheless nearly 5000 acres ahead of Scotland and about 2000 acres ahead of Wales. It grows 41 times fewer pears than England, but still is ahead of Scotland and a long way ahead of Wales in this fruit. There are 70 times fewer plums grown in Ireland than in England, and about the same in Scotland, while Wales does very little indeed. In small fruit Ireland is a long way behind Scotland in the culture of strawberries and raspberries, although with currants and gooseberries it is very close. Considering the climate, and the fact that there are, according to the latest available returns, over 62,000 holdings above 1 acre but not exceeding 5 acres (having a total of 224,000 acres), it is possible fruit culture may become more prevalent than it has been in the past.
The Flower-growing Industry.—During the last two or three decades of the 19th century a very marked increase in flower production occurred in England. Notably was this the case in the neighbourhood of London, where, within a radius of 15 or 20 m., the fruit crops, which had largely taken the place of garden vegetables, were themselves ousted in turn to satisfy the increasing demand for land for flower cultivation. No flower has entered more largely into the development of the industry than the narcissus or daffodil, of which there are now some 600 varieties. Comparatively few of these, however, are grown for market purposes, although all are charming from the amateur point of view. On some flower farms a dozen or more acres are devoted to narcissi alone, the production of bulbs for sale as well as of flowers for market being the object of the growers.
In the London district the country in the Thames valley west of the metropolis is as largely occupied by flower farms as it is by fruit farms—in fact, the cultivation of flowers is commonly associated with that of fruit. In the vicinity of Richmond narcissi are extensively grown, as they also are more to the west in the Long Ditton district, and likewise around Twickenham, Isleworth, Hounslow, Feltham and Hampton. Roses come more into evidence in the neighbourhood of Hounslow, Cranford,
