Intercolonial Fruit Conference.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5279, 8 June 1895, Page 7

Intercolonial Fruit Conference.

From a summary of the proceedings at the Intercolonial Conference of Fruitgrower.-, held at Hobart at the end of April, contributed to the Melbourne Leader, the following is extracted : — -,

The first paper read, that by Mr A. H. Benson, tha fruit expert to the Department of Agriculture, Now South Wales, upon the general question of fruit production, ably dealt with a wide field of inquiry, including suitable Boils, best varieties of f ruito to plant, how to properly cultivate the soil and keep it clean and in good heart, together with a valuable disquisition, upon the proper classea of fertilisers to use, in order to combine effectiveness with economy. In stocks suitable for fruit trees, Mr C. T. Cole, of the Richmond nursery, Victoria, found a congenial subject in which he gave the conference the benefit of his many years valuable experience in connection with the moat desirable stocks for the apple, apricot, peach, plum and pear. As all who know him will be prepared to fully understand, Mr G. E. Neilson, the curator of the Boyal Horticultural Society's Gardens, Melbourne, gave a most interesting and instructive address under the heading of " Fruit-growing in Victoria, Past and Present," in which he describes bow the industry had advanced by leaps and bounds during recent yeara. Under the bonuees the area under fruit trees had increased in 1893 from a former 1939 acres to 31,370 acres, and iv 1894 to 42,463 acres. A finer collection of the edible fruits of commerce produced in the open air, Mr Neilson quite rightly claimed, would be difficult to find anywhere than that at Burnley, whence in 1894,100,000 cuttings, all proved and correct to name, had been distributed to growers, not only throughout Victoria, but also all the other colonies. " Fruit-growing," said Mr Neilson, at the conclusion of his paper, " is one of the most pleasant, and, if properly managed, one of the moat remunerative of . all rural industries." Mr C. E. Draper selected for the subject of his paper a description of his experiences in the growing of filberts and other nuts. The walnut, in Mr Draper's opinion, would be found one of the most profitable productions in the mountainous regions. Valuable as Mr Draper's addreßS was on thia special subject, the variety of his practical knowledge was illustrated in his contributions to the variqus discussions. In the debate upon Mr Benson'e paper he emphasised the value of the common plum, as it could be put to so many purposes, including distilling. Mr L. S. Christie, of Gippsland, on the subject of Shelter Trees had found the cherry plum the best for that put pose, in addition to its own merits. Mr Corrie, of Queensland, deprecated burning on the ground, owing to the return of potash not being sufficient to make up for the damage done to the soil, especially when rich in humus. Mr J. P. Carolin, of Bendigo, advocated planting only those kinds of trees for Bhelter whioh were of commercial value, and urged the avoidance of thoße noted for harbouring insect pests. Mr A. Molyneux, South Australia, advocated the planting; of suoh shelter trees as grew most quickly, and met with a divided opinion in the conference in the strong emphasis he laid upon the mistake of too deeply ploughing and cutting the surface roots of trees, thus forcing them down too deeply in the subsoil. Mr Swan, Wangaratta, submitted the proposition that there was something to say in favour of deep ploughing to cause the roots to send out fresh fibres for the nourishment of the tree. Mr Molyneux endorsed Mr Draper's remarks on the walnut. They were worth Gd per lb in Adelaide. The Eev E. H. Thompson, of Tasmania, contributed some of his practical experience in connection with the value of the pear as a good permanent fruit to be depended upon, but he found there were varieties which did not fertilise their own kind. The three which were specially incapable of fertilising their own blossoms were the Winter Nelis, Williams's Bon Chretien and Gansell's Bergamot. This he thought was a point tbat required attention. Mr H. B. Whittell, New South Wales, opened up an interesting proposition sb to i the necessity for a better knowledge of tbe effect of tho plant on the scion in selecting stocks for grafting. He had observed that trees which thrived on one kind of stock in ono garden failed altogether upon the same stock in another location. Mr W. E. Shoobridge, Tasmania, found the Holland berry as an apple stock most successful, and described some of his experiences in connection with irrigation. Fruit grown by irrigation to be successful required plenty cf sun heat. Mr J. Williams, Queensland, found that plums grafted on peach stocks, and oranges on lem.n stocks, did not deteriorate, and the best pear stock in Queensland was the China pear. Mr Wills, Tasmania,

83 an experienced shipper of apples, iv reply to a question a3 to which woto the best Borts for exportation, tskicgoarly shipping, carrying capabilities, and value in the London market into account, pu. Stunners first, and after these Scarlets, Crabs and New York Pippins, in tho order named. Mr T. Barnett, Tasmania.tjjfound Eibstones carried well and mntured early. He also commended the New Fork Pippin and Adams's Perainain. The Eev E. H. Thompson Eaid the. last two Epoakcrs emphasised theneed of propemomenclatnrc. What they called thwNew York Pippin waa really the Cleopatra, snd that described as Adams's Pearmain was t h King of the Pippins, or Hampshire Yellow. Ac a Tasmanian ehippor of eomo experience, Mr Shoobridge placed Stunners first. Scarlet Nonpir.ilu next ; then the New York Pippin (or aa if* should be called, the Cleopatra), aud Bibstones and French Crabß fourth and fifth. One thing abont the Stunners, however, waß they required more moisture in growing than any other apple he knew. I>lr Benson, returning to the subjected shelter, condemned hawthorn hedge 3 as tho vt-iy worst orchard fences for harbouring insooc pests, especially the pear tree blu.*-. In this opinion he had the conferencj unanimously with him. Mr Corrie, of Queensland, in his paper upon fruit transportation, dealt elaborately with hia subject in all its phases from the orchard to the buyer. On the question of marketing he advocated combination of tha growers, instancing the Florida Ex**han?e, which did not receive and pack for growers, and then ship to commisEion men, but itsalf Baw to the transport and rale of thn fruit in all desirable markets, and claimed that it thereby' created competition of buyers in place of a competition of sellers as was the result under the present eysU ni. Mr Peacock, Tasmania, dealt with fruit ricking, and took up a position n;t c hily to be controverted in hvs ar^-u---•i ont that packing to be done properly must be at first hand in the orchard. Which was the better Byatem, refrigeration or ventilation for ocean transit of fruit; ? was ably dealt with in a paper by Mr Shoobridge, Tasmania. The main requirement for safe fruit transit, he contended, was perfect ventilation, plenty of freßh r.ir. The fruit should be stored i&\ a ventilated chamber three weeks befoto shipping. Then in the hold, the trua** remedy waß to cool the air, to, say, 40deg. which would condense the moisture, especially in the tropics, and pass it gently through the apples in a constant, tut slow, draught, whioh must bo thorough i i 'every part. Indirect cooling, that is passing the air through a cool chamber, before being drawn through the hold by the fan was alike the oheapest and moat effective method. In the discussion Mr Joseph Harris, Victoria, endorsed Mr Shoobridge's conclusions and quoted an instance of Mr Draper Bending 97 varieties of apples to the Philadelphia Exhibition in thia way, and only two or three epeoimena went bad. There was no refrigerating plant on the ship. Mr T. Jessup, New i-'Outh Wales, laid Btress upon the need of Government eupervision aa to grading, packing and quality, in order to ensure a good name on the markets, in which the conference fully cononrred. Mr Norman Steele, Sydney, read a very interesting paper, treating the subject of cold storage from an engineer's point of view, whioh was supplemented by an address from Mr J. C. Blackmore, Government Pomologißt, NewZealand, on the same subjeot, illustrated hy the latest American experiences. " The Fruit Industry of Australasia" was tha ambitions title of a paper jointly contributed by Messrs Wilahire and Whittell, but its interest was slightly marred by prolixity, while there seemed a little too much anxiety to import into ib party politics to please the majority of the delegates. Mr W. Souttar, Queensland, in a v.ell-thonght-out contribution upon " Fruit Distribution," remarked that Australian fruit-growers were unanimous in striving towards best production, but when it came to distribution they were purely individualistic. He advocated combination for distribution, arguing that the existing competition amongst sellers was the primary cause of low prices. By the preßenfc nyßtom tha arower.nroduc.ed fruit, and competed against himself in the market. Mr Joseph Harris, Victoria, in a paper upon " Fruit Markets/ did not see mneh prospect of business in the East. In Great Britain and the large continental cities, Australian fruit growers would find their best markets. In Great Britain the fruit demand was yearly inoreaoing, and if the Cape could ahip peaches to England, retaining their bloom, and realisiug up to 12b a case, he did not know why we should not do the same. A paper by Mr T. B. Walker, of the firm of Edward Jacobs and Son, upon the English markets, waa forcibly criticised by Mr Jeßßup in his description that "it was an excellent paper in favour of the middleman," and Mr W. S. Hampson, New Zealand, followed with a plea for the -establishment of what he called a Bureau of Commerce, by which he thought the sub-tidies paid to mail steamers might be shared in by th* cargo boats to the great advantage of tbe export trade generally. Mr Year, Viotoria, argued for combinations to g*et more directly to the consumer. His own experience aa a oherry grower waa that he had only begun to make a living since opening up a trade with the retailer direot. Mr Albury, Tasmania, contributed some striking facte from hiß own experience illustrative of the way in which the producer under present conditions did all the work, and the nonproducing exchanger, practically, took the money. Mr Bovill, Tasmania, said if the London costerß could place apples on their barrows at 4d pcs lb there would be an enormous sale for Australian fruit/ but this would never be done ai long as the Covent Garden " rings " existed. Mr G. B. Edwards, Sydney, handled the subject of fruit preservation most ably, and in the course of a paper which dealt exhaustively with all the details, referred particularly to the procesi of crystallising fruit as one that offered an excellent field for light and profitable em. ployment requiring but little capital, the raw material not costing more than onefifth of the price obtainable for the finished article. Four years' experience with the codlin moth and suggested remedies waa the subject chosen by Mr G. W. Water, house, Tasmania, in which he noted the failure of the Tasmanian Act, and from ■ long practical experience g&ve directions, which Bhould be published at length in the proposed handbook of the proceed* ingß as a standard esiay on .hit important subject. Various phases of the insect pest question, including Valuable experiments in spraying, and the best mixtures to use, were treated in papers read by Mr Year and the Bey E. H, Thompson, the discussion on these subjects being mainly sustained by Mr Innes, of Franklyn; Mr Shoobridge; Mr Campbell. New South Wales; Mr Mornington, the Inspector under the Codlin Moth Aot ; the President, Mr Pi esse; Mr Locke, Tasmania; Messrs Bnson and William*. Queensland; Mr Molyneux, Mr Hampson, Mr Bovill and Mr Year. On a motion that "all restrictive tariffs on fruits be removed between the colonies," the inevitable Mt West, of Triple Beform fame, was in cvi. dence, but his assertion " that a 10,000 per cent duty would not benefit fruitgrowerß," met with tbe reverse of an enthusiastic response. Mr Molyneux, "although a freetrader to the backbone, could not accept the motion." Mi Blackmore, New Zealand, strongly advised the conference "to drop the motion." The president "thought it would be better to refer it to the next conference." The motion waa eventually carried in _an amended form, in whioh the political aspect of the question was dropped. A committee of three delegates from each colony was appointed to deal with the nomenclature of the apples shown at the exhibition, comprising Messrs Thompson, Walker and Shoobridge for Tasmania; Benson, Walters and Jeesup for Kew South Wales; Neilaon, William** aud Draper for Victoria; Molyneux, Harris and Wills for South Australia; Blackmore, Palmer and Hampson fir New Zealand; and Corrie and Bailey for Queensland. The concluding resolution was-"" That the next conference should be held in New Zealand."