A grower's opinions.

THE question of low prices of fruit discussed by C. W. Idell in the February Garden, is most important, though I differ with him on some points. He is undoubtedly right in condemning the practice of shipping poor fruit to the cities; he wisely advises growers to plant less acres, to devote more care to securing fruit of better quality. The grower has tried the plan of growing large, fine-flavored berries, packing in neat, new packages full to the top, putting pretty green leaves on to make the fruit look well, has written the name of the variety on the package and stenciled his own name on the crate as a guarantee of good faith, and all to little avail.

You make a shipment, receive a dispatch telling you your fine fruit has sold well and to "ship heavy tomorrow." You feel encouraged, but when a day or so latter you learn that your fine Sharpless strawberries have sold at the same price as your neighbor's small and soft Crescents, inferior in every respect, you fail to see why if the "taste of the consumer has become so much more cultivated " for fine fruit of good quality, you did not get an advanced price. These are facts from the grower's standpoint. I know that the huckster gets an advanced price and that the consumer pays it, but the point is, does the grower receive the benefit he should ? I think not.

When five crates of choice berries from a small grower have to sell fifty crates of inferior ones from a larger grower, I fail to see how the small grower can continue to grow choice berries that do not yield half the quantity of the smaller ones per acre, and for which he receives the same price. To make choice fruit plentiful in the city markets, the grower must receive an advance price for his superior product, and when he does not he will continue to grow the ones that give the most quarts per acre, regardless of size or quality. The commission men are always on the lookout for the man who has the largest berry fields or orchards, and to keep his trade, in western vernacular, they will "stand in with him." In order to do this, they usually manage to sell his inferior product at the same price as they do some one of his neighbor's choice, well-graded stock. That this is a fact, hundreds are ready to prove.

As to the packing of fruit, especially peaches, commission men and buyers have done more to break up honest packing on this peninsula than any one else and have only themselves to blame for it. They positively refused to buy peaches through the exchange last sum-mer, because they claimed that a grower had no right to put a price on his fruit himself and should accept just what the buyer offered. As the result, some growers, seeing their peaches were not dumped, packed in any way so that the big fruit was on top, and the buyer got the benefit of it. When peaches were sold through the exchange a sworn inspector dumped enough baskets to show the buyer that the fruit was honestly packed. and he saw just what he was buying. Now he takes them at haphazard. As a result, Wyoming, so long celebrated for its finely-packed fruit, furnishes as much inferior stock as can be found anywhere. As further evidence that the grower is not fairly dealt with by the commission man, a paper read before the New Jersey Horticultural Society will show.

The writer, Mr. W. H. Goldsmith, heartly condemns the practice of selling "different producers' goods in lump lots, and the pilfering allowed in the stores, in consequence of which the value of many fruit packages is reduced one-half." Your correspondent says "shippers show the utmost indifference to the whole matter." I cannot agree with him. Some growers are indifferent, but as a whole our best fruit-growers always inform the commission man by telegram what he may expect and follow his advice to the letter. Suffice it to say that if the commission man will only return to the grower just what his product sells for, the grower will gladly and promptly unite with him in correcting such abuses as poor varieties and bad packing. C. W.

Sussex Co.. Del.