The herald., 1896-12-05

eve print the above letter to show our
readers that the department at Wash
ington is taking an interest in Califor-
mia. The ladybir referred to are the
rhiZobia and twice tabbed.-Editor)
WEAKNESS.
The Los Angeles Herald of November
1st replies to the article published in the
Berkeleyan of October 16 written for the
purpose of explaining a malicious at
tack made by The Herald OF our Agri-
cultural department The Herald calls
on the Berkeleyan to retract its state
ments made in the above article, or to
prove them. The Berkeleyan sees no
reason for retraction and reiterates its
former position. The explanation u sed
by The Herald will show the paucity of
lheir own defense. Mr. Woodbridge
says in his defense that he never in
verted fertilizer. and that Prof. Hill
gard had recommended the fertilizer
, which he sells, and proves this by pub
( fishing a letter written by the professor.
But this only goes to prove that Mr..
Woodbridge is a manufacturer of fer
tilizers. even if his ability is not suffic
lent to invent them; and also that in one
particular case the fertilizer manufac-
tured (rot invented) by Mr.. Wood bridge
was of value But, Prof. Hilgard, un-
/ like some experts in fertilizers. is man
common fertilizer" to be used for all
| deficiencies in soil, is like "Morrison's
cure-al pill. e., it is not what it is
| cracked up to be.
| The fact that Prof Hilgard did rec
ommend a complete fertilizer" in the
| one case quoted, does tot prove the ade-
| quacy or its availability in a universal
| case. This has undoubtedly led Prof.
| Hilgard into rejecting such complete
] fertilizer on many occasions-hence
! this tale of woe by The Herald. Let us
ask one pertinent question here, before
leaving this part of our subject. If this
complete fertilizer is a panacea. that is
in its application to convert all soils,
finally to one universal best SOIL why
pay 500 an acre for one piece of land and
$40 a square mile for another? Either
/ this or the complete fertilZer-or some
! cure for-all deficiencies-must be ac-
knowledged to be of extremely limited
availability.
! Dropping this part of our subject, we
desire to acknowledge to Mr.. Wood
bridge that we appreciate his evident at
/ tempt at fairness by devoting a whole
! column to extolling the agricultural de-
J partment, by quoting letter written
by a Mr.. Henderson, which letter sets
/ FORTH to some extent, the great work
/ that Prof. Hilgard and his able col
leagues are doing for the agricultural in
dustries of this state. Mr. Woodbridge
/ prints this letter and then states that he
does this in order to give the college
the full benefit of all it can allege In
] its behalf" We are sorry to stat. now.
/ ever, on account of its implied reiiec
/ tion on Mr.. Woodbridges intellectual
acumen, that he thinks he has boWled
a strike against the agricultural de-
partment by aftsrward bringing for
ward two instances Zone of which is ab-
IL " n a re
in the agricultural business state equiv
ocally that the agricultural department
is impractical and OF. no use whatever.
Mr. Woodbridge evidently forgets that
the proof ofthe value of the agricultural
department to the state is not an induc-
tion to be invalidated and refuted by
one instance to the contrary. The de-
partment may not have been of any use
to Mr.. Bichowsky-we should not judge it
would be from the fact that he has al
ways refused to have anything TO do
with the college of agriculture or any
one connected with it.
Therefore We are not surprised that
Mr. B. has not profited by his opportuni-
ties. But we are free country, and no
compulsion can be brought to bear
AS regards the other instance which
states that the phylloxera was intro
duced into the state by Prof. Hilgard.
we desire to tsate right here that the
statement is false, and we hereby call
on the Herald Ito retract its charge or
produce the proof of it's assertion
There is no phylloxera on any of the
United States stations. and there never
was till years after it had spread over
the state. Prof. Hiigard, years ago. dis
covered the phyloXera elsewhere, ard
reported it to the viticultural commits
sion.
Some time after this the commission
aDOllShPd ha nh,
found at the door of the ex-chief viticul-
tural officer in Livermore valley.
we surmlse that the Inference from
this state of things is that the comnleta
fertilizer needs advertising: but we do
not think such publicity as it is likely 70
get IN TINS manner Will do it any good
Berkeleyan.
Berkeleyan has undertaken bv false
statements as to the agricultural editor
of the Herald and others to impugn their
motives and to parry the force of the
evidence produced. and to settle the
whole c>se by sundry allegations re-
spectlhg 1eftlizers, and other matters
quite as Irrelevant. The Agricultural
editor of the Herald is responsible only
tor what appears in his department of
the paper and the Berkeleyan sbould
have the fairness" to admit that II
can not find in the agricultural columns
OF the Herald anything to justify its
assertion lndt we nave accused Prof
Hilgard of having introduced the phv1l-
oXera into the state and as we have
made no such charge we have nothing tn
retract or prove. Our only reference
to the connection of Prof Hilgard with
the phylioXera was in the testimony of
Mr. Bichowsky. which we recuote side
by side with the perversion Of the Ber
keieyan in the deadly parallel column.
1he Herald gave the name and words
OF the person making such charge as
was made and is therefore relieved from
any further responsibility in the matter
We have every confidence in Mr.. Rich-
/ "wsky as an honorable and capable gen
tleman. we'll versed in his business and
| believe what he said to be the truth
''The phylloxeral prof. Hilgard was
/ was introduced into the direct cause Of
the state hv Prof the spread Of the
HilGard. The Ber- phylloxera by plant
keleyan charge ing, for experimental
against the Agricul-' purposes. infected
tural Editor of The vines.''-E,. c. Rich-
Herald. lowsky in Los Ange-
| les Herald.
With this disclaimer the editor. how
ever, frankly admits that he has not the
! intellectual acumen" to see the bear
ing of all this on the allegations against
! the college as falling in the great object
for which it exists. His intellectual
acumen" also fails him in trying to see
the connection between the worth of
i the college and the value of fertilizers.
! complete or otherwise. Let us have de-
! tails of crops and orchards which Prof.