STATE HOETICULTUEAL SOCIETY. 6 



read essays on the influence of scion on stock, and stock on scion, 

 presumably in answer to the Vaughan article. 



While Dennis's emits no uncertain sound, Burrill's seems to the 

 unscientific mind a little like the oracles of old — a foot on opposite 

 sides of the fence while neither touches — for, in conclusion, he 

 says: "It therefore seems that we may at least render a Scotch ver- 

 dict upon the question, and say ' not proved.' At the same time we 

 cannot deny the possibility of the occurrence, at least in some excep- 

 tional instances, of a radical constitutional change in either stock or 

 scion, from an influence exerted by the one upon the other." Yet 

 in the body of the article he says, " that life is a property of solid 

 rather than liquid matter, hence it is impossible that living proto- 

 plasm should be carried through plant tissues with the ascending or 

 descending sap." 



No more does the mother in animal life take up the living pro- 

 toplasm, and pass it through her veins with the ascending and de- 

 scending blood. But in that case a third party is formed, who suf- 

 fers by the taint which either party may have inherited. Suppose 

 animal life could be extended by grafting the body of one on to the 

 foot of another. Would anyone imagine for an instant that the 

 ascending and descending blood would not be affected by coming in 

 contact with a cancerous foot? Would not the ascending and de- 

 scending blood carry and distribute the disease, and affect the whole 

 system? Would we go to the hospital, the cider presses, for the foot? 

 Is there such a thing as blood poison? What is sap but the blood 

 of the plant? 



Further on he says: " It is, perhaps, necessary here to again ex- 

 clude the mere changes in vigor shown by plants on different stocks." 



That is just what is not intended for him or anyone else to do. 

 The whole discussion is like the play of Hamlet with Hamlet left 

 out. But he helps us out, for he adds, '' The stock and scion do 

 have reciprocal influence in the matter of nutrition, and the peculi- 

 arities of growth, fruitfulness, and the like." Exactly! That is 

 what is claimed; and had he stopped right there we would not have 

 been in so much doubt as to his views. But after citing numerous 

 cases to prove the truth of the above, he adds: " The fact is, in the 

 ordinary methods of propagating apples and pears, we confidently 

 proceed upon the assumption that the stock has no real or essential 

 influence upon the scion, otherwise it would be impossible to keep 

 true by present methods, any variety of fruit by grafting or budding. 

 The thousands of seedling stocks on which the Yellow Bellflower 

 has been grown would surely have spoiled the variety if each modi- 

 fied in the least the characteristics of the scion grafted upon it." 



That line of argument would seem to say, that because the fruit 

 is not thought to be changed, the constitution of the tree must re- 

 main unaffected. In this we are liable to be deceived. While the 



