312 



THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 



[October i, 1882. 



so ruinously afif^'Ot d. lieural as has been the dis- 

 coura^ement oi a^riculcure id r-hunst ;iil eouritrit^a 

 during thf lust drtCade, torae piojncts h v- e3c;:peJ, 

 or havK ai leist ei joyel cumpmalive immuuity from 

 th>3 inrtiCtiuu which has scnictt-u our coUbi'. I', 

 the efi.re, our •■■■ tates had been dcvolwl to »everal. 

 iusteaci of beiug exclusively occupied with one pro.luct, 

 we mi;^ht have t-iijoyed at least a partial prosperity, 

 and fhould uot have suffered such total di-comtiture. 

 But it is uot merely as a matter of jiolicy that our 

 too exc'usioe cultivation cjf one product has been cou- 

 denmed. It is ad'luctd as a cause of the prevdling 

 loss of fruitbeariug power ot our coft'ee ti'ees ! In 

 what manner this has been brought about is not 

 stated. The authors of this dootnue do not appear 

 to have considered it necessary to connect the means 

 with the end. It has been expected to carry coiivcti'jn 

 and to need no enforcement. A very sagacioa.>< planter 

 of my acquaintance furnishes the only argument I 

 have ever heard advanced in its favour. This g-'Utle- 

 man has very consistently, and for several years past, 

 divided his attention upon several products ; and 

 has therefore profited substant ally by his belief in 

 the hyp'thesis that a country can only produce a 

 certain quantity of any one product. Ceylon, for 

 examjiile, on his theory, can only yield, say, a 

 million cwts. Be3'una this stipulated natural caj^abil- 

 ity it would, he believes, be impossible to stretch 

 the power of the country to produce coffee. Even 

 though the whole island were planted up with 

 coliee it could not yield more than the prescribed 

 million cwts. ! This theory seems to be based upon 

 the opposition that somcthiny U'cessar^' for the pro- 

 duction of coffee has been dealt out to Ceylon in 

 certain measure, and that we have overdrawn the 

 account ! It reminds me that I once heard from a 

 highly-intelligent and well-informed fnend, who had 

 resided in a sugar-f;rowing country, that, after the 

 cultivation there had extended till the crop attained 

 an aggregate of, say, half-a-million hhds., all attempts 

 to raise the crop beyond that quantity failed entirely, 

 though the area of cultivation was more than doubled ! 

 It ii not possible to confute a tneoiy of this kind. 

 It miyht indeed be true ! If, however, for the sake 

 of argument, we were to accept this hypothesis, it 

 would not fit our case H id all our subsequent 

 crops, alter we had reached our million allowance, 

 continued to average about that quantity, irrespective 

 of largely-extended area of cultivation, we might 

 have inquired further about the theory ; but it fails 

 to account for the sudden change wh'ch came over 

 our coffee trees in 1871, and for the reduction of our 

 total crop during the decade to a quarter of the 

 prescribed allowance. Why tliis curtailment of our 

 credit by li per cent ? This is precis -ly what we want 

 to know, and this theory does uot help us ! Indeed, it 

 Would hardly have been worth meutiDn, except to thow 

 how unsatistving are all attempts yet madt' to account 

 for the ailment of our trees and to what extremities we 

 are reduced to find an adequate origiuating c.uise ! 

 Then there are tho^e, a goodly number, who lay 

 the whole hlame of our misfortune on inhreedinrj ! 

 We are righily served, say they, for having oeglected 

 to import fresh seed. We really cannot omit to 

 notice this complaint. 



The degenerative tendency of successive crops from 

 seed g'Owu on the same soil is on all hands admit- 

 ted. If, therefore, we could be convicted of having 

 made i^o grievous >i mistake we siiould deserve blame, 

 twhether the ev Is we suffer were or were not the 

 Ipenalty of i ur fult. Hut is it a, fact that we have 

 irai>-ed sntcesst'e crops by sowing; and ie»owing tlie 

 seed so r dsed in the same soil ? 



Cer anily not. The accusation (■riginates with a 

 total miSAiipliuaiion of principle. The theory ai^plies 

 to_aimual plants, raised from year to ^ear, throUj,h 



many successive generations, from seeds sown and re- 

 sown on the same lands on wliieh they were grown ; 

 and is not applicable to perennial trees ; unless to a 

 very sliL;ht degre. We have yet amongst our 

 plautntinus the very identic d plan's, living a:id fruit- 

 ing which were produced from the first imported 

 seed I We are even yet sowing the seed from these 

 very trees, and are in so far, in the very first gener- 

 ation of direct descent from the prim-'vals ! Possibly 

 some of the later school of plmtcs may have been 

 less careful ret;arding the sources from > hioli they 

 h.ave derived their seed and plants, but formerly 

 tlie selection of seed and the sources from whence 

 it came were habitually regarded as of primary 

 importance. The same care is still exercised by 

 many at least of the modern school, if indeed 

 t has beeu vvholly neglected by any. The seed from 

 he older plantations, whose pro luo; had .an estab- 

 i^lied character in the London market, was alwavs 

 n high request, and continues to be so still. It 

 follows tliat a very large proportion of our coffee 

 trees are but first descendants from the trees of im- 

 ported seed ! Moreover, within my own knowledge 

 planters have imported seed from Mocha and else- 

 where. Amongst my earliest recollections relevant to 

 this S'lbject was a prediction of an old planter about 

 1847 regarding two contiguous estates, of which he 

 prognosticated that one would be a flour. shing 

 property after the other should have died out. 

 The prophecy was based on the fact that one 

 had been planted from the nurserj' and the other 

 from the villages. I have lived to see that prediction 

 Verified. Villa^'e plants were in those days strongly 

 denounced, and few planters would then have in- 

 curred the odium of resorting to such a source for 

 their supply of plants. 



It follows- from the foregoing scrap of history that, 

 even supposing some of the younger estates may have 

 been grown from seed which had passed through two 

 or thiee descents ; and, granting that here and there 

 some of tlie older fields were planted from native seed, 

 inbreeding to this limited extent, even if the term could 

 with any propriety be applied to the case, . ould uot 

 account for the sudden change of our prospects in 

 1871, nor for the universal infliction from A'hich we 

 are now sufferiUL'. Still, it would be a useful lesson to 

 som- planters of this present period, if theycould see the 

 fastidious care «ith which planters of old selected their 

 plants and watched their coolies planting ihem. Had the 

 same discrimination and care been exercised in select- 

 ing and planting cinchona as were observed in regard 

 to our oldest coffee plantations, the result would very 

 .imply have repaid the pains and sacrifice they would 

 have entailed. It is probably to this care and per- 

 sonal supervision that we may attribute the fine 

 luxuriant fields of coffee still extant on our oldest 

 estates. But alas ! these have shared the same fate 

 as the younger generations, and we are tberefoie forced 

 to search for causes more applicable than inbreeding 

 to our case, if we are to account satisfactorily for the 

 origin of our present mi-fortune. 



Imperfect fertilization, ascribed to the supposed 

 deer -ase in the number of bees about the estates, has been 

 suggested as a po-sible cause ot failure of fruit. And, 

 though I have not heard of many disciples of this doctrine, 

 it is by no means unworthy of notice, not only because 

 of its bearing on the natural method ot fertilization 

 of coffee blossom, but became it has an interesting 

 relation to recent unfavourable blossoming seasons. 

 The fact is I hat, lowing to the relative position of 

 anthers and stigma of the coffee fl iwer. no foreign 

 agency whatever seems ti be i.eeessiry to the fertil- 

 iz ng process. N r. indeed, is it requisite for the 

 pu'p'isc of impiegnation that the flower fliould ever 

 open. This fact renders the process of liyb' i.lizat.iou 

 and crossing in the case of the coffee jilaut extremely . 



