FRUIT CATALOGUE, 359 



of the hardier fruits can be grown with success even to the north of Alpena, while 

 the central district can not be relied upon for the tender fruits for the counties 

 north of Gratiot. 



As will be seen from the rejected list that is placed at the end of the regular cata- 

 logue, a large number of sorts have been excluded. Many of them have shown 

 themselves unworthy to be longer carried in the regular list, while others have con- 

 siderable value and have for a long time been known, but hardly a tree can be 

 found in the state, and, moreover, they are not offered by any of the nurserymen. 

 By rejecting them we are able to reduce the number of sorts mentioned in the cata- 

 logue and thus lossen the confusion that a long list malies for many persons. The 

 foreign grapes and nectarines are so little grown that it was thought well to leave 

 them out, especially as no changes would have been made in the last list. 



NOMENCLATURE. 



The nomenclature used in this revision is in accordance with the "Rules of Pom- 

 ology" of the American Pomological Society, and several changes have been made 

 that bring the list in harmony with the names recommended by the Division of 

 Pomology of the Department of Agriculture. 



In preparing this list, errors have without doubt crept in and, that they may be 

 corrected in future lists, any person who notices any rating that is incorrect for a 

 given locality is urged to inform the writer. 



L. R. TAFT, 



Chairman of Committee on Revision of Catalogue. 

 Agricultural College, Aug., 1896. 



