28 ORIGIN OF THE APPLE TREE. 



of the variety, I went with Charles Edwin. Esq., to Eclose, 

 in hopes of seeing the primo-genus of this family. The 

 proprietor of the estate acquainted Mr. Edwin that it had 

 ceased to bear, years ago, and was cut down. Those at Ross 

 are but poor bearers now, and I shall suppose the variety must be 

 one hundred and forty years old, though Marshal who wrote in the 

 year 1786, mentions these trees were prolific, and he supposes 

 the sort to be about 80 years old ; but from present expe- 

 rience, it must be much more. The Tinton Squash Pear is 

 of Gloucestershire ; the Barland and Old-field were near Led- 

 bury, Herefordshire. The two last pears clearly bear the 

 names of the two fields where they were raised. The Bar- 

 land fell about six years ago, visibly from weight and lon- 

 gevity, which was supposed to have been about 200 years. There 

 have been many other names of estimation handed down to 

 us, though the realities are now totally worn out, and have 

 ceased to exist. Can any better proof be desired, that en- 

 grafted fruits are not permanent, than the regret we feel for 

 the loss of these old valuable fruits. 



" To making my paper short as convenient, I have dwelt 

 only on the apple ; yet all the engrafted fruits are under 

 the same predicament of the seed not producing its like, and 

 the offspring in time falling into nothingness of growth, and 

 bearing, though that space of time must certainly depend on 

 the natural longevity and hardiness of the sort, soil, position, 

 care, &c. All these are more fully expressed in the papers 

 published in the different volumes of the transactions of this 

 Society, and the two volumes of the Orchardist, wherein the 

 whole system is extended, to form a rational culture for the 

 management of standard fruits. 



" It should be remembered, that, as I am now alluding to 

 the state of actual permanency, fifty years are to be counted 

 as nothing ; and, as often as we come to that point, we are 

 compelled to resort to our first assertion : ^' That engrafted 

 fruits are not permanent, they being continued from elonga- 

 tions, and not raised as a repetition of seeds. This is the 

 only rational way, as yet introduced, of accounting for the 

 loss of the valuable, old varieties of fruits. Should a better 



