THE POMOLOGICAL CONVENTION AT NEW- YORK. 



BY YARDLEY TAYLOR, LOUDON COUNTY, VA. 



Being a lover of good fruit, and desiring 

 to see its cultivation extended, I have read 

 with interest the articles in the Horticultu- 

 rist, and other kindred publications, on this 

 subject, as well as the proceedings of the 

 late Fruit Convention at New-York. That 

 convention, as a body, could hardly be ex- 

 pected to perform, in one session, all that 

 it may ultimately accomplish, even in any 

 one department. It may be justly said to 

 have made only a beginning. Yet, if no 

 other benefit should be obtained than the 

 personal information imparted, at the time, 

 most, if not all, of its members would be 

 amply repaid for the expense and time 

 spent while in attendance. Every member 

 of that convention seemed to manifest not 

 only a willingness, but a desire, to impart 

 to others all the information he possessed 

 in relation to fruit, its culture, &c. This 

 was one of the most pleasing features ex- 

 hibited; and must be looked back upon 

 with much satisfaction by all its mem- 

 bers. 



The official acts of the coijvention have 

 elicited commendation from the public press 

 generally ; yet, in some cases, justice has 

 hardly been done to its motives. In a late 

 number of the Cultivator, in an article al- 

 luding to the small number of fruits recom- 

 mended for general cultivation, the infer- 

 ence would seem to be made, that the com- 

 mittee, to whom the subject was referred, 

 had hardly done its dutj^, or that there were 

 no other fruits worthy of general cultiva- 

 tion ; for with all the talent and ability of 

 that committee, they could not agree upon 

 a larger number, — as scarcely one variety 

 could be named, but what some objection 



was made to it, in one section or other. 

 Whether this inference was intended or 

 not, it struck me as doing the committee- 

 injustice. I well remember the report of 

 that committee ; and that was, that from 

 the nature of the subject referred to them, 

 and the necessaril)^ limited time of the com- 

 mittee, they could not, at present, give the 

 subject all the attention the importance of 

 it demanded ; but they would make a be- 

 ginning, and report a small number of fruits, 

 such as were generally known, and that, at- 

 some future time, the list might be in- 

 creased until it should include all worthy 

 of cultivation. This was all the committee 

 could do at the time ; and no one, who was 

 a witness of their labors, would say that 

 they were idle. 



A member of the convention urged upon 

 its consideration the propriety of a commit- 

 tee, to bring in a list of recommended fruits, 

 as also a list of rejected fruits. This pro- 

 position was considered premature by the 

 convention. 



Dr. Valk, of Flushing, has been enter- 

 taining the readers of the Horticulturist, in 

 advocating a great reduction of the varie- 

 ties in the catalogues of most nurserymen ; 

 and appearing to infer, that from the great 

 number enumerated they could not all be 

 good ; and that it was hardly honest, or at 

 least, not right to keep so large a number 

 in cultivation. But in a late number, the 

 Dr. has an interesting " Chapter on Pears," 

 in which he gives an extract from a cor- 

 respondent in Belgium, whom he had re- 

 quested to give him a list of those " he 

 knew to be the best in that country." The 

 quotations from that correspondent are va- 



