AND HORTICULTURIST. 



223 



of translation of the French name. As to " Beau- 

 fin," it is hardly likely Frenchmen would give 

 it this name, as " beau" and " fin" have exactly 

 the same meaning as we understand them. One 

 old author writes the name " Norfolk Boeufin/' 

 as if he had the French for beef in mind. The 

 earliest writer, we find, who refers to this apple, 

 is Thomas Hitt, who wrote in the beginning of 

 the last century. In the text he calls it the 

 Baflin apple, but as the French apple — Pomme- 

 gris is written in the same work Pomme Gree, 

 we must not look on him as an authority in or- 

 thography. 



Forsyth, in 1781, seems the first to use the 

 word " Beaufin," and this is followed by Lind- 

 ley in his " Guide to the Orchard," but without 

 any other reason that we can see. One hundred 

 years ago it was written by various persons 

 Norfolk Beefing, Lincolnshire Beefing, Yorkshire 

 Beefing, Cat^head Beaufin, and Read's Baker — 

 the numerous names at that time seeming to 

 indicate that its history had even then been 

 lost. 



From all these considerations it seems very 

 difficult to get at the correct term. Perhaps 

 some of our European contemporaries, with a 

 better command of reference books than we can 

 have at this distance, may be able to settle the 

 question. 



Since the above wa3 written, we have the fol- 

 lowing note from Mr. Dow'ning : 



" ' The name of this apple is sometimes written 

 Beaufin, as if of French origin ; but it is more 

 correctly Beefing, from the similarity the dried 

 fruit presents to beef.'— (Hogg.) 



"These Beefins, or Biffins, may do very well 

 for Englishmen, but the Americans prefer canned 

 or dessicated or evaporated fruits, and the Fall 

 Pippin, for this purpose, is much superior to 

 Norfolk Beaufin."— Ed. G. M.] 



The Eukopean and Americax Chestnut. — 

 " F. L. S," asks whether the American and Euro- 

 pean chestnuts are varieties of the same thing, 

 and in what part of Europe the chestnut is na- 

 tive? We give the answer under our literary 

 column, because the question is rather one for 

 history to solve. It is hard to say, in the ordi- 

 nary sense of the word " native," whether the 

 European chestnut is native there. It is wild 

 there, and there seems to be evidence that it has 

 been wild for at least 3,000 years. Some believe, 

 however, that it was not known in Europe till 

 brought from Thessaly, and the Latin name, 



Castanea, is supposed to be derived from a Gre- 

 cian town of that name, near which it is believed 

 they once abounded. 



The chestnut is found in Japan, as well as in 

 the United States. As to whether the American, 

 Eurox^ean and Japanese forms are vaiicties of 

 one thing, or distinct species, it is hard to say. 

 If we adopt Mr. Darwin's idea of natural selec- 

 tion, a species is nothing but a collection of in- 

 dividuals which have departed by variation from 

 some central form, and in which the collecting 

 links have been lost. It depends, on this view, 

 how many links have been lost — that is to say, 

 how far one form is removed from another form, 

 whether it is to be considered a variety or spe- 

 cies. The relationships of these chestnuts are 

 so close that they must be regarded as on the 

 border line, and possibly eminent botanists 

 would hardly be unanimous in placing them as 

 species. 



The European chestnut is more nearly allied 

 to the Japan form than to the American. It is 

 probable that in the long, long ago, there was 

 but one form — that the Japan and American 

 colonies became isolated perhaps from the great 

 ocean being formed between them, and by this 

 very long time have assumed separate charac- 

 teristics, just as a colony of isolated human 

 beings do ; that since — perhaps long since — this 

 event the chestnut has gradually travelled from 

 Asia to Europe, and that because this is more 

 recent than the separation of the American 

 colony, there has not been time for as great a 

 departure as in the case of the American form. 

 After all, the difierence between native or indige- 

 nous, and introduced or wild, is merely one of 

 time. All things in this world are on their 

 travels, and it is quite likely every few thousand 

 years the character of the vegetation in any one 

 place becomes completely changed. 



CKnicisMS ON other Magazines. — ''S. F." 

 sends an article controverting some statements 

 made in another magazine. The paper is well 

 written, and the criticisms are temperate and 

 seem just, but us probably few of our readers 

 have seen the paper criticised, and we have no 

 room to reprint it in our own, the readers of the 

 Gardener's Monthly will not be able to judge 

 understandingly of the merits of the contro- 

 versy. For this reason we have done as our 

 correspondent re<iuests, given " the reason, if 

 declined." It is not, as he supposes, "fear of 

 offending the other magazine." 



