306 



THE GARDENER'S MONTHLY 



[October, 



SCRAPS AND QUERIES. 



Hansell and Superb Raspberries. — S. C. 

 DeCou, Moorestown, N. J., writes: "I see by 

 Gardener's Monthly for September the Han- 

 sell raspberry, reported to have ripened June 

 4th, and the Superb, June 30th. I think thee 

 has got different years mixed. I was at the 

 meeting of June 27th, at Hansell's, and the ber- 

 ries, ripe ones, were not very thick, but were 

 said to have been a few scattering ones for a 

 week before — not three weeks. I have no inter 

 est in one berry more than another, but I think 

 this puts our friend Churchman to a disadvan- 

 tage, and it would seem only fair to set him 

 straight." 



Hansell and Superb Raspberries. — Mr. 

 Churchman, Burlington, N. J., writes: " I don't 

 mean to growl, nor wish to be considered as 

 growling, but I cannot help feeling a little an- 

 noyed at the tenor of a couple of editorial briefs 

 in the Gardener's Monthly for September, 

 which appear to be penned under an evident 

 misapprehension of facts ; and as they are in 

 such close juxtaposition as to lead to, and to 

 seem to be intended as, a comparison between 

 two raspberries (the Hansell and Superb), con- 

 vey a wrong impression and one which does me 

 some injustice. You state that the Superb com- 

 menced picking on 30th of June, and the Han- 

 sell 'this season,' June 4th, and for market 

 June 11th. Now the proprietor of the latter 

 only claims this as the fact in 1880, in which 

 year the ' Superb' picked June 16th. This sea- 

 son, which is fully three weeks later than that 

 of 1880, as any one who has seen the Hansell 

 can tell you, it did not pick until June 26th. Is 

 it at all likely that if they had picked for market 

 June 11th, they would have waited until the 

 27th before inviting those ' eminent fruit grow- 

 ers' to see the show? I don't care a straw about 

 that postprandial resolution in regard to the 

 Hansell. I don't look upon it as in competition 

 with my child, and never should have noticed it 

 had they left my name out. For me to say that 

 I ' don't consider the Hansell any way superior 

 to the Superb,' would be 'damning' the latter 

 'with very faint praise.' But this thing of earli- 

 ness is a matter that everybody is looking after, 

 and it is important that no misapprehension 

 should be propagated in regard to it. The Su- 

 perb picked this year June 29th, within three 

 days of the other, and I am quite confident that 



if I had cultivated for fruit instead of for canes, 

 it would have been, and will be always, under 

 like cultivation, quite as early. The only point 

 of superiority I yield to the Hansell is in carry- 

 ing quality, which, being in consequence of its 

 .small lobes and great number of seeds, is at the 

 expense of flavor, &c. As to all other points 

 my opinion, which is altogether ex parte, cannot 

 interest j'ou ; but time — perhaps too late for 

 much profit to myself— will vindicate my claims 

 for the Superb, all of which are stated in my 

 circulars. 



"It is perhaps needless for me to say that I 

 don't write this for publication, but as I know 

 you would not knowingly misstate anything, 

 and as I equally well know that you are in error 

 as to this one matter of the Hansell's claim to 

 earliness ' this season,' I owe it to myself, as well 

 as to you, and to all fruit growers, to set you 

 right. Pardon me a few words more. In my 

 circular are testimonials from three of the gen- 

 tlemen who were at that meeting, and who will 

 bear testimony to what I say above, and another 

 one of them expressed to me the opinion that 

 my one and one half acres of Superb would turn 

 off more fruit this season than the whole ten 

 acres on the Hansell farm. 



" Mr. Child, of the Farm and Garden, who 

 reported the proceedings of that meeting, will 

 also testify that on the 27th of June, the day of 

 said meeting, there was no appearance or claim 

 of any having been previously picked for 

 market." 



[The notes above criticized were made up from 

 matter sent, and evidently "intended for jDubli- 

 cation." As the Gardener's Monthly has no 

 interest in these matters, beyond furnishing 

 news of any important matters to the reader, 

 it may be best, for variet3''s sake, to offer this 

 letter "not" so "intended."— Ed. G. M.] 



Healthfulness of Pears Propagated from 

 Plants Growing on Dwarf Stocks. — Mr. Wm. 

 Parry writes that he believes the Kieffer pear, 

 and the other varieties of Chinese sand pear 

 race, are not as healthj' when propagated from 

 plants grown on quince, as when from plants 

 growing on standard trees. We believe Mr. 

 Parry right on this point, and would extend it 

 to all sorts of pears, as well as pear trees of this 

 class. It is surprising that the point has never 

 been suggested before. There seems to be no 

 doubt but that, as the vital powers of a pear are 

 avowedly checked in favor of the reproductive. 



