348 



THE GARDENER'S MONTHLY 



[November, 



dian the apple, and why not the peach? But 

 there is a letter in existence written a year he- 

 fore this one quoted from Pen n, by a "Jersey- 

 man," Mahlon Stacy, and he remarks: "We 

 have peaches by the cart load, and the Indians 

 bring us seven or eight fat bucks a day." The 

 wording of this would indicate that " we," that 

 is, the settlers, had the peach trees and the In- 

 dians the deer. No doubt the Indians also culti- 

 vated them, for the leaders, or "Sachems," had 

 plantations, in which they grew many things, 

 and they lived in comparative peace with the 

 white settlers. How rapidly the peach was prop- 

 agated by the early settlers may be inferred 

 from the statement of Oldmixon, that the Ger- 

 mantown road, then but a cart road or trail, a 

 length of at least twelve miles, was lined with 

 peach trees along its whole length. This was in 

 1700. No doubt it early escaped Irom cultiva- 

 tion, and wild trees may have been found in 

 some abundance, but as to actual indigenity it 

 must be concluded the facts are against it. 



It is, however, a very interesting topic, and we 

 shall be very glad to have notes bearing on the 

 early history of the peach or any other fruit. 



It may be noted that in the extract made by 

 Mr. Blodgett, the white and black mulberries are 

 named. These, though found in the woods, are 

 evidently forms of Morus alba, found wild in the 

 woods now as in Penn's time, and must have 

 been introduced in early times as well as the 

 peach, as no one would regard them as indi- 

 genous any more than the peach. — Ed. G. M.] 



FRUITING OF A MALE TREE OF CEPHA- 

 LOTAXUS FORTUNII. 



BY P. J. BERCKMANS, AUGUSTA, QA. 



I send you by this mail a few fruits of Cepha- 

 lotaxus Fortunii. Although I have grown this 

 species for twenty-five years past, this is the fir:<t 

 time during that period of fruit being produced. 



My object in sending you .this fruit is to show 

 there is a greater variation in the sex of the 

 flowers of some trees than is generally supposed. 

 Siebold describes the genus Cephalotaxus as 

 dioecious. For many years I thought this correct, 

 as my tree produced only male flowers. This 

 year a large proportion of the flowers were 

 female, and the result is a heavy crop of plum- 

 like fruit, giving a beautiful appearance to the 

 tree. 



My specimen trees were received from Bel- 

 gium ia 1858 ; the female variety died after a 



couple of years planting, and those received 

 since are planted at a considerable distance from 

 the male tree. The female appears in every re- 

 spect identical with Ceplialotaxus drupacsea. 

 The male tree, so called, has certainly proved to 

 be monoecious tliis year, and I believe, therefore, 

 that the word dioecious cannot altogether be re- 

 lied upon as regan's this variety. 



Some seedling trees of Japanese persimmon 

 produced nothing but male flowers during six 

 years. The seventh, about one female flower to 

 three hundred male. The eighth year, one 

 female flower to about one hundred male, show- 

 ing a gradual change in the inflorescence, and as 

 the trees became older they became fruitful. 



[Tills very interesting note, coming so soon 

 after the discovery, that Salisburia, or the Ginko 

 tree, is probably monoecious, will leave few, if 

 any, truly dioecious genera among coniferae. In 

 regard to the appearance of the male flowers, it 

 is generally the case that they appear a year or 

 several years before the appearance of the female 

 flowers although branches which bear female 

 flowers, as they become weakened by age, bear 

 male flowers only ! This appears to be a general 

 law, and it might therefore be expected that a 

 tree, many years male, and which would thus 

 give some ground for regarding its species as 

 dioecious, might become female. 



Another point is that Prof. Karl Koch believed 

 Cephalotaxus Fortunii to be but a barren or male 

 form of C. drupacea, though the last seems to be 

 the only form in Japan, while the other is 

 credited to China. The leaves and habit of the 

 two are different, but this might be but sexual 

 characters, which often extend to foliage and 

 habit as well as to floral characters But we 

 have often seen the fruit of C. drupacea, especi- 

 ally on the grounds of A. D. Brown, E^q., of 

 Princeton, and they are much larger and dif- 

 ferently formed from those of Mr. Berckmans, 

 though not having both before us the exact 

 characters cannot be noted. If Mr. Berckmans 

 finds the foliacious character still different in 

 the fruiting specimens of each, the fact will go 

 far towards confirming the tendency of botanical 

 belief, that the two are distinct species. — Ed. 

 G. M.] _^_ 



EDITORIAL NOTES. 



Intelligent Correspondents who read, will 

 find the lollowing " words to the wise" suffi- 

 cient. Those who " run '' but don't " read," will 



