MINNESOTA STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 117 
Recommended for trial : 
Melinda. (13 for, none against.) 
Stewart’s Sweet. (11 for, none against.) 
Haas. (13 for, none against.) 
Walbridge. (10 for, none against.) 
Peach Apple. (5 for, 1 against.) 
Recommended for favorable localities : 
Price’s Sweet. (10 for, 1 against.) 
Saxton. (9 for, 7 against.) 
St. Lawrence. (14 for, none against.) 
Utter’s Red. (4 for, 4 against.) 
Recommended for most favorable localities : 
Fameuse. (14 for, 3 against.) 
Plumb’s Cider. (7 for, 5 against.) 
Talman’s Sweet. (12 for, 5 against.) 
Recommended for trial by amateurs and pomologists : 
Alaska. 
Recommended for trial in favorable localities when top-worked : 
Red Astrachan. (8 for, none against.) 
Recommended for general trial throughout the State : 
White Astrachan. (8 for, 1 against.) 
Winter Fruit. 
Mr. Sias then read a paper on Winter Fruit which was accepted 
and ordered incorporated in the Transactions. The following is 
the text in full: 
WINTER FRUIT. 
RocuEstTER, Minn., January 17th, 1876. 
Mr. President and Gentiemen of the Minnesota State Horticultural Society: 
Where shall we find hardy, reliable winter varieties, of good quality, of 
the common apple (Pyrus malus?) You need only refer to the last annual 
report of this Society to convince you that right here is the great want of 
the State. Hence, the question of where shall we find desirable winter 
varieties of the common apple, will, I think, be acknowledged by all to be 
a pertinent one, and uvless we can add something to this very meager list 
for general cultivation, it will certainly count us but very little as an im- 
