98 SIXTH ANNUAL REPORT 



tie entomological knowledge would have thrown a flood of light on 

 the subject, and, from all I can gather through correspondence, would 

 have entirely changed the verdict : for the idea of conditions of atmos- 

 phere, or of the meat generating the worms, is simply absurd. Judg- 

 ing from descriptions, the '' paper-worm " figured most in the injury 

 referred to, and as its natural history, as here detailed, will show, if 

 the Boston firm could prove that the hams had been well cared for, 

 and the covering kept intact while in its possession, there was but 

 one legitimate conclusion, viz.: that the ova were deposited, and the 

 injury, therefore, done in germ, before the meat left Cincinnati. Of 

 course, in such a case, the parties run the risk of getting poor ento- 

 mological advice, as they do of getting poor legal advice, for there 

 are quacks in all professions; but it is no more difficult to discrimi- 

 nate in the one case than in the other, and even a poor entomologist 

 would be apt to throw more light on such a subject than the best of 

 lawyers. 



A somewhat similar and very interesting case, where scientific 

 knowledge was called into play, lately came before a jury at Norris- 

 town, Pennsylvania. The question was as to whether the trunk of a 

 tree can elongate after it has once formed? Botanical science (and 

 the experience of surveyors and others who have good opportunity 

 of judging confirms its truth) says emphatically, no, because the cell 

 once formed does not elongate or change, and such elongation is im- 

 possible, however much the external morphological features of tree- 

 growth may make it appear to take place on a superficial view. Yet, 

 in this case, the jury decided, from the evidence brought forward, that 

 a peg in a certain buttonwood tree had been raised 4 inches in 48 

 years, and condemned botanical science as wrong. But science does 

 not say that the trunk of a tree may not be raised. On the contrary, 

 a pretty thorough discussion of the matter, brought out by the above 

 case, and much of it in the columns of the jY. Y. Trihune, elicited 

 the fact that there are at least three ways in which such a peg may 

 be elevated ; but they are all mechanical, and not by the elongation 

 of the trunk : 1st. There is such power in cell-growth that the en- 

 largement of the roots on a rock surface acts with such force against 

 the rock as to gradually lift the tree. 2d. Frost exercises a lifting 

 power on the largest trees, on the same principle that it draws clover 

 and other plants out of the ground, and brings stones to the surface, 

 viz. : by expanding and thus lifting the soil, and vegetation with it •. in 

 thawing, the water carries earth under the lifted roots, which prevents 

 their sinking fully to their former place : such action is naturally most 

 apparent on trees in exposed places, and not anchored by deep tap- 

 roots. 3d. If a peg is driven into a tree at an acute instead of a right 



