MULBERRY : CELTIS: FIG. 49 



the Squill is planted there, for several peasants have 

 not only assured me that this is the case, but have 

 given me the reason for it. The Squill, they say, is 

 useful to the Fig. I should not be surprised to learn 

 that this utility, if such there be, is in some way 

 connected with fertilization, or with the intricate 

 question of Caprification. If the Squill is in any 

 way useful to the insects that frequent the Fig, it 

 would indirectly be of service to the tree. 



It is a mistake to reject these popular ideas with- 

 out sufficient evidence. When the farmers objected 

 to the Barberry (Berberis] bush on the ground that it 

 is injurious to corn, botanists ridiculed the idea. 

 M. C. Cooke, in " Microscopic Fungi," 1872, wrote 

 that " no fungi can be much more distinct than that 

 found on wheat and that which infests the leaves of 

 the Barberry." " What has a Barberry bush to do 

 with the wheat harvest ? Popular superstitions ! " 

 Yet the farmers were right, though they could 

 neither prove nor explain their theory. For the 

 Barberry Cluster Cup (sEcidium Berberidis) turns 

 out to be identical with the microscopic fungus, the 

 Corn Mildew (Pucdnia Graminis) which does so 

 much damage to the crops De Bary and other 

 cryptogamists have shown that these two parasites, 

 however different in appearance, are but alternating 

 generations of one and the same species. 



An interesting question arises : If two plants 

 suffer from the same parasite, as Wheat and 

 Barberry, or are in some way useful to each other, 

 as may well be the case with Fig and Squill, must 

 we not suppose that they had their origin in the 

 same district ? And may not this consideration 



4 



