STATE POMOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 141 



pear. I think there is an absolute agreement. We now take one step 

 more. Mr. Robert Manning, the well-known pomologist of Salem, writ- 

 ing in 1830, 7-eraarks as follows: 



''I procured in the spring of the present year two trees of Williams' 

 Bon Chretien, one from William Prince of P'lushing, who received it from 

 Mr. Biadick, the other from Buel & Wilson of Albany, by whom it was 

 imported from the London Horticultural Society." So it seems that Mr. 

 Hooker's recommendation to the S »ciety had been heeded, and in this 

 year, fourteen later, the venerable Society had aroused from its slumbers, 

 and was dealing in the trees. 



Mr. Manning continues. "As soon a^ the leaves expanded I perceived 

 those two were alike, and possessed all the richness and beauty of foliage 

 which distinguishes the Bartlett, a/id were so perfectly similar to it in 

 every respect that no person would hesitate to recognize them as the same.'' 

 Mr. Manning either had his attention railed to the fact of this similarity, 

 or had discovered it himself, and cor.sidering the fact that he was a pains- 

 taking observer, and a constant investigator ot matters pertain! f)g to fruit, 

 it is not too much t<j assume that he hin)self made the discovery. Not 

 content with the ob-ervation and conclusion to which he had arrived, he 

 determined to investigate further, and if possible trace back the Bartlett 

 to its source. He says, '"1 was told tliat Mr. James Carter of Bo ton, had 

 procured trees from England for Mr. Brewer, the former owner of the 

 Bartlett estate in Roxbury. I called on him. H^ informed me that he 

 was in London about twenty-five j'ears ago. and purchased pear trees for 

 Mr. Brewer, and as his objfct was to obtain what was then rare and valu- 

 able, there can bf no doubt that tlie tree now called Bartlett was in the 

 collection.'' 



Assuming the words, "about twenty-five years ago" to iiave been a cor- 

 rect statement, then the tree was procured in ISOo, eleven years before 

 Mr. Hooker's investigation, and sixteen after Mr. Aiton's notice of it in 

 the Hortus Kewensis and about twenty-six years from its first fruiting, 

 assuming fcr our purpose, that it was a young seedling in 1769, and bore 

 its first fruit ten years later. Of course our data not being clear, we are 

 not sure in our conclusions; enough however has been named to show 

 that it was a new pear, and had received favorable mention by Aiton and 

 Forsyth; that Mr. Carter had procured trees for Capt. Thomas Brewer, 

 and was of the opinion that '"the Bartlett was probably among them, as 

 he had endeavored to obtain what was then — in 1806, 'rare and valuable.' " 



Now, what was the opinion of Mr. Manning after the further investiga- 

 tion, and perhaps, and probably when he had seen the original tree, and 

 compared it with ids own, the AVilliams' Bon Chretien? These are his 

 remarks : 



"In my own mind I am fully convinced. Those gentlemen who may 

 entertain a different opinion will not easily account for the appearance in 

 this country and in England, of two pears so nearly resembling each other 

 in the wood, the leaf, the fruit, and the time of ripening. I would recom- 

 mend to such as are less confident than myself, to insert buds of both 



