ABOUT FRUITS, FLOWERS AND FARMING. 271 



rows of early Virginia among the beds for the sake of im 

 pregnating the rest. 



Mr. Hovey s next formal notice was exactly one year from 

 the foregoing, November, 1843, and it appears thus: &quot;We 

 believe it is now the generally received opinion of all intel 

 ligent cultivators (italics are ours again) that there is no 

 necessity of making any distinction in regard to the sexual 

 character of the plants when forming new beds. TJie idea 

 of male and female flowers, first originated, we believe, by 

 Mr. Longworth, of Ohio, is now considered as exploded.&quot; 

 Such a sudden change as this was brought about, he says, 

 by additional information received during that year by 

 means of his correspondents, and by more experience on 

 his own part. He says nothing of male blossoms and female 

 blossoms, which he had himself seen in wild strawberries. 

 Mr. Hovey then assumed the theory that cultivation, good 

 or bad, is the cause of fertile or unfertile beds of strawber 

 ries, and he says : &quot; in conclusion, we think we may safely 

 aver, that there is not the least necessity of cultivating any 

 one strawberry near another (our italics) to insure the fer 

 tility of the plants, provided they are under a proper state 

 of cultivation.&quot; 



Mr. Hovey now instituted experiments, which he prom 

 ised to publish, by which to bring the matter to the only 

 true test ; and he, from time to time, re-promised to give 

 the result to the public, which, thus far, we believe, he has 

 forgotten to do. 



His magazine for 1844 opens, as tl.at of 1843 closed ; and 

 in the first number he says, &quot; the oftener our attention is 

 called to this subject, the more we feel confirmed in the 

 opinon that the theory of Mr. Longworth is entirely un 

 founded ; that there is no such thing as male and female 

 plants, though certain causes may produce, as we know 

 they have, fertile and sterile ones.&quot; 



Nevertheless, in the next issue but one this peremptory 

 language is again softened down, and a doubt even appears, 



