22 



would not check. It is. not necessary to sulphur figs more than ten or 

 fifteen minutes. As stated before, they will not stand as much sulphur- 

 ing as other fruits. 



Figs grown on low, moist lands which are not suitable for fig culture, 

 change their characteristics, so much so as to deceive some of the best 

 experts in fig culture. Those grown on soil of a higher altitude and 

 under most favorable conditions also change, and this has caused many 

 to believe that they have produced something new, and to give the sup- 

 posed novelty a name of their own. This has greatly added to the 

 already much confused nomenclature of the fig. The figs grown on 

 low, wet lands, and in low lands in the valleys, I find to have a much 

 thicker skin, a larger cavity, and while the fruit is much larger, it con- 

 tains a superabundance of moisture, which, after being picked, if the 

 fruit is not properly treated, becomes sour; while those grown on lands 

 suitable for fig culture and of higher altitude, possess much better keep- 

 ing qualities, contain much more saccharine matter, remain more moist 

 without souring, and in every respect are much better figs. In drying, 

 these show about as follows: The figs grown on low, wet lands become 

 coarse, with less pulp and much tougher skin; those grown in a higher 

 altitude, and on valley lands suitable for fig culture, are generally not 

 as large, but the grain is much finer, the skin much thinner, the fruit 

 contains much more saccharine matter, and when dried does not resemble 

 the fig of the same variety grown under unfavorable conditions, on low, 

 wet lands, excepting in some of its botanical characteristics. Those 

 grown on low, wet lands are generally lacking in flavor and are unpal- 

 atable, and appear in many instances as if part of the inside had been 

 squeezed out; while those grown under better conditions are very fleshy, 

 so much so that when pressed they burst out at the end; while the 

 former in being pressed show but little inside and the skin seldom 

 bursts. 



There is such a confusion in the nomenclature of the fig, that for the 

 present I shall not mention any variety but the White Adriatic (Gal.), 

 this being to-day the best fig in California, as far as we know, for drying. 



During the past few years a great many fig trees and cuttings of many 

 varieties have been imported into this State. After they began fruiting, 

 nurserymen and others, having become confused as to their origin or 

 names, at once rechristened them, giving them popular names. In one 

 instance I found the fig known, within a radius of a few miles, under 

 at least seven different names, and no nurseryman had taken the pains 

 to investigate its true name. I also found, upon investigation, that the 

 same confusion existed abroad. The Minister of Agriculture for Italy 

 found this same difficulty, and was unable, in his own province, to 

 identify more than three varieties, yet, in that same district, more than 

 one hundred varieties had been previously described by nurserymen 

 and others. 



The same confusion was found in the names of the fig tree and cuttings 

 imported from France. Trees were once received from a district in 

 France under certain names, and from that same district trees were 

 received under entirely different names. Those varieties most promi- 

 nent, however, although not more than a dozen, could be traced by 

 following the California popular names that had been given them, but 

 this would hardly be of any use, except for identification. 



Conditions in this State are so varied that, as I have stated before, 



