ARBOR DAY ITS HISTORY AND OBSERVANCE. 



57 



and unsatisfactory. Trees Lave their natural homes, in which they 

 attain their best development. The geologist, as he may be traveling 

 swiftly over the country, can ascertain the character of the soil, its min- 

 eral composition, from the prevailing kinds of trees which from time to 

 time meet his sight. 



Some trees are less particular than others in their choice of climatic 

 or soil conditions, and therefore are available for planting over a wider 

 range of territory and under a greater variety of exposure. They will 

 have their places, consequently, in many lists of desirable trees. 



The Tree Planting and Fountain Society of Brooklyn, !N. Y., a few 

 years ago sent a request to various nurserymen, landscape architects, 

 practical arboriculturists, and private citizens in different parts of the 

 country for a small list of what they deemed the most suitable trees to 

 be recommended for planting- on the streets of Brooklyn, a general 

 description of the character of the soil of the city having been sent 

 with the request. Three classes of trees were asked for large, medium 

 sized, and smaller, for wide streets, narrow ones, and those of inter- 

 mediate width. The lists received were interesting as showing the vary- 

 ing estimates of the same tree by different persons and also the sub- 

 stantial agreement of the same persons in regard to a large number of 

 trees. 



Fifteen lists were sent in, and in all about sixty trees were recom- 

 mended. Of these the Norway maple was most frequently found on the 

 lists, followed in the order of preference by the sugar maple, oriental 

 plane, laurel-leaved willow, silver maple, European linden, American 

 elm, sweet gum, catalpa, yellowwood, pin oak, white oak, American 

 linden, or basswood, hackberry, scotch elm, koelreuteria, and tulip 

 poplar. The other trees on the lists were named only in one or two 

 instances each. 



In another list, sent from the Division of Forestry of the Department 

 of Agriculture, and in which the rating of the trees was made up from 

 a consideration of eight separate points, viz, endurance, or ability to 

 withstand more or less unfavorable conditions, recuperative power, or 

 ability to heal wounds and outgrow other injuries, cleanliness, beauty 

 of form, abundance of shade, extent of the season when in leaf, rapid- 

 ity of growth, and length of life period, the trees stood rated in the 

 three classes thus: 



LARGE-SIZED TREES. 



Red oak (Quercus rubra), 22. 

 Scarlet oak (Quercus coccinea), 22. 

 Yellow oak (Quercux tinctoria), 22. 

 American elm ( Ulrnus americana), 22. 

 Sugar maple (Acer saccltarinum), 19. 

 Black maple (Acer nigrum), 19. 

 Tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), 19. 

 European linden (Tilla viilgaris), 19. 

 Sweet gum (Liquidambar siyraciflua), 19. 

 White oak (Quercw alba), 19. 



Burr oak (Quercus macrocarpa), 19. 



Oriental plane tree ( Platan us orientalis), 

 19. 



Kentucky coffee tree (Gymnocladus cana- 

 densis), 19. 



American plane tree (Platanus occidenta- 

 ls), 18. 



Sycamore maple (Acer pseudoplatanus), 

 'l9. 



American linden (Tilia americana), 17. 



