BOTANY OF THE TOMATO I3 



den varieties, and I believe it to be the original species 

 from which our cultured sorts have been developed, 

 by crossing and selection. Such crosses probably were 

 made either naturally or by natives before the tomato 

 was discovered by Europeans. The earliest prints we 

 have of the tomato (Figs. 9 and 10) are far more 

 like the fruit of this plant than that of L. cerasiforme, 

 and the prints of many of the earliest garden varieties 

 and of some sorts which are still cultivated in south- 

 ern Europe, for use in soups, are like it not only in 

 size and form, but in flavor. These facts make it seem 

 far more probable that our cultivated sorts have come, 

 by crossing, between this and other species rather 

 than by simple development from L. cerasiforme. 



Prof. E. S. Goff, of Wisconsin, who has made a 

 most careful study of the tomato, expressed the same 

 opinion, writing that it seemed to him that our culti- 

 vated sorts must have come from the crossing of a 

 small, round, smooth, sutureless type, with a larger, 

 deep-sutured, corrugated fruit, like that of the Mam- 

 moth Chihuahua, but smaller. However this may be, 

 I think that it is wise to throw all of our cultivated 

 garden sorts, except the Pear, the Cherry, and the 

 Grape — which I regard as distinct species — together 

 under the name of L. esculcntiim, even when we know 

 they have originated by direct crosses with the other 

 species ; and it is well to classify the upright growing 

 sorts under the varietal names, L. validum, and the 

 larger, heavier sorts, as L. grandifolium, as has been 

 done by Bailey. (Cyclopedia of Horticulture.) 



