42 



1895) the ground was abundantly strewn with the weathered fruit 

 of the previous season. This fruit was probably half of the usual 

 normal character, and presented no apparent difference from the 

 ordinary black walnut, either in its outer husk, o-r in the nut and 

 kernel. The other half of the fruit which lay on the ground presented 

 in a more or less marked degree on its outer husk the split character 

 of the hickory nut. The valves sometimes were barely indicated at 

 the tip. At others they were clearly marked to the middle of the fruit 

 or even lo-wer still, but never quite to the base. The nut itself in 

 every instance was a genuine walnut. 



On leaving this freak my first thought was that it must be a hybrid. 

 This, however, cannot be the case, because the tree bears fruit of 

 no constant character. Part is normal and the remainder is of the 

 character indicated. There remains now to be stated that, which to 

 my mind, is the most singular fact of all in connection with the his- 

 tory of the tree; i. e., its fruit not only varies on the tree in the 

 same year, but one year's product appears to be no certain sign of 

 the character of the fruit on the following year. For example, the 

 fruit of 1895 was, as has been stated, about evenly divided between 

 the normal character and the sport. The fruit of the season of 1896 

 was almost, if not quite, wholly normal. At least I failed to find any 

 pronounced instances of the sport in the fruit when I visited the tree 

 in October of this year. There was at the time an abundant crop of 

 fruit lying on the ground, and the only indication I was able to ob- 

 serve of any departure from the normal state were two fruits which 

 bore faint longitudinal ridges toward their apex. 



So far as I am aware, no demonstrable solution of this singular 

 biological problem is to be had. Still there are certain facts which 

 point to a possible explanation. 



It is clear that a tree so maimed as this one cannot be regarded 

 as in a healthy condition. Leaving out of sight the fact that it is 

 practically a mere shell, there remains also the still more important 

 fact that one-half of tihat shell is destroyed, and that if the limbs above 

 receive full nourishment it must be through a much diminished sur- 

 face of cambium and young wood. That nutrition is seriously im- 

 paired might probably be inferred from the remark of Mr. Beale, that 

 he has known the tree all his life, and that it has changed but little, if 

 any, during that time. Its growth is, therefore, exceedingly slow. 

 There is another fact to be considered as pointing toward though not 

 proving the explanation about to be offered; i. e., the season of 1895 

 was one of phenomenal drought, and the abnormal fruit formed about 

 fifty per cent, of the yield of that season. The summer of 1896 was 

 more favorable, and there was but little shortacre in the rainfall. 

 During this season the fruit was practically wholly normal. May it 

 not be a case of arrested development due to impaired nutrition? 



