The Story of the Senator Dunlap Strawberry 



By It^ Originator, J. R. Reasoner 



I HAVE been asked by the editors of 

 The Strawberry to give a brief state- 

 ment of the experiments by which 

 the Senator Dunlap strawberry was orig- 

 inated. I cheerfully comply with the 

 request. 



About twenty years ago, as a means of 

 recreation, I commenced a series of ex- 

 periments with a view to producing a 

 strawberry which should have a combina- 

 tion of the most desirable qualities of the 

 best varieties of that day; and if possible, 

 to make some improvement upon them 

 in every particular. 



Being a Methodist preacher and 

 obliged to move every three years — or 

 perhaps oftener — the operations must be 

 confined to a small part of a small par- 

 sonage lot. Some of the leading varieties 

 were secured; several seasons were em- 

 ployed in studying their indi\idual char- 

 acters before the breeding process com- 

 menced. The experiments were embel- 

 lished by several little episodes. One 

 season 11 the little seeds which had been 

 carefu y gathered were destroyed by 

 veimin and insects. Another year, the 

 berries for seeds were carefully stored on 

 a shelf, properly labeled. Some innocent 

 children who discovered, and wanted the 

 boxes, emptied them all out. Some very 

 good friends advised me not to "monkey 

 with experiments," but the work went on. 



The plants were grouped and mated 

 according to desired results, believing: — 



1. That self-fertilized blossoms — that 

 is, blossoms fertilized by their own 

 pollen — if of a bisexual character, or an- 

 other blossom from the same plant, or 

 from plants of the same variety, are most 

 likely to produce a progeny of the same 

 type of the parent, but inferior. Or in 

 other words, if marked beneficial results 

 are to be obtained, ''in-breeding" must be 

 avoided. 



2. That most, if not all plants, have a 

 tronger affinity for the pollen from an- 

 other variety than their ov\ii. 



3. That to introduce a desirable quality 

 into a plant which is deficient in that 

 particular, it is necessary to transfuse the 

 blood from a plant having that quality. 



In that series of experiments, no hand 

 pollenation was practiced. As Nature 

 and the insects were the lowest bidders, 

 the contract for that part of the work 

 was awarded to them. 



As all of my records were burned, I 

 am obliged to depend upon memory for 

 everything connected with the work. 



The berries for seed were gathered 

 from the different plants and groups, and 

 their seeds all sown in the same bed, and 

 for that reason the experiment was of 

 much less scientific value. It is very 

 unfortunate, from a scientific point of 



J. R. REASONER 



view, that we are not able to write up 

 the pedigree of the Dunlap with absolute 

 certainty, but its excellence of character 

 will help to atone for that discrepancy. 

 Its parentage will probably be forever a 

 matter of speculation. Experiments are 

 now in progress which may assist in our 

 conjectures. In the same bed of seed- 

 lings from which the Dunlap came there 

 were four other plants whose foliage and 

 fruit appeared to be almost identical with 

 No. 1 (Dunlap). 



The plants selected for this experiment, 

 as I now remember, were Cumberland, 

 Crescent, Windsor, Sucker-State, Bubach, 

 Jessie May-Chief (Glendale), and per- 

 haps one or two other varieties. 



The Cumberland was taken as the 

 standard, and main breeder. With it 

 were grouped in close proximity Crescent, 

 Sucker-State and Windsor. 



Many persons have supposed the Dun- 

 lap to be a seedling of the Warfield. By 

 some accident or mishap there were no 

 Warfield plants in that experiment. I do 

 not think there was then a Warfield plant 

 within five miles. The supposition that 

 Warfield was the parent is untenable. 



In our conjectures the parentage of No. 

 1 has lain between some two plants of 

 four varieties, which under several com- 

 binations were planted in the same plot, 

 viz: Cumberland, Sucker-State, Wind- 

 sor and Crescent. The plant which I 

 bought for Sucker-State produced a dark 

 red berry, with glossy neck, and in some 

 respects similar to Warfield. The glossy 

 neck, and deep red of the Dunlap would 

 seem to favor the Sucker-State for one of 

 the parents. The other side must be as- 



Plge 3 



signed to either Cumberland or Windsor. 

 Crescent, fertilized by Cumberland in 

 such a way as to leave but little doubt, 

 has produced plants and fruit with strong 

 resemblance to Dunlap. As Windsor 

 and Sucker-State probably are both ex- 

 tinct, it would be impossible to repeat the 

 experiment. 



No. 1, with several other seedlings, was 

 sent to several experiment stations, and in 

 several instances to private parties, under 

 pledges and restrictions. Several of them 

 abused the privilege. As it was purely a 

 matter of honor, I was obliged to make 

 the best of it. 



About ten years ago a tract of land ad- 

 joiningthe University Experiment grounds 

 :.t Urbana, 111., was secured, to which all 

 of the work was transferred, and opera- 

 tions commenced in a more orderly way. 

 Dr. Burrill, Prof. Blair and others from 

 the University were frequent visitors to 

 the trial plots for the purpose of studying 

 the character of the seedlings. They 

 watched No. 1 carefully for four consec- 

 utive seasons, and decided that its char- 

 acter would warrant its introduction. 

 The Illinois State Horticultural board 

 met upon the grounds during the fruiting 

 season, when No. 1 was at its best, and 

 decided that it should be introduced. 



Families sometimes find that one of the 

 most difficult things to do is to find names 

 which are good enough for their children. 

 A patriotic colored family in Virginia, is 

 reported to have named one of their 

 young kids Georgewashingtonthomasjef- 

 fersonandrewjackson. It was said that 

 the name was too much for the boy, and 

 that he soon died. One of the difficult 

 things that confronted us was to find a 

 name for No. 1. We knew full well 

 that the pomological society could never 

 be able to spell out or appreciate such a 

 combination of distinguished names as 

 the colored boy received. A list of all 

 the names proposed would be amusing. 

 With the advice of the members of the 

 Horticultural board (during the absence 

 of its president, Hon. A. M. Dunlap) 

 it was decided to name it "Senator 

 Dunlap". Many protests came from 

 pomologists for giving it a double name. 

 Some said leave off Senator and call it 

 "Dunlap"; others said, call it "Senator." 

 They may have feared that it would be- 

 have badly and disgrace Mr. Dunlap. 

 But if we should call it Senator the odium 

 could very easily be shifted to some other 

 Senator. Mr. Augustine, of Normal, 

 Illinois, is largely responsible for the full 

 name. He was inflexible in saying, 'call 

 it Senator Dunlap." I have not learned 

 of any charges for "heresy" having been 

 preferred against Mr. Augustine by the 

 pomological society. Notwithstanding 



