1910.] PUBLIC DOCUMENT — No. 31. 193 



Regarding the following the writer is in some doubt, owing to 

 lack of opportunity for sufficient study, but considers it probable 

 that thoy do not belong to this group : — 



Breckinridge. 



Chicago. 



Collins (Cliami)ion). 



Florence. 



Givens. 



Hastings Eed. 

 Highfill. 

 King David. 

 Marion Red. 



The remainder of the forty are accounted for as synonyms. 



In deciding whether or not any variety should be admitted 

 to a place in the Ben Davis group as here given, the intention 

 has been to be conservative. The study of varieties of fruits by 

 groups has only recently begun and the writer feels that in con- 

 stituting these groups it is best to include in any group under 

 consideration only such varieties as seem beyond doubt to belong 

 there, even if there are strays left that do not seem to belong any- 

 where. If any of these odd varieties are of great importance 

 they will in time become the central types of new groups, while 

 if only of minor account they may as well be left by themselves. 



It is to be understood that the foregoing is not final, but of the 

 nature of a report of progress. In order to be conclusive the 

 study of the fruit in some cases and of the tree characters in 

 many cases is necessary. It is hoped, however, that it may 

 prove a contribution of some value on this subject and a basis for 

 further study. 



