340 Large HeartShaped Bigarreau Cherry. 



riety in 1844, but in order to settle all doubts, I obtained speci- 

 mens of the fruit of the " Black Bigarreau of Savoy," from 

 Mr. Samuel Walker, of Boston, the present season, which 

 I found identical with my own, the two original trees of 

 which were obtained from Marseilles, in the year 1829, and 

 are 25 feet in height. From these we have propagated a 

 great number annually, which have been disseminated 

 throughout our country. 



The only other variety to which this is allied or assimi- 

 lates, is the Tradescant's Black. Having, therefore, but one 

 congener, and being readily distinguished from other vari- 

 eties, it would seem an unpardonable neglect for any pomo- 

 logical writer, however theoretical and limited his sphere of 

 actual observation may have been, to confuse this marked 

 variety with others, or to publish this variety under two dis- 

 tinct heads as some have done, or under three distinct heads, 

 as Mr. Downing has done in his new work, thus causing the 

 same fruit, Proteus-like, to assume different forms, colors, and 

 qualities on diiferent pages of his book. It would have been 

 far better, had this subject remained in statu quo, than that 

 he should, when professing to correct errors, thus render con- 

 fusion worse confounded. I had intended to have referred to 

 some varieties of the Duke Cherry, described by Mr. D. un- 

 der a plurality of names, and to Duke and Heart Cherries 

 described as varieties of the Bigarreau, and also to Duke 

 Cherries, described as Morellos, but I have not the time at pres- 

 ent. Indeed, having already, in a mere cursory perusal, noted 

 numerous errors, it would occupy more space in your Maga- 

 zine than you would be willing to concede, were I even to give 

 a brief summary. I, like others, had looked for the work of 

 Mr. D. with much hope of good, knowing that his zeal mer- 

 ited commendation, and that, as a compiler at least, he ranked 

 high, but, I have been greatly disappointed. I should not 

 have referred to the work in question, were it not that its as- 

 sumed authority rendered some explanations necessary, as 

 due to the character of American pomology. 

 Linncean Bot. Garden and Nurseries, i 

 Flushing, July, 1845. \ 



