mrn^m mn^^M.& 



AND GARDENER'S JOURNAL. 



9 



PUBLISHED BY JOSEPH BRECK d: CO, NO. 53 NORTH MARKET STREET 



(Agricultural Warehouse.) 



VOL. XVII.] 



BOSTON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, OCTOBER 24, 1838. 



I NEW ENGLAND FARMER AND GARDENER'S JOURNAL 



(For the New England Fanner.) 

 i THE BEURRE CAPIAUMONT AND FRED- 

 ERIC DE WURTEMBERG PEARS. 

 Mr Editor, — ^Having been absent on a journey 



of some two or three weeks, to a distant State, a 



notice of the remarks of your respected correspon- 

 dent, the Hon. Mr Lowell, on the report of the 

 commiltee on fruits of the Mass. Hort. Society of 

 tlie Sth nit. has necessarily been delayed. 



In order to show the grounds on which the com- 

 mittee rest their opinion, that the Beurre Capiau- 

 mont figured in the London Poinological Magazine, 

 is not the true variety cultivated on the continent 

 of Europe under that name, but the Wurtembur''; 

 or ratlier the "Frederic de Wurtemberg," which is 

 sometimes also called, perhaps improperly, the "Roi 

 de Jf'urtemberg," I submit, first, the followins- ex- 

 tract from that work published in I8at>, and accom- 

 panying the figure. 



" The first specimens which were seen in tliis 

 country, came to the Horticultural Society in 1820, 

 from M. Parmentier of Enghien, and ill. Dumortier 

 Rutteau, of Tuurnay. They e.xcited much admi- 

 •ation at the time, and measures were immediately 

 aken to secure the variety for this country. Un- 

 ortunately, however, the cuttings which were sent 

 )ver were so much mi.xed, or so carelessly labelled, 

 hat a very small proportion of them proved to be 

 >f the true kind, in their room we received the 

 3enrre Ranee, tlie Ctdraar Jaminette, and even the 

 'Japoleon. The true kind has always been sold by 

 tfr Richard Williams, of Turnham Green; and 

 rom tr^es procured from his nursery, and growino- 

 n the garden of the ^Horticultural Society, ou'r 

 drawing was made." 



It will be observed that this drawing, figured 

 everal years after the specimens of the fruit had 

 een received, which e.xcited so much admiration, 

 'as made not from fruit produced from tlie cuttino-s 

 eceived from M. Parmentier and otliers, but frum 

 rets brought from the nursenj of Mr Richard Wil- 

 'ams. How Mr Williauis obtained the true kind 

 ; is not stated, but it is evident that tlie London 

 forticultnral Society had no other means of test- 

 ig the identity of this fruit than the authority of 

 n English nurseryman, and we have the assertion 

 f Mr Knight himself that at that time, he knew 

 if no English nurseries to be trusted in regard to 

 ,18 new fruits, "that he feared there was too much 

 onfusion in all the large nurseries, &c." 



It would not therefore have been an event at all 

 irprising if the society had been led into an error 

 y Mr Williams, as it will be seen by the follow- 

 ig extract from the catalogue of the society pub- 

 shed by Mr Robert Thompson in 1831, to what 

 itent similar mistakes had occurred ; he says, 

 leaking of the omission of tlie abbreviations 

 hich distinguish the most important characters of 

 le fruit, " In these cases no certain information 

 13 been collected at the garden ; owing either to 

 le trees not having fruited, or to inaccuracies hav- 



[NO. 16. 



ing been discovered in the names of the plants re- 

 ceived at the garden. These inaccuracies have 

 taken place to an extent of which no one who has 

 not personally inspected the progress of investiga- 

 tion, can form ar^idea, and have caused more em- 

 barrassment than ail other causes whatsoever taken 

 together." — So much for the possibility that an 

 error may have been made at the garden of the 

 Horticultural Society ; but for this error, its late 

 venerable and highly distinguished president could 

 have been in no way responsible ; from the nature 

 of the case, he must have depended on others, or 

 on those who had received the trees from Mr Wil- 

 liams, and he again on some one else, and so on, 

 through a connection, which we have no means of 

 knowing how multiform it may not have been, an 

 error in any part of which would have been fatal 

 to- the truth of the variety. The conclusions ar- 

 rived at from what is before stated may be said 

 truly, to be only conjectural ; they show, however, 

 tkat there has been room for error, and we will 

 abw proceed witli the evidence we have that there 

 has been an error in the case of the Beurre Capi- 

 aumont ; and this we are the more anxious to do 

 because we have received a rebuke from a quarter 

 entitled to grave consideration, and our hiirhest 

 respect, and whether the rebuke be deserved or not, 

 yet coming, as it does, from the early and constant 

 patron of horticulture, and of our own society es- 

 pecially, we are quite sure was made in kindness 

 and witl) a view to its benefit Wo stand, tliere- 

 fore, in this matter, on our defence, only so far as 

 to show that we had strong evidence for adopting 

 the opinion expressed. 



The term miscalled may certainly appear harsh, 

 and if it had any particular personal allusion, would 

 be so in fact ; but it had none, it was inadvertently 

 applied in the haste of a weekly report, and the 

 meaning intended to be conveyed was simply 

 ^' lohat people at thi^ time miscall.'" We have no 

 doubt that the description of the pear in the Ponio- 

 logical Magazine is a true one of that fruit sent to 

 this country by Mr Knight, as the ISeurre Capiau- 

 mont ; but the question now at issue is, whether 

 the pear which. is there figured an J described, is 

 that which it was intended to be or identical with 

 the true Beurre Capiaumont which was then, and 

 now is, cultivated on the continent ; if it be so, 

 then indeed are we in error, but if otherwise, most 

 assuredly the integrity of those through whose in- 

 strumentality the scions were obtained and so libe- 

 rally distributed throughout our country, can in no 

 way be impugned. 



Soon after the Capiaumont, sent by Mr Knio-ht 

 as such, came into bearing, some of the members 

 of our Society (including Mr Manning and myself) 

 received specimen trees of the Capiaumont from 

 other sources ; from France and from Flanders, all 

 bearing a like resemblance to each other, in the 

 young wood and the leaf, but essentially different 

 from the Capiaumont sent by Air Knight. 



At a subsequent period, Mr Manning received 

 from Messrs Buel & Wilson, a tree, among others, 

 of the " Roi de ffurtemberg," (believed to have 



been received by them from the London Horticul- 

 tural Society,) and being at Salem sometime after- 

 wards, he called my attention to this tree, and we 

 concluded from its appearance that it must prove 

 to bo identical with the Capiaumont of Mr Knight; 

 this tree has since produced fruit, which has been 

 annually exhibited, and our predictions have been 

 fulfilled. 



In 1834 and 183.5, we received scions also, of 

 the " Wurtemberg," from Dr Van Mons, of Lou- 

 vain, the wood Wild leaf exactly oorresponding with 

 the tree received from Messrs Buel & V/llson ; 

 these have also produced fruit, which has been ex- 

 hibited by Mr Manning, and which proves to be 

 the same as the Capiaumont of J'lr Knight. Dr 

 Van Mons has stated the Frederic de WuHembero- 

 to be a fruit which was originated by himself (no^ 

 by M. Capiaumont) and his description coincides 

 precisely with the Capiaumont of Mr Knight, and 

 also with that figured in the Pomological Magazine. 

 Dr Van Mons says the Wurtemberg is a twice' 

 bearing variety, this also is in exact accordance 

 with what we have seen. 



In order, however, to satisfy ourselves, and to 

 resolve all doubts on the subject, we sent, in 1834, 

 to Mr Thompson of the garden of the London 

 Horticultural Society, for scions of the true Buerre 

 Capiaumont ; we also sent at the same time to Dr 

 Van Mons for scions of the same fruit ; they have 

 been received from both sources, and they ontirelv 

 con'cspond in appearance, both in leaf and wood, 

 with those which have been before received from 

 France and from Flanders as such,as well as with the 

 tree which produced the fruit e.xhibitcd by Mr Ives 

 as the true Capiaumont, at our late annual exhibi- 

 tion, the same having been received by ourselves 

 from France. It may also be observed, that the 

 fruit exhibited by Mr Ives as the true Capiaumont, 

 corresponds with the account given by Mr Thomp- 

 son in the last descriptive catalogue of the fruits 

 which had been produced in the garden of the 

 London Horticultural Society, up to the date of 

 that work in 1831, and is as unlike to the Capiau- 

 mont sent by Mr Knight, as is the tree and the 

 leaf. 



The' Beurre de Capiaumont is thus briefly de- 

 scribed by Mr Thompson in the descriptive cata- 

 logue of 1831, — Of medium size and of ovate form, 

 color brownish red next the sun ; beurre and of 

 first rate qu.ility, a great bearer, withstands late 

 spring frosts better than most others. Its season 

 October. 



We would also observe that in 1836 and 1837 

 we were visited by M. De Wael, from Flanders, 

 the Secretary of the Horticultural Society of Ant- 

 werp, a gentleman who brought letters from Dr 

 Van Mons to several members of our society, tes- 

 tifying to his high attainments as a naturalist, and 

 especially in pomological researches ; possessing 

 himself a vast collection of fruit trees of diflerent 

 varieties ; — at first sight he pronounced the Capiau- 

 mont of Mr Knight to be the Wurtemberg. 



We have indeed no good reasons for supposing 

 that any one with a right understanding of the 



