222 [ASSHMBLY 



LiOTT, Ihat it had been growy In Ohio from ten to twelve years, and 

 Mr. Barry that it had been cultivated in Western New-Yoik for 

 gevcn years. All three gentlemen concurred in recommending it. 

 Col. Hodge agreed with them. It was a very pleasant sub-acid fruit. 



The Belle Magnifique Cherry was adopted. 



Of Peaches, the committee recommended the Late Jldmirable. 

 Mr. HovEY was hardly prepared to recommend it. Mr. S. B. Par- 

 sons said it was very good at Flushing, N. Y. Mr. Downing found 

 that it ripened finely. Mr. Hamilton said it was good in Orange 

 Co., N. Y. Mr. Hancock had never had it good. 



On motion, it was passed by for the present. [This was equiva- 

 lent to a refusal to recommend its cultivation, for it was not subse- 

 quently called up for action.] 



Mr. Hancock moved that, in considering the various fruits proposed 

 for general cultivation, the same course be adopted as was followed 

 in regartl to rejected fruits j i. c, that any one to which an objection 

 might be raised, should be stricken from the list. 



Mr. Downing was opposed to this motion, because after three or 

 four of the very best fruits had been agreed upon, it would hardly be 

 possible to find another so fine as not to meet with a single objection; 

 an objection, it might be, arising from a local cause alone, or from 

 some peculiar idea or particular experience on the part of a single 

 cultivator. 



Mr. HovEY also objected to the motion. The rejected fruits in 

 the list which had been passed by the Congress, were still in cultiva- 

 tion, and any one good objection to placing a fruit on that list, com- 

 ing from a gentleman who found his account in continuing that par- 

 ticular fruit, was entitled to be rejected ; so far, at least, as not to 

 abolish the cultivation of that variety. But in adding to the catalogue 

 of fruits worthy of general cultivation, more than one objection to 

 any particular variety ought to be presented before there could be 

 reasonable ground for excluding it. The difficulty which an indivi- 

 dual might have experienced in respect to a particular variety which 

 had succeeded with almost every body else, might be purely the re- 

 sult of fortuitous circumstances, and at any rate, ought not to operate 

 to the exclusion of such fruif. 



Professor Mapes, of New- Jersey, also spoke in opposition to the 

 motion. If adopted, it would virtually put an end to all discussion 

 on fruit. 



