BUSHBERG CATALOGUE. 
Aminia. 
Alma. (Riparia-Hybr.) A seedling of the 
Bacchus fertilized with a hybrid seedling from 
across between a hardy native variety and the 
“ Purple Constantia,” from the Cape of Good 
Hope(?), produced by eas ie RICKETTs, who 
says, in presenting this ing grape: 
“T feel confident that it; will meet the approval 
of the grape and wine-growers of Am 
it is a pleasant dessert grape, and makes a 
splendid wine, with a rose and wintergreen 
flavor most delicately blended. This vari variety 
is a fine healthy grower; foliage large, lobed, 
slightly tomentose on the underside: ; perfectly 
hardy and has never shown the least trace of 
disease, The must has stood by the scale 100- 
107; acid, 5-7.” Ripens’with or soon after the 
Hartford Proli 
and soils remains to proved; at 
Rickett’s place it does well and is very fine. 
Amanda. (Lair.) Description in our former edi- 
Sos, — ese n Catalogue of f Bluffton Wine Co. (and 
eo we obiained om plats offsame source. "Tt is alarge 
“skinned, | ard- vulped grape; in taste and 
baie bunch 
oem size, compact, quite showy; the vine a 
Labrusca. : 
most vigorous, healthy 
"ine hw aene-.. cn ae 
' tel es Y 1 
ee a, 
_ to suppose that ours is the tru: 
Amber (Riparia X). A sister of the 
Elvira, raised by Jacob Rommel, of 
Missouri, seems to be a cross between 
Riparia and Labrusca, having some 
eharacteristics of both species. Vine 
hardy, vigorous and moderately pro- 
ductive; Rommel says it should be 
for shipping to distant markets ; may 
also makea very good white wine. It 
seems, however, not to hold its leaves 
as ie as other Taylor Seedlings. 
ber Queen (Hybr.). Described in 
pons ger & Barry’s catalogue (by the 
originator) as follows: ‘‘ Bunch large, shoul- 
dered like the Hamburg; berry large, fre- 
quently oblong; holds persistently to the 
bunch; amber colored at first, but grows 
— till it becomes a purple grape; flesh 
Tuit always ble in August, and with proper care 
will keep winter.”’ (We have never seen this 
grape. B. & 8S. & M.) 
Aminia. (Supposed Rogers’ No. 39.) In Fall 
of 1867 we tried to get those of Rogers’ un- 
named hybrids, which we had not yet tested, 
and aware of the confusion existing as to their 
numbers, we obtained a few of each number 
from different sources at the same time. Of 
those which we planted as No. 39 three sur- 
vived, but not twoof them were alike. One 
of them proved especially valuable. To ascer- 
tain whether this was the true No. 39 we ad- 
dressed Mr. Rogers, to let us have a plant or 
a graft of the original No. 39, but were in- 
formed that the original stock was lost! 
planted vines thereof, while we destroy: 
the other two. From the commendation ieee 
to No. 39 at the quarter-centennial session 
the Am. Pomol. Society, by its president, Pes 
Hon. M. P. Wilder, we have the more reason 
true No. 39; but to 
avoid confusion with others which may ‘be sent 
out by other propagators, under this number, 
and which may or may not be the same, we 
; Mr. Rogers as- 
gave ours the name 
