WILD COFFEE IN AFRICA. V 



trouble to attempt ;i justification of this view by reference to the con- 

 ditions under which coffee grows in the wild state. 



NATURAL HABITAT OF COFFEE. 



Like so many other members of the large natural order Rubiaceae, 

 the numerous species of the genus Coffca arc slender shrubs or small 

 trees incapable of maintaining themselves in genuine forest growth, 

 but seeking their opportunities for existence along water courses or 

 in the somewhat open, partially Avoodcd country which borders the 

 many disconnected forest areas of Africa. Crowded among the great- 

 est variety of similar vegetation, and finally overwhelmed by the trees 

 of larger size, partial shade is a very general natural condition of such 

 species. This fact has been interpreted Try some writers as a reason 

 for the belief that shade is a normal requirement of the coffee plant. 

 It requires, however, but little observation in nature to realize that 

 most of the plants having the same ecological relations as the coffee 

 are not assisted by deficiency of light but will thrive much better and 

 become more vigorous and productive when the competition of the 

 masses of other vegetation is removed. In fact, many species which 

 appear in nature and in works on systematic botany as a lax, trailing 

 shrubs," will change their habit to one of strict upright growth when 

 permitted to stand alone. 



It is now generally admitted that the so-called Arabian coffee origi- 

 nated in the mountains of Abyssinia, whence it was introduced into 

 Arabia in early Mohammedan times. Although there seem to be no 

 very careful records of the natural habit and habitat of the Abyssin- 

 ian coffee, the tendencies of the plant under cultivation and when 

 neglected show its essential similarit} T to the other species, and indicate 

 the improbability that there is an}^ inherent or physiological reason 

 wiry sunlight should be directly harmful. 



To what extent Coffea arabica is confined in nature to high altitudes 

 is by no means satisf actor \\y determined, so fragmentary is our knowl- 

 edge of African botairy, and so great are the chances of artificial intro- 

 duction of the species to all the accessible parts of tropical Africa. 

 Coffee considered not specifically distinct from C. arabica is noted by 

 Warburg from several localities in the East African colonies of Ger> 

 many and Great Britain, particularly in the lake region. The wild 

 coffee reported by Welwitsch from the mountain forests of Angola as 

 a tree attaining 20 feet in height and 6 to 18 inches in diameter is much 

 larger than anything described from East Africa. This fact, in con- 

 nection with the notably small size and inferior quality of the seeds, 

 tends to throw doubt upon its identity with the genuine Arabian 

 coffee. But even if considered specifically identical there are evidently 

 considerable varietal differences, so that cultural reasoning could 



