112 



represented to be White Adriatic figs at the Los Angeles convention three 

 years ago, and Mr. Milco assured me that they came from a large tree 

 twenty-five years old, from White Oak Flat, up in the foothills." 



E. Booth, Roseville, Placer County: To support Dr. Kimball's theory I 

 must say that I have been collecting figs for the last twenty years, and 

 have trees now sixteen years old, and some three or four years old, and you 

 would not believe the fruit was of the same variety, though one was propa- 

 gated from the other. I have gone to see the tree I have propagated my 

 trees from, and I could not recognize it. This shows the difference in trees 

 of different ages and growing in different localities. 



W. G. Klee, Glenwood: I happened to meet Mr. Rixford of the "Bulle- 

 tin" one evening, and he told me about having received the specimens from 

 Mr. Parker. Naturally being interested in settling this question, I secured 

 from John Rock, at Mies, a number of specimens of the White Adriatic 

 fig, and I took them to the rooms of Mr. Rixford. We compared them very 

 particularly. The figs were both in the green state, as they came from the 

 tree, having been picked only a few days. In cutting them open we found 

 that the meat did not seem to differ very materially, at least, that was my 

 opinion; the color was about the same, the skin of the White Adriatic was 

 somewhat thicker, but the most striking difference was, of course, in the 

 shape, as you see by the photograph. That was too marked and distinct 

 to escape anybody's notice. The product as dried shows still greater dif- 

 ference, as Mr. Parker's specimens prove. His Smyrna fig dries quite 

 transparent, while the specimens of the White Adriatic that I have seen do 

 not. In my mind the question of the identity of the Smyrna fig of com- 

 merce and that of Mr. Parker is settled. It is impossible to tell them 

 apart. I think it will be proved that the Smyrna fig of Mr. Parker is well 

 adapted to the foothills, and I believe it will also be proved that the White 

 Adriatic is adapted to a greater range; it will be an inferior fig, but it is 

 very likely that its greater yield and its greater adaptability to a wider 

 range will secure for it a great future. It is an excellent fig, and I think 

 no one having planted it need feel discouraged. But Mr. Parker's fig, I 

 am satisfied, will be much the best, and is as distinct from it as anything 

 can be. 



THE SMYRNA FIG IN SAN DIEGO. 



F. A. Kimball, National City: I examined with a great deal of interest 

 the specimens shown by Mr. Parker. I have seen but one sample of dried 

 fig in my life superior to it. I have made a great many examinations, 

 particularly in my own county of San Diego. There was one sample of 

 figs exhibited at an exhibit at Oceanside, and now in the rooms of the 

 Board of Trade in San Diego, which seems to me identical with that fig, 

 and they were grown from a tree of the "Bulletin" importation, and packed 

 by the Escondido Land Company. I see no difference in texture, in seed, 

 or color, either inside or outside, except in the thinness of the skin. The 

 skin of the figs packed at Escondido is much thinner than these here, but 

 the shape and all the characteristics seem to be identical. I have examined 

 many kinds all throughout the county and taken pains to compare the figs 

 that have been grown there for the past twenty years with the White Adri- 

 atic fig which I procured from Mr. Eisen of Fresno, some two hundred to 

 three hundred cuttings, and distributed throughout the county to learn how 

 they would be affected by the different localities, and I found many of the 

 figs which have been planted within ten or twelve years, are practically 

 the fig as claimed by Mr. Eisen to be the White Adriatic. I see no 

 difference in fruit or foliage. There seems to be no insect enemy of the 



