238 



produced by the other. Now, mark right here, a 

 new feature : the transmission, through the germ, 

 of this something — this inherent principle, as the 

 term is. 



Now, we lay down another rule, and we deduce 

 it from the fact that where varieties are hybridized, 

 the new variety produced partakes of the qualities 

 of both parents to a certain extent ; that the effect 

 produced by hybridization is dependant on the ha- 

 hitual condition of the two kinds operated with. 

 Let us take a step farther, and presume that it is 

 also dependant upon the particular condition at the 

 time of hybridization. For, if such a strong mental 

 impression can be produced upon the mind of a fe- 

 male animal by a particular male (of which we have 

 indubitable proof) as to cause the offspring of a dif- 

 ferent parentage to bear a close resemblance to that 

 particular male, can we not justly infer that, in the 

 vegetable kingdom, there is, at times, such a mys- 

 terious influence exerted, by hybridization, upon the 

 peculiar organization of a plant as to produce in its 

 subsequent productiDns a type different, in many 

 respects, from its usual fruit? And can we not rea- 

 sonably infer that the juices of the plant become 

 "tainted" with this particular condition, and, under 

 favorable influences, develop it. So we come 

 to the reason assigned by your correspondent 

 for these changes: "That the varieties of any spe- 

 cies contain a principle which is at once common 

 and inherited from a common parent, unchanged by 

 the many generations, it may be, through which they 

 have descended, but subject to certain influences 

 which have been exerted upon them until fully devel- 

 oped under favorable circumstances. ' ' In what other 

 way can we account for them? (3) 



In pr^of of this, it would be extremely interesting 

 to trace the genealogy of our fruits had we only the 

 data necessary — which is now, no doubt, impossible 

 for us to procure. Take the before-mentioned 

 Seckel pear, for instance. It has the well-known 

 character of rarely succeeding on the Quince. Now 

 this is only a varietj'. Why has it this character? 

 Were its two parents somewhat loth to unite with 

 this stock? Was this the characteristic of some 

 one of its ancestors, rendered latent through many 

 generations by some strange influence and now de- 

 veloped under some unappreciable but favorable cir- 

 cumstance? Or, was this a characteristic of the 

 pear in its original state ? In my father's garden 

 there is one which has succeeded well as a dwarf^, 

 and borne fruit for several years. Now, may not 

 the tree from which this bud was taken have be- 

 come tainted to such an extent as to render this 

 union easy? And will not a bud from this tree 



unite still more readily with this kind of stock. (4) 



I have a bud of the same kind growing on a Pip- 

 pin apple, and the fruit, in appearance only, is 

 Seckel ; in taste, texture, &c., it is something else. 

 Here is an influence exerted on the hud — the prin- 

 ciples contained in the bud — somewhat different 

 from that of hybridization ; at least it is done, ap- 

 parently, in a different manner than when a seed- 

 ling is produced. 



Take the Duchesse d'Angouleme, GloutMorceau 

 and Louise Bonne de Jersey pears. Why is it that 

 the fruit of a dwarf and a standard of either of these 

 kinds are so totally different? Here is, evidently, a 

 "graft-blending." The juices of two varieties of 

 the pear form in producing, in the one case, a very 

 poor substitute for a fruit, while in the other, that 

 of the quince and pear combined form varieties of 

 the first merit. 



Take one from each kind of stock and place them 

 before any inexperienced cultivator of fruits, and he 

 would pronounce them different varieties. P. B. 

 rather doubts that there is such a thing as a 'graft- 

 hybrid.' The pears above named, when worked on 

 quince stocks, certainly "produce an intermediate 

 character," which can reasonably be designated as 

 a graft-hybrid. They can be perpetuated the same 

 as other varieties, and will degenerate when not 

 rightfully propagated. 



A neighbor of mine has an apple tree, the 'fork' 

 of which divides the tree into two equal halves. The 

 fruit of the respective sides ripens alternate years, 

 and are easily distinguishable. A year or two since 

 I had an unanimity among my collection of Dahlias, 

 which were famous for this sporting quality. In 

 the majority of cases there would be a small limb 

 on the north side (if I recollect aright) that would 

 invariably produce flowers of a dull brick red, while 

 the rest of the bush was of the blended colors de- 

 scribed in the catalogues. These, I think, are in- 

 stances where the juices of a plant may become im- 

 pregnated, and by some unostensible agency declare 

 it by their fruits. 



It is well known to breeders of animals that part 

 of a progeny will often bear a resemblance to a pre- 

 vious male parent. I have a brood of puppies, part 

 of wbich are pointers, like the immediate male pa- 

 rent, the others are of another breed, and the same 

 as I raised at two previous broods back, without, I 

 know, any subsequent intercourse. 



Now, why can not an apple or pear produce fruit 

 in the very same manner ? Is it more unreasonable 

 in the one case than in the other? Cases of both 

 kinds can be cited almost indefinitely, and, I think, 

 can alike be accounted for. 



