HISTORICAL. 



9 



manager, at Highercombe, who reports that " the spots on apples run thus — Downton Nonpareil, Old 

 Nonpareil, Pennington Seedling, Dutch Mirjnonne, and Lord Nelson are subject to spots when a short 

 crop, such spots as those I have noticed since first having to do with fruit ; they appear more plainly 

 after the fruit has been stored for a few weeks ; also, when there is a large crop, some of the larger 

 apples will be spotted and the smaller ones not, from the same tree. As the flavour of the apple is 

 not altered, I therefore think it must be the nature of the fruit. " 



In Germany the disease is very common and well-known to the orchardist under the name 

 of " Stippon " (pitting) of the apple. There is a spotting of the apple mentioned by Fries in 18] 9, 

 which arises in the living fruit, and the cause is referred to a doubtful fungus (Spilocaea pomi Fr.), 

 but since the fungus origin of the disease in question has been disproved, this cannot be accepted 

 as a case of Bitter Pit. 



The first distinct reference to it is given by Jaeger (41) in I860, wdio considered the cause of 

 it to be placing early maturing fruit too soon in a damp cellar, without keeping it for some time 

 in a comparatively dry atmosphere. 



In the United States it is commonly referred to as " Baldwin Fruit-spot," because that is 

 the variety particularly subject to it, and the earliest mention of it is in 1891, when L. R. Jones (42) 

 referred to it in the annual report of the Vermont Agricultural Experiment Station, as being quite 

 common throughout the State. His description leaves no doubt as to the disease :— " The flesh 

 underneath the spot showed brown discoloration for one-eighth inch or more in depth, and this 

 discoloured portion was quite bitter to the taste " — and although a saprophytic fungus was found 

 on the spots when the diseased apples were kept in a moist chamber, yet a re-examination of the 

 brown spots showed that the spotting was not caused by a fungus. 



In Canada it was described in 1896 by Craig (22) as " A Dry Rot of Apples," and the description 

 with accompanying illustration prove its identity. 



In South Africa it is mentioned by Lounsbury in a letter to me as being bad in the Hex River 

 Valley in 1901 ; and Pole Evans (31) states that "Bitter Pit occurs practically wherever apple 

 culture is carried on." 



In India the disease has not hitherto been observed, and Dr. Butler informs me by letter that, 

 after having examined hundreds of trees in Kashmir, where the fruit is extensively grown, he con- 

 cludes that " the disease is, at any rate, not common in the apple-growing districts of Northern India." 



In Russia it is recorded in 1910 by Diakonoff (27) that apples in store were badly affected 

 with " stippigkeit," and, while quite free on picking, they were very soon covered with brown spots, 

 and rendered worthless. 



The earliest modern notice I can find of this disease in England is contained in the Gardener's 

 Chronicle for September, 1905, where it is named "Apple Brown Spot" ; and it is further stated 

 that this is not the first time it has been observed in Britain. 



In France it was noted by Delacroix (25) in 1908 under the name of " Points brun de la chair 

 de pommee," and is said to be common on numerous varieties of apples. 



It also occurs in every State of the Commonwealth, and in New Zealand it was recorded by 

 Kirk (45) in 1898 as occurring in the Wellington Province. 



Bitter Pit being one of the obscure diseases of the apple, it is not likely to have attracted 

 general attention before it became very pronounced, and from the very nature of the disease it 

 would only be put on record, if at all, when it interfered with the profits of the commercial 

 orchardist. But there are stray references to it scattered through the literature relating to the 

 apple, and there is one aspect of the question which makes it highly probable that references to 

 it may be overlooked, viz., that it only received the definite name by which it is now known as 

 late as 1895. 



Dr. Cameron, Director of Agriculture, puts this view of the matter very pithily when he 

 writes : — " The dependence apparently placed upon the period (about 1891) when the disease began 



