772 
THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 
[May 1, 1901. 
CACAO : 
Cultivation v. Longevity . 
Dear Sir, — There is no question, [ take it, that 
the cultivation of cacao, if carried on at all, 
should be done more or less in co operation with 
the tree itself. 
I may be pardoned this platitude on account of 
the number of planters who appear to forget in 
their treatment of it that cacao is one of the 
most delicate of fruit trees ; and this is manifest 
in numerous ways, but in two ways very spe- 
cially, namely (a) the condition of Suokering, and 
(b) the condition of Manuring. I think I see in 
these two conditions of treatment, as applied to 
cacao in Ceylon, somethinf; of the conditions 
under which coffee was grown to the comparative 
disadvantage of the former. In this connection 
also, I may venture to indicate a parallel uetween 
the leaf fungus of coffee, and the bark-fungus of 
cacao : that, as some have thought the coffee- 
fhngus may be traced, however indirectly, to 
drastic manuring, so the cacao fungus may perhaps 
be traced to the accumulation of damp litter ; the 
point of the analogy being that both improper 
manuring and exces^i of litter induce dirt, and 
hence illdiealth in the tree. Analysis of the soil, 
and sometimes of the tree itself are resorted to 
for purposes of discovering it possible what natural 
constituents of life are respectively lacking and 
present: chemical analysis therefore tells us what 
to manure with ; but practical analysis, i.e. know- 
ledge of the tree and its nature, is also required 
before any manure should be applied. The just com- 
bination and intelligent application of these two 
metlioas constitute the scientific lines on which a 
product should be cultivated. 
But, although the object of manuring coffee 
and cacao is identical, namely, the production 
of fruit, it by no means follows that the system 
of manuring as applied to coffee is applied with 
equal benefit tc cacao, irrespective of whether 
cacao will stand the treatment. On the other hand 
cacao is a delicate plant, more delicate certainly 
than coffee, and should consequently be treated 
more leniently — within certain prescribed limits ; 
and these limits have direct reference not so much 
to the method of treatment as to the actual life of 
the tree. 
If the natural quantity of fruit borne by a 
tree is insufficient to render its cultivation re- 
munerative, the tree must be forced. This is 
undoubtedly the case with cacao ; for a cacao 
tree allowed to grow at its own sweet will does 
not bear soon enough for impatient mortals. Quick 
returns first — then large profits : it can be done, 
but it is done at a cost ; and that cost, I hazard 
the opinion, is canker — not tlie only cost, but the 
greatest, 1 believe. 
This question of manure, too, is all the more 
important owing to the extremely unnatural con- 
ditions under which the cacao tree is alone 
speedily remunerative. I shall never believe 
that the tree's original nature is to throw 
up 'S2ickers.' What the tree does throw up 
in the first instance is not a 'sucker' — not 
a • gormandiser ' ; it is the tree itself. 
To cut this off is to top the tree ; and the 
proof of this is that, if the so-called ' sucker ' is 
allowed to grow, it in turn spreads out in another 
platform, and a little later another so-called 
' sucker ' grows up and forms a third platform, 
and so until five, six, seven platforms may 
successively be reached. It is true that, what- 
ever that first 'shoot' is called, it has to conue 
off if crop IS the objective; but I have done 
something more than say the same thing in 
other words. I have made it clear (if indeed it 
was necessary) that the conditions under which 
a -cacao tree is cultivated in Ceylon are at least 
as unnatural as those under which coffee was 
grown ; and, if it is admitted that cacao is more 
delicate than coffee, it will be seen that this only 
increases the disability under which cacao 
necessarily labours. 
Weakness in a cacao tree is dependent upon 
many things; but three especially, namely,-soil 
climate, treatment. The tree may fail, early o^ 
ate, but It IS bound to go in the long-run. It 
has neither the longevity nor the vitality of tea ; 
but trees in a natural uncultivated state have 
been known to live— I write under correction - 
hfty and sixty years, and perhaps longer ; and 
such trees are in the Island. Now, the oldest 
trees lo the Island are Caraccas, but what 
Superintendent can point to a thirty-year old 
Caraccas field and believe it good for another 
t\venty-vears at 3 cwt. per acre? It is .said that 
'Cacao Walks" of the West Indies have been 
handed down from father to son for generations • 
but it has never been urged, 1 believe, that the 
original trees are still living. The soil of the 
West Indies is infinitely finer on the whole than 
our average Ceylon soil, but soil is no guar- 
antee of longevity any more than is the aTr we 
breathe. Bad air poiisons us, but good air is not 
conversely, elixir vitm, but a natural food; and 
similarly good soil to the cacao tree is a sustainer of 
life in pronortion to the quantity of it consumed and 
the method of consumption. The first indication 
of this weakness therefore may appear early or 
late, according to the absence or presence of certain 
necessary conditions. A time comes when the 
tree, worried by suckerin? and fatigued by bearing 
fails; then is the time to manure. Coffee was 
manured by cutting half-moon trenches about the 
tree. Shall the same be done for cacao and in the 
same way ? If we scrape away an inch or two of soil 
around the base of the tree we come upon a very 
network of fine silky roots. Not everyone knows 
that these are the fruit-roots. Shall we cut them 
through with our half-moon trenches, first on one 
side the first year and then on the other side the 
following year? It was so done to coffee. But 
cacao IS more delicate than coffee ; surely, there- 
fore, such drastic treatment should not be 
entered upon without Sufficient reason. Where 
is the reason then? Is it to be found 
in root-pruning? The ruthless catting through 
of the roots, upon which we depend for one crop 
can scarcely be called that. This root-amputatingi 
fibre-smashing, crop-obliterating treatment is not 
root-pruning. What other reason, then, for this 
extraordinary manner of application? Is it hal- 
lowed by habit, or cursed by custom ? At any rate, 
the fruit-roots being all on the surface, it is folly to 
dig for them ! Uncover, sprinkle the manure over, 
cover them up again, and the thing is done cheaper) 
because quicker ; better, because all iudiscriminat- 
ing amputation is avoided. And we need to 
manure because the trees wou'd otherwise grow 
weak— nay, they grow weak in any case— sWly, 
gradually weaker ; the object of manuring being to 
delay this natural process, the common miracle of 
decease, and to let the tree— and the proprietor 
— down lightly. 
Ever since the tree was topped, it has done all 
it knew to follow its own bent. For every ' shoot ' 
pulled off, it has put up two, four, sijf, until new 
