8 BULLETIN 179, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
Kenrick again refers to a native in 1841 (88, p. 230), when he | 
describes the ‘‘Dwarf Texas Plum’’ as follows: 
A low, dwarfish tree or shrub, rising 2 or 3 feet or more; the blossoms white, profuse, 
of a beautiful appearance, and in early spring resembling snow; the fruit of different 
colors, according to the variety, some being yellow, some red, and some purple; the 
flesh of delicious flavor; the produce most abundant. This new tree, or shrub, was 
lately introduced to our country from a small district in the colder part of Texas, and 
the upper Colorado, by my friend John B. Russell, Esq., of Cincinnati, Ohio. He is 
persuaded it must prove hardy. 
This description suggests very strongly Prunus angustifolia watsoni, | 
but possibly might also refer to P. reverchonit. It is almost certainly 
one or the other of these two. If it is really the sand plum, it is a 
httle curious that it should apparently not again come to the atten- 
tion of horticulturists until about 1890. It was, however, grown in | 
gardens to some extent in Kansas and probably also in Nebraska, 
as early as 1880, or perhaps even earlier. 
Thomas Bridgeman (11, p. 339) in 1840 and Michael Floyd (42, 
p. 303) in 1846 also mention native species and discuss them briefly, | 
and an early edition of Thomas’s American Fruit Culturist includes | 
the ‘‘Red Chicasaw (Prunus chicasa)’’ (71, p. 347-348), which the | 
author describes and says is ‘fa native of the western states.” 
Thomas is evidently more familiar with P. americana, concerning | 
which he says: 
There are many wild varieties of this species, the fruit varying from roundish to 
oval, and presenting various shades of color, mostly ight red. Some have a pleasant, 
rich, sweet or subacid pulp. Tree 10 to 15 feet high, leaves ovate, coarsely serrate, 
branches somewhat thorny. Ripens latter part of summer. The quality of the fruit 
is improved by cultivation. It is sometimes used as stocks for the plum and apricot. 
Thomas also describes the beach plum rather briefly and mentions 
these natives in some of the later editions of his work, but in that | 
of 1867 all reference to them is omitted. Native plums were dis- 
cussed by Elliott in 1854 (21, p. 402), who said Prunus americana was. | 
much used by nurserymen as a stock, seedlings of it often answering 
to work the same season. Elliott also throws some light on the 
attention that had been given at that time to the development of 
new varieties in general, in the following statement: 
New varieties have thus far been produced from chance seedlings; no persons, to _ 
our knowledge, in this country, having exerted themselves to the production of | 
varieties with any special view to the preservation of separate or combined characters. 
Elliott lists the beach plum among his varieties, but says it should — 
be discarded. This author in a later work (23, p. 95) discusses the | 
native varieties a little more fully, and what he says concerning them — 
indicates a more thorough knowledge of their merits and adaptability | 
than is shown by almost any other author of a pomological work up | 
to that time. Elliott’s book is also one of the earliest general works © 
to give a list of the native varieties known. The author says: 
a wee a pens See ae 
oe 
or 
MI 
