PEARLS AND PEARL FISHERIES. 
413 
these, some of which enumerate a variety of tints, the following colors are mentioned, 
giving a fair idea of their relative frequency: 
White 
61 
Yellow ... 
Pink 
53 
Green 
Purple 
......... 29 
Steel 
Black 
...: 23 
Wine 
Blue 
21 
Lavender. 
Red i 
16 
Brown . . . 
Gold 
12 
Gray 
Bronze 
10 
Ruhy 
10 
5 
3 
3 
3 
3 
2 
Maroon 
Copper . 
Silver . . 
Lead . . , 
Cherry . 
Salmon . 
Rose .. 
Slate . . 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
Of these, copper, cherry, maroon, and ruby colors may be referred to red, and, 
perhaps, in some cases wine color also; gray, steel, and steel-gray belong together; 
also, bronze and brown; and rose will fall under pink. Yellow may be placed with 
gold, and probably wine-color; all these last are presumably from the beautiful Unio 
dromas, the only species, or at least the only frequent one, that presents a yellow or 
golden nacre in a portion of its interior. The frequent reference to blue is sur- 
prising, especially from the terms used by several in characterizing the shade. Six 
speak of sky-blue, four of steel-blue, one of lead-blue, and one of peacock blue (Wis- 
consin). One Wisconsin paper also refers to peacock-green as especially valuable, 
as also lavender. A few allude to the varying degrees of translucency notable in Unio 
pearls, referring to some as “clear,” to others as “'milky,” and as “bone white” (opaque). 
One (Tennessee) speaks of them as occasionally “clear as crystal.” Only two make 
any discriminations as to the occurrence of different colors, other than their compara- 
tive frequency or rarity. Several say that they are of various colors, according to the 
shells whence they are taken, and a Tennessee paper specifies that white ones come 
from the “yellow” mussel and steel-gray ones from the black. 
The impression produced by reading this account is very strong as to the peculiar 
interest and value of the Unio fauna of the Mississippi basin, in reference to this pro- 
duction of many-colored pearls and the importance of preserving it from the reckless 
extinction which is threatened by the present rude and wholesale methods of pearl- 
hunting, in which the shells are destroyed by thousands, for want of some simple and 
judicious process, such as older countries have devised and applied. 
The responses to question 15 are a good deal intermingled with those to question 
17, and, so far as they give actual values or prices, have been incorporated in the 
summing up of the answers to that inquiry. Question 15 properly deals only with 
relative values of different sizes, shapes, and colors ; and therefore these points alone 
have been considered in drawing up a summary of results. Many of the answers are 
extremely general, referring only to the fact that values vary according to size and 
quality; others give simply prices, which, as above stated, are included in the report 
on question 17. Of 96 papers responding, 61 give more or less data belonging strictly 
to the question, 37 of which refer to the shape chiefly, and 33 to the color, several to 
both and to other points of quality. 
So far as shape is concerned, nearly all these agree in giving the first place of 
value to spherical pearls, then to hemispherical and “button-shaped,” then to oval 
and pear-shaped. Several speak of the small and “seed” pearls as of practically no 
value. One gives the “biscuit” pearl as the most prized (Tennessee); this of course 
arises from some local circumstance. A Tennessee paper gives a valuable statement 
to the effect that, compared with a spherical pearl taken as unity, a “button-shaped” 
one of equal size and quality is worth about two-thirds, and a “pear-shaped” pearl 
somewhat less. A Tennessee correspondent states that rare-colored pearls are twice 
