1 
374 SOUTHERN CULTIVATOR. 
FRUIT TREES FROM THE NORTH,” &c. 
Editors Southern Cultivator — Tn your October num- 
ber, I notice a communication from H. E. Hooker, Esq., of 
Kochester, N. Y., in reply to an article ©f mine in your 
July issue. 
At the beginning of his third paragraph Mr. Hooker 
says : “The statement that late keeping varieties of Apples 
for the South, cannot be procured from the North, is, in 
the main, correct; as those varieties are not much known 
out of the Southern States,” &c. 
Thus, you see, he clearly admits one of my strongest 
positions; and it is unnecessary to dwell any longer on 
that point. The remainder of Mr. Hooker’s article does 
not seem to call for any special reply from me. It is, 
generally, to the effect that a young tree grown at the 
North is just as good for the South as one grown in our 
own climate — a statement which all experienced Southern 
fruit growers know to be incorrect— and farther, that 
Rochester, N. Y., is a peculiarly favorable spot for the 
production of Nursery articles, and that a heavy amount 
of such articles is annually sold therefrom to nurserymen 
“from Maine to Georgia,” &c. I admit this proposition, 
and, to a certain extent, regret it, as far as Georgia and 
the South are concerned. It is really a shame that we do 
not raise our own trees, (which are far better adapted to 
our wants,) and keep our money at home. 
I have no particular cause of controversy with Mr. 
Hooker. I believe him to be an honorable gentleman and 
a fair dealer in all respects, as are many more in 
the same business, at Rochester and elsewhere in the 
North. I believe, also, that if these gentlemen had trees 
adapted to our wants, that they would be glad to sell 
them to us; and I fear that their desire to sell,sA all haz- 
ards, sometimes slightly clouds their judgment. But, 
the truth simply is, that, with few exceptions, they have 
not the kind of trees nor the varieties we most need and 
desire — that it is to our interest, in every way, to purchase 
Southern raised trees of Southern varieties, if possible ; 
and that, therefore,! am happy to believe that there will 
not be, hereafter, so many orders sent North for fruit trees 
as there have been heretofore. 
Respectfully yours. Malic Acid, 
Home Place, Ga., Oct., 1859, 
DEVEREUX, EENOIR AND OHIO GRAPES. 
Editors Southern Cultivator — In the last number 
of your journal you say: “ The nomenclature of our 
Grapes needs a revision, as many single varieties are 
known under, at least, half a dozen names,” This is 
very true ; and I propose to assist you in making the re- 
vision, and to begin by correcting what I suppose to be 
a mistake of your own. It lies in your remark that “the 
Devereux, Ohio and Lenoir are nearly, if not altogether, 
the same.”* 
Since the Report of the Committee of the Pomological 
Society, made two years ago, I have considered the name 
and description of the Lenoir as settled. We have that 
Grape in Atlanta, bearing the description which they 
gave it. 
We have the Ohio, also, which corresponds with the 
description given by Longworth, Downing and the said 
Committee. Ten years ago, I obtained that Grape from 
the Nurseries of Mr. Downing, and afterwards, when Mr. 
Thurmond established the Downing Hill Nursery, at this 
* We should have said that these varieties were much 
confused and by many considered identical. We thank 
our correspondent for setting the matter right. — Eds, 
place, he got the same of me. So we cannot doubt that 
we have the genuine Ohio, or Cigar Box Grape. 
If you will turn to the descriptions of these two Grapes, 
will you find them to be entirely distinct varieties. The 
Lenoir has a smallish entire leaf, net lobed, but plainly 
dentate ; and the bunches of fruit are rather small ana 
very compact. The Ohio has a large leaf, deeply tri lobed 
and the bunches are always very loose and long, some- 
times measuring over a foot. It has another peculiar 
characteristic which I have not seen noticed — the fruit be- 
ing quite sour long after it has turned black, but sweet 
and very pleasant when fully ripe. 
The Devereux appears, from articles long ago publish- 
ed in the Cultivator, to have been found near fifty years 
ago in Hancock count , by Samuel M. Devereux, and as 
such most long and lavorably known. IMr. J. Crawford 
says it “is scarcely distinguishable from the Warren.” 
But the said Committee seem to have settled the question 
that it is identical with the Lenoir. At the same time, 
however, they have introduced another Devereux, of an 
entirely different kind, received from Mr. Peters, of this 
place, who got it of Dr. Baldwin, of Alabama; yet they 
give it the same origin as the old Devereux. 
Supposing that to be the simon-pure Devereux, I pro- 
cured a root from Messrs. Peters, Harden & Co., which 
has grown two summers with me, but has not borne. 
Soon afterwards I learned from them that they had found, 
by comparison offruit, leaf and vine, that this new comer 
was identical with the Ohio. I have not seen the fruit, 
but have carefully compared my vine with the Ohio, 
growing beside it, and can perceive no difference between 
them. 
This fact may enable some of your readers to trace the 
origin of the Lenoir. Perhaps Dr. Baldwin, who sent it 
here as the Devereux, may throw further light upon the 
question. Windsor. 
Atlanta, Oct., 1859. 
ORCHARD RAMBEES. 
Editors Southern Cultivator — Mr. Van Buren very 
correctly answers, in the negative, the question whether 
the Peach, under the shortening-in process, will not be- 
come unduly thick in the head 1 
As Mr. Downing and others have recommended a sup- 
plementary thinning-out, I would notice the very beauti- 
ful provision of Nature which ren .^ers it unnecessary. 
The weight of the fruit sufficiently opens the head of the tree. 
How it will be with that curious production the “Pyra- 
midal Peach” when it begins to bear, is an open question. 
Perhaps, like some of the Pears and Apples, the centre of 
gravity will so nearly coincide with the centre of motion 
that a condition of stable equilibrium will be the result. 
There is no substitute for.tlie shertening-in of the Peach. 
Particular varieties and different conditions, as to thrift, 
may demand important modifications as to its application ; 
but, as a genera! rule, unless a gentleman wants to gather 
his fruit as the “Deacon” smashed “the one-horse shay,” 
“All together, and nothing firstf^ 
he had better not neglect it ! 
It rests almost entirely with the cultivator whether the 
Peach shall remain the ragged Witch of Endor that it is, 
or become the veritable King Solomon, in all his glory, 
that it ought to be. 
To one who has never seen it, I would say that the 
properly-cared-for Peach at the age that it ordinarily 
“gives out,” is, with its short and polished stem, its sturdy 
branches, its softly-tinted shoots, its broad and glossy 
foliage, and its magnificent globes of cream and crimson, 
perhaps the most beautiful object which a July sun shines 
upon ! T. 
Torch Hill, 1859. 
