1866.] 
AMERICAN ACRICULTURIST. 
59 
flavor, the fruit is so generally good and the 
crop, so regularly to be depended upon, that we 
are disposed to give it a high rank. 
Dana's Eovey.—'Wh&n this pear was first ex¬ 
hibited, it was so small that its lack of size 
seemed to detract from its good qualities, but as 
the trees grew older, the fruit became larger, 
and it is now of sufficient size for a table fruit. 
"We have only seen specimens from Mr. Hovey, 
who states that the growth, habit and produc¬ 
tiveness of the tree are all that can be desired. 
In quality the fruit is of the very best. It has 
a russet skin, is very juicy and of an exceedingly 
rich fiavor. Last year it -was in eating the mid¬ 
dle of December. Mr. Hovey states that ordi¬ 
narily it keeps until the end of January, and 
never rots at the core. 
McLaughlin:—A. fine, large, russety fruit, 
which originated in Maine, and is not much 
'Imown out of New England. From the speci¬ 
mens M'e have seen we should consider it good, 
and worthy'of the attention of cultivators. 
Josephine de Malines. —The tree has not a 
very rapid growth, and it needs age before it 
will produce good fruit. When in perfection, it 
is one of the best, and will last until spring. 
Winter Nelis. —This fine old variety should 
not be overlooked in making a selection of win¬ 
ter pears. All the specimens we have seen this 
year ripened early, but they were very fine. 
Vicar of Winkjield. —This is the best of all 
•cooking pears, and when well grown by good 
culture and proper thinning, is a better table 
pear than some with a higher reputation. ' In its 
best condition it is a very handsome fruit, audit 
is generally sure to bear a crop. 
Besides these'there are many old and new 
varieties, including Easter Beurre, Glout Mor- 
ceau, Sieulle, Beurre D’Anjou, Belle Epine 
Dumas, and others. If winter pears have good 
culture and the same care in thinning, when 
needed, that is given to other varieties, we shall 
not hear so many complaints that the whole 
class are a failure. The prices that good speci¬ 
mens always bring in market, should be an in¬ 
ducement to fruitgrowers to give them a fair trial. 
Newspaper and Popular Science. 
Popular science is too apt to be popular error. 
It would be a good thing to have children taught 
the rudiments of the natural sciences as thor¬ 
oughly as they are those of arithmetic; could 
we only have capable teachers and suitable text 
books. Of late what is called Object Teaching 
has been introduced into schools. The idea is 
a good one, .but to properly carry it out calls 
for acquirements more varied than will usually 
be found among our college professors, and are 
not to be looked for among common school 
teachers as a class. The American Educational 
Monthly, not long ago published an “Object 
Lesson on Iron,” in which children are taught 
that iron is “ corrosive.” The class being asked 
what steel is, answer; “ The best kind of iron.” 
Teacher. —“ That is about correct; it is iron 
worked into a more perfect form. Can you de¬ 
scribe the process?” Class. —“It is made hot 
and then put into cold water.” And so on all 
through the article a profound ignorance is dis¬ 
played of the nature of iron and the children are 
taught errors which they must in time unlearn. 
It is very unsafe business for those who know 
but little of any science to undertake to teach 
those who know less. One of our agricultural 
cotemporaries in a popular article on chemis¬ 
try gives chloride of lime as an illustration of 
a binary compound. Chemically speaking there 
can be no such thing as chloride of lime, and if 
the writer means the article popularly known 
by that name, he could not have chosen any¬ 
thing farther from a binary compound. When 
our literary papers affect the scientific, science 
gets the worst of it. The Home Journal of 
Dec. 9th last, had an article upon the potato 
which may have appeared learned to some, but 
which was a tissue of absurdities from begin¬ 
ning to end. To show up the errors of such an 
article as this "would be labor misspent. Our 
daily papers have much to answer for in the 
way of false science, and their articles which 
treat on scientific matters are so amusing that 
we for the time forget that Vanity Fair and Mrs. 
Grundy are dead. The N. Y. Tribune of Dec. 
6th, has an article giving “ Anecdotes of the 
Microscope,” which is so remarkable a produc¬ 
tion that we have cut it out and put it among 
our literary curiosities. It was probably writ¬ 
ten by one who never saw a microscope. The 
Tribune is, however, no worse in this respect 
than the other dailies and, they are all, as far as 
their treatment of scientific matter goes, melan- • 
choly illustrations that “a little learning is a 
dangerous thing.” 
Gardening in a Back Yard. 
The Agriculturist commends itself to those 
who have small gardens, as well as to the own¬ 
ers of large farms, but we did not know that it 
was read by those operating on quite so small a- 
scale as the writer of the following who sends his 
experience over the signature of “ Rusinurbe.” 
This queer name is, we suspect, a running togeth¬ 
er of Bus in urie, the “ Country in the City.” 
“ The changes of this changing world found me 
in N. Y. City, on the cold first of May last taking 
possession of a city house. It had been engaged 
for me without my first inspecting it, and upon 
reaching my new possession, I neglected to look 
at parlor and dining room, but ran eagerly to the 
rear to survey the ‘grounds.’ Imagine how small 
the smallest kind of a city yard looked to one 
who had been accustomed to till his.acres of 
garden. Here was all of mother earth that was 
left to me, scarcely a good sized burial lot. I 
resolved to make the best of it. When I was 
gardening on the large scale, I used to read 
in the Agriculturist of wonderful things in small 
plots of ground, and I recollected with sorrow, 
the co.ntempt I felt for those potterers in small 
patches. Here was so much, or rather so little, 
land to be. made the most of. ' It had already 
been laid out by a former occupant, a grass plot 
which two bed sheets would cover, and a border 
around three sides of the yard. I had 36 feet 
of border averaging 3 feet wide, and I borrowed 
a bit from one end of the grass plot to make a 
little bed 8 feet by 3. A stable at hand supplied 
manure, and the ground was put in a tolerable 
condition. Now for my planting. The fence 
with the warmest exposure was furnished with 
a trellis of wire and strings, and Lima beans, 
planted as well for ornament as for beans. 
Eighteen good Tomato plants were set out 
along the borders and supplied with trellises. 
Two egg-plants filled spare corners, while the 
bed I annexed from the grass plot was devoted 
to two hills of cucumbers. Then all along the 
edges of the borders and beds, parsley seed was 
sown. The results were first shown in a cu¬ 
cumber ! Do you believe there was such anoth¬ 
er cucumber in New-York, and did I not on 
that day feel pity for those misguided persons 
who bought the wilted’ things at the corner 
grocery ? Tomatoes came early, and plenty of 
them, all that five persons could eat and quanti¬ 
ties to can and pickle green. About a dozen 
egg-fruit, aldermanic in proportions, and deli¬ 
cious in flavor. Several pickings were made of 
Lima beans, and the parsley was always pretty 
to look at, and handy to have. ‘ And is this all ?’ 
some reader of large possessions will ask. No. 
All those nice things on the table were as noth¬ 
ing to the weeding, the pinching in of rampant 
cucumber vines, the tying up and cutting up of 
tomato vines, (how much cutting they do stand,) 
the fight with insects, the getting the hands 
dirty, the back tired, and being happy generally. 
I don’t think I can ever have a smaller garden, 
but if it comes down to a single cubic foot in a 
candle box, I shall accept it and thankfully read 
the Agriculturist which tells me how to make 
it yield to the full extent of its capabilities.” 
Names of Plants and Fruits. 
Our horticultural nomenclature is in sore need 
of revision, and we are glad to see that the sub¬ 
ject is being agitated by so influential a paper 
as the London Gardeners’ Chronicle. In a well 
conceived article in its issue of Dec. 9 last, it 
protests strongly against the practice, which is 
becoming too common, of the imposing of names 
for supposed new plants by those who have 
only a limited knowledge of botany. It says; 
“ But w'e put it to all advocates of correct bo¬ 
tanical nomenclature, who are not sufficiently 
educated themselves, whether it would not be 
more desirable to endeavor to have their plants 
scientifically and correctly named by qualified 
botanists than to send such plants out to the pub¬ 
lic, oftentimes not correctly named, or not un- 
frequently provided with names of questiona¬ 
ble taste.” To all of which we heartily say 
yes, and in turn ask the Chronicle if it would 
not help the end it desires, to stop calling one of 
our American trees Wellingtonia, which it con¬ 
stantly has done, and does in the very number 
fi'om which we have quoted. The name Wel- 
lingtonia was given to it in a “ questionable 
taste,” the absurdity of which is only exceeded 
by that of Washingtonia, by which others have 
called it. But our objection to.it is that it is 
not “ correct botanical nomenclature.” As our 
friends do not seem as wmll up in American bot¬ 
any as they should be,we refer them, to Silliman’s 
Journal, and the Pacific R R Reports, where 
they will find it shown that the so-called Wel- 
lingtonia was discovered, after the fruit became 
known, to belong to Endlicher’s old genus Se~ 
quoia., and that the proper name is Sequoia gi~ 
gantea. It may gratify national pride to attach 
a name honored in English history to this won¬ 
derful tree, but it should not be indulged at the 
expense of scientific accuracy. The Chronicle 
says, “ There is some consolation in knowing 
that the time will soon come round when these 
so-called names which have been given to plants 
by unqu alified persons, wull be discarded for 
those which have been given by botanists.” 
Though the name Wellingtonia w'as not given 
by an “unqualified person,” it is in the category 
of those which “will disappear from a posi¬ 
tion they should never have occupied.” 
In January 1865 we had some remarks upon 
the nomenclature of fruits, especially upon the 
inconvenience which attends the designation of 
a fruit by a name of several words, such as the 
pear Beurre gris d' River Nouveau. The French 
pomologists are responsible for most of this re¬ 
dundance, and we are glad to see that a reform 
baa commenced in the quarter where it was 
most needed. In the Nouveau Jardinier for 
