92 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ February 4, 1892. 
of insects or the wind, it would be an incomparably better plan to obtain 
seeds of the required variety, which had been raised for some generations 
under as different conditions as possible, and sow them in alternate rows 
with seeds matured in the old garden. The two stocks would then inter¬ 
cross with a thorough blending of their whole organisations, and with 
no loss of purity to the variety; and this would yield far more favourable 
results than a mere change of seeds.” 
The second result of crossing, the summary production of new 
varieties, is the subject which is almost universally associated with 
crossing in the popular mind, and even among horticulturists them¬ 
selves. It is the commonest notion that the desirable characters of 
given parents can be definitely combined in a pronounced cross or 
hybrid. There are two or three philosophical reasons which somewhat 
oppose this doctrine, and which we will do well to consider at the outset. 
In the first place, Nature is opposed to hybrids, for species have been 
bred away from each other in the ability to cross. If, therefore, there 
is no advantage for Nature to hybridise, we may suppose that there 
would be none for man ; and there would be no advantage for man did 
he not place the plant under conditions different from Nature or desire 
a different set of characters. We can overcome the refusal to cross in 
many cases by bringing the plant under cultivation where new con¬ 
ditions overpower its former antipathies. Yet it is doubtful if such a 
plant will ever acquire a complete willingness to cross. In like manner 
we can overcome in a measure the comparative seedlessness of hybrids, 
but it is very doubtful if we can ever make such hybrids completely 
fruitful. It would appear, therefore, that with plants in which fruits 
or seeds are the parts sought, no good can be expected, as a rule, from 
hybridisation, and this seems to be affirmed by facts. It is evident that 
species which have been bred away from each other in a given locality 
will have more opposed qualities than similar species which have arisen 
quite independently in plaaes remote from each other. In the one ca«e 
the species have struggled with each other until each one has attained 
to a degree of divergence which allows it to persist, while in the other 
case there has been no struggle between the species, but similar con¬ 
ditions have brought about similar results. These similar species which 
appear independently of each other in different places are called repre¬ 
sentative species. Islands remote from each other, but similarly situated 
with reference to climate, very often contain such species, and the same 
may be said of other regions much like each other. Now it follows that 
if representative species are less opposed than others they are more 
likely to hybridise with good results ; and this fact is well illustrated 
in the Kieffer and allied Pears, which are hybrids between representa¬ 
tive species of Europe and Japan. We will also recall that the hybnd 
Grapes which have so far proved most valuable are those obtained by 
Rogers between the American Vitis Labrusca and the European Wine 
Grape, and that the attempts of Haskell and others to hybridise 
associated species of native Grapes have given, at best, only indifferent 
results. 
Another theoretical point borne out by practice is that because of 
the great difference between parents pronounced hybrid offspring are 
unstable. Again, because of the unequal and unknown powers of the 
parents, we can never predict what characters will appear in the 
hybrids. This fact was well expressed by Lindley a half century ago in 
the phrase, “ Hybridising is a game of chance played between man and 
plants.” The characters of hybrids as compared with the characters of 
simple crosses between stocks of the same variety are therefore ambiguous, 
negative, and often prejudicial. 
The difficulties in the way of successful results through hybridisation 
are, therefore, the difficulty of effecting the cross, infertility, instability, 
variability, and often weakness and monstrosity of the hybrids, and the 
absolute impossibility of predicting results. The advantage to be 
derived from a successful hybridisation is the securing in combination 
the most desirable features of bof h parents ; and this advantage is often 
of so great moment that it is worth while to experiment in the face of 
numerous failures. From theoretical considerations it is apparent that 
hybridisation is essentially an empirical subject, and the results are such 
as fall under the common denomination of chance. And as it does not 
rest upon any legitimate function in nature, we can understand that it 
will always be difficult to codify laws upon it. 
Among the various characters of hybrid offspring, the most prejudicial 
one is their instability ; it is difficult to fix any particular form which 
we may secure in the first generation of hybrids, and therefore we find 
that the great majority of the best hybrids in cultivation are increased 
by bud-propagation, as cuttings, layers, suckers, buds, or grafts. In 
fact, there are few instances of undoubted hybrids which are propagated 
with practical certainty by means of seeds. This simply means that it 
is difficult to fix hybrids so that they will come “ true to seed,” and 
makes apparent the fact that if we desire hybrids we must expect to 
propagate them by means of buds. 
Let us now recall how many undoubted hybrids there are, named 
and known, among our fruirs and vegetables. In Grapes there are the 
most. There are Rogers’ hybrids, like Agawam, Lindley, Wilder, Salem, 
and Barry ; and there is some reason for supposing that Delaware, 
Catawba, and other varie ies are of hybrid origin. And many hyorids 
have come to notice lately through the work of Munson and others. 
But it must be remembered that Grapes are naturally exceedingly 
variable, and the specific limits are not well known, and that hybridtsr- 
tion among them lacks much of that definiteness which ordinarily 
attaches to the subject. In Pears there is the Kieffer class. In Apples, 
Peaches, Plums, Cherries, Gooseberries, Blackberries, Dewberries there 
are no commercial hybrids. The Strawberry is doubtful. Some of the 
Raspberries, like Caroline and Shaffer, appear to be hybrids between 
the red and black species. Hybrids have been product between the 
Raspberry and Blackberry by two or three persons, but they possess no 
promise of economical results. Among all the list of garden vegetables 
—plants which are propagated by seed—I do not know of a single 
authentic hybrid, and the same is true of Wheat—unless the Carman 
Wheat Rye varieties become prominent—Oats, the Grasses, and other 
farm crons. But among ornamental plants there are many ; and it is a 
significant fact that the most numerous, most marked, and most 
successful hybrids occur in the plants most carefully cultivated and 
protected—those, in other words, which are farthest removed from all 
untoward circumstances and an independent position. This is nowhere 
so well illustrated as in the case of cultivated Orchids, in which 
hybridisation has played no end of freaks, and in which, also, every 
individual plant is nursed and coddled. For such plants the struggle 
for existence is reduced to its lowest terms; for it must be borne in 
mind that even in the garden plants must fight severely for a chance to 
live, and even then only the very best can persist or are even allowed 
to try. 
Most of the so-called hybrid fruits and vegetables are myths. There 
is everywhere a misconception of what a hybrid is, and how it comes to 
exist ; and yet, perhaps because of this indefinite knowledge, there is a 
widespread feeling that a hybrid is necessarily good, while the presump¬ 
tion is directly the opposite. 
There is an old yet common notion that there is some peculiar 
influence exerted by each sex in the parentage of hybrids. It was held 
by certain early observers, of whom the great Linnmus was one, that 
the female parent determines the constitution of the hybrid, while 
the male parent gives the external attributes, as form, size, and colour. 
The accumulated experience of nearly a century and a half appears 
to contradict this proposition. There are instances, to be sure, in 
which this old idea is affirmed, but there are others in which it is 
contradicted. The truth appears to be, that the parent of greater 
strength or virility makes the stronger impression upon the hybrids, 
whether it is the staminate or pistillate parent. And it appears to be 
equally true that it is usually impossible to determine beforehand 
which parent is the stronger. The common little pear-shaped Gourd 
will impress itself more strongly upon crosses than any of the edible 
Squashes and Pumpkins with which it will effect a cross, whether it is 
used as male or female parents. Even the imposing and ubiquitous 
great field Pumpkin is overpowered by the little Gourd. Seeds from a 
large and sleek Pumpkin, which had been fertilised by Gourd pollen, 
produced Gourds and small hard-shelied globular fruits which were 
entirely inedible. A more interesting experiment with the handsome 
green-striped Bergen Fall Squash showed a similar prepotency of the 
Gourd. 
Uncertainty follows hybridisation, and uncertainty also attaches to 
the mere act of pollination. Between some species, which are closely 
allied and have large and strong flowers, four-fifths of the attempts at 
cross-pollination may be successful, but such a large proportion of 
successes is not common. Even the most expert operators fail as often 
as they succeed in promiscuous pollinating. In my own experience 234 
pollinations of Gourds, Pumpkins, and Squashes, mostly between 
varieties of one species and including some individual pollinations, 
gave 117 failures and 117 successes. But from all the 117 fruits, for 
some of them turned out to be seedless, and some were destroyed by 
insects before they were ripe or were lost by accidental means, a few 
more than half of the successful pollinations—if by success we mean the 
formation and growth of fruit—really secured us seeds, or but one-fourth 
of the whole number of efforts, and this was considered a successful 
experiment. Referring to a record-book where experiments were made 
with many species, I find that a total of 312 efforts resulted in 89 
successes, 223 failures. 
And now the sum of it all is this ; Encourage in every way crosses 
within the limits of the variety and in connection with change of 
stock, expecting increase in vigour and productiveness. Hybridise, if 
you are curious to know what Nature will do about it, but do it care¬ 
fully, honestly, thoroughly, and do not expect too much.^ Extend 
Darwiu’s famous proposition to read like this : Nature ab’uors both 
perpetual self-fertilisation and hybridisation.— (The summary of a paper 
read at a recent meeting of the Massachusetts State Board of Agricul¬ 
ture by Professor L. IL Bailey of Cornell University.) 
HARDY FRUIT GARDEN. 
Renovatiko Unprofitable Apple and Pbar Trees. —Last 
year was a good season to test these in most localities, and wherever the 
crop was generally a good one any trees that failed to bear satisfactorily 
should now have a careful inspection in order to ascertain the cause of 
failure. Some kinds of Apples are much disposed to bear only once in 
two years, and, even under favourable conditions in every way, do not 
flower oftener than this, or only to a small extent. The White Juneating 
