SEPT 22 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
623 
white to pink as the nights grow cold. It is a 
coarse but showy shrub. Of all the Spiraeas, 
let us choose the Japan Spiraea, prunifolia. 
The little double white dowel's appear in late 
May and soon the shrub liecouies a mass of 
white which lasts until June. As we have 
said before, we once estimated upon a plant 
but three feet high, that there was not less 
than 10,000 of these little white rosettes. 
Spirma Thunburgii is one of the first of all 
hardy shrubs to blossom. It is a small shrub 
beariug white blossoms in great profusion. 
As for Deutzias and Weigelas, one may take 
nurserymen’s catalogues for his guide, since 
there is no great choice between them—all are 
pretty floriferous. Exochorda grandiflora (now 
classed by some as Spiraea grandiflora), bears 
white flowers resembling those of the crab 
apple. The leaves keep green until after 
frosts; the shrub grows to the bight of ten 
feet and is entirely hardy in this climate. 
The Japan Judas Tree, as we choose to call it, 
(Cercis Japouica) wreathes its naked branches 
in late Spring (May), with rosy purple flow- 
ei-s, and later clothes itself with shiny, thick 
leaves of a heart shape. The Silver Bell (Hal 
esia tetraptera) is a well-shaped little tree 
found wild in Ohio and southward. The white 
bell flowers droop from the stems in small ra¬ 
cemes, leaving a winged seed from which the 
specific uame is derived. The stems of this 
little tree are clean and shapely, the wood 
very hard, the bark prettily striated with gray 
and dark brown. 
The Long-raeemed Horsechestnut forms a 
hemisphere of foliage resting upon the soil. 
1 he racemes of whitish, fragrant flowers are 
often over a foot in length, bloomiug in July, 
when the garden stands iu greatest Deed of 
flowers. It grows slowly for several years, 
but finally shows that it is worthy of a promi¬ 
nent and permanent position, Our space iu 
this number is limited and we cun but indicate 
the shrubs which, wore we again laying out 
grounds, we should choose if confined to a 
lew. For the rest, wo may mention Stuartia 
pentagyua, Kalin’s St. Jolra’te-Wort (Hyperi¬ 
cum Kalmiamim), the Golden Nine-bark. 
Rose of Sharon, standard Honeysuckles, 
Smoke-Tree (Rhus Cotinus) ; Lilacs (the im¬ 
proved kinds), aud Purple Barberry. 
1 UKKs. We have no space iu this number 
of the Rural to dwell upon individual merits. 
Passing over all trees that grow very tall, and 
confining ourselves to a mere mention of the 
best of those adapted to door-yards or lawns 
of less than uu acre or so in extent, we men¬ 
tion first the Yellow-\Vood to which we have 
frequently called attention in these columns 
during the past six years, it is occasionally 
found upon hill-sides from Kentucky south¬ 
ward along the Alleghanies, but so rarely of 
late years that it ism danger of extinction. It 
should be severely cut back when transplanted. 
The European Purple Beech is a grand tree, 
bearing purple leaves that retain their color 
longer than any other purple-leaved tree. Of 
the Maples we would mention the Dissected- 
loaf Maple (Acer platanoides dissectum) as 
our first choice uni Schwerdler’s Maple, sec¬ 
ond. When the leaves first unfold iu Spring 
they are nearly black. This changes fiist to 
purpie and dually to green. A loaf sketch is 
shown at Fig. 040. Next may be placed the 
Dissimilar-leaved Beech (Kagus heterophylla), 
though of very slow growth. Scarcely any 
two leaves are alike. The Liquidambar is 
desirable for its star-shaped leaves, turning to 
the most brilliant colors of Full: for itssym 
metrical shape aud for its singular bark growth. 
Of Horse-chestnuts we should choose the Yel¬ 
low and Red flowering. 
Magnolias have u grand, luxuriant, tropical 
beauty unequaled by any other hardy tree. 
We should select one each of the Cucumber 
Tree, the Sweet Bay, the Great.-leavod Mag¬ 
nolia and Leuui5's Magnolia, though the last is 
not very hardy north of this latitude. 
Thu Ginkgo or Maiden hair Tree is notable 
for its fan-shaped leaves, as if composed of so 
many of the “needles” of our White Pine 
joined together. 
We need make no mention of Evergreen 
trees or shrubs, siuce they should not be trans¬ 
planted in the Kali. 
DO TREES AFFECT RAINFALL, CLI¬ 
MATE OR PRODUCTIVENESS. 
J. A. FOOTE. 
1 HE RvHAL’S veteran and valued corres¬ 
pondent, B. F. Johnson, iu the Fair Number, 
suggests as one of the chief subjects for inves¬ 
tigation, discussion and action, “the re-forest¬ 
ing of the country because of its beneficial 
effects on climate, drought, rainfall and agri¬ 
cultural production generally.” This is very 
proper as stated; but if your correspondent 
assumes, as may readily be iuferred, that re- 
luresting bestows ull these benefits, then an 
exception may be taken to the preposition. 
Eor if that is the assumption and it is allowed, 
then there can be no uoed of investigation. 
I heu an exception may be taken to the word 
re-foresting. The suggestion of the whole 
paragraph is that there has been a loss in 
forests and a consequent damage, and that 
their restoration will give back the benefits 
lost. Now is this true? Mind that this is 
spoken of the Valley of the Mississippi. Now 
it cannot be denied that in some parts of this 
valley forests have been cut off, notably in 
Indiana and Ohio, but how is it about his 
own State, Illinois, and those other great 
Prairie States, Missouri, Iowa, Kansas and 
Nebraska? Has there been a loss of forests in 
them? Has Illinois less trees now than it had 
50 years ago? It is certainly doubtful and it 
may be it has more. At any rate, the differ¬ 
ence is not appreciable. Then if there has 
not been a diminution of forests in this vast 
district, the word re-foresting is open to crit¬ 
icism. And if there has been no loss, then 
there can have been no ill effects, as suggested. 
But supposing that the proposition was put 
this way—that the increase of forests would 
benefit "climate, rainfall and agricultural 
production generally,” it would still be open 
to criticism in my opinion. I might admit 
that the iucrease may benefit, to a limited ex¬ 
tent., climate and productiveness, and in some 
sections it must lie conceded that an increase 
would be profitable iu other ways than climate 
and productiveness, but, as to other sections, 
it would be difficult to prove even this. Here 
in Indiana, for instance, it cannot be allowed 
that climate has suffered by the diminution of 
forests. On the contrary, the healthfulness of 
the State is greater thau it was when the 
country was largely covered with forests; nor 
can it be shown that there has been any in¬ 
crease in either heat or cold. Then, as to 
production, if there has been any loss anv- 
where iu this respect it can be much more 
readily accounted for in the wearing out of 
lauds by improper cultivation. But the fact 
is that the production of Indiana is fully 
equal to what it ever was. if not greater. So, 
it will be seen that this correspondent, whose 
writings I have always appreciated, is on a 
wrong scent along with a great many other 
intelligent persons. For it must be clear on 
reflection that the Prairie States ha ve suffered 
no damage from this cause since they have 
had no forests to lose, and the wooded 
States tire not aware that they are damaged 
either iu climate or production. 
Now I come to the question of rainfall, and, 
as stated at the loginning, 1 infer .hat. the 
writer means to intimate that there has been 
a loss in the rainfall iu consequence of the 
loss of forests. At uny ruto, it is a very com¬ 
mon opinion constantly stated in our papers 
and even advocated by some scientists. 
I-et us examine this, as has boon done as to 
the other items in the proposition.reniembering 
that the discussion is iu regard to the Mississ¬ 
ippi Valley. First, the suggestion eanuot ap¬ 
ply to a large aud the most important part of 
this valley, viz: the Prairie States, for they 
have had no forests to lose, and if there has 
been any loss iu rainfall iu them it could not 
possibly be from this cause. Secondly, l deuy 
that there has been uny loss of raiufull what¬ 
ever in the wooded States, it is a common, 
assumption that there has been a diminution, 
but it is not true. No one has ever produced 
any statistics to prove it to be so. On the 
contrary, the only statistics accessible prove 
that there has been a slight gain. Having 
taken an interest in this question and believ¬ 
ing that the assumption was a fallacy, I ap¬ 
plied to the Signal Service Office for statistics 
bearing on the question, which were kindly 
furnished. Here is the result from four of the 
earliest records of the rainfall in Ohio and 
Kentucky, compared with the latest. I would 
give them more in detail did space allow. At 
Marietta the record goes back to 1824, at 
Steubenville to 1831, at Cincinnati to 1835, and 
in Springdale, Ky., to 1842. 
Average rainfall in these four localities 
Earliest 10 years, — inches.43.01 
Latest 10 years. — inches.43.93 
Here we have the undeniable fact of a slight 
increase in the rainfall instead of a decrease. 
So the whole fabric falls to the ground—there 
is no support for the assumption—it can hardly 
be called a theory. 
Conservative people may yet hesitate as to 
accepting my view of this subject. For their 
benefit I add the opinions of two of our lead¬ 
ing scientists. Prof. J. D. Whitney, in an 
article on “Climatic Changes,” referring to 
the diminution of moisture in Egypt, says, in 
effect, that no efforts are of the slightest avail 
to restore the former conditions of climate by 
planting forests. And more to the point — 
“There has lieen a loss rather than a gain in 
the frequency and quantity of rain in Egypt 
since the beginning of this century, despite 
the vigorous measures of the government in 
planting forest trees ” 
Prof. Sargent, in the North American Re¬ 
view, presents views identical with those of 
Prof. Whitney. He is positive that trees have 
no power to increase the quantity of rain and 
therefore manifests no faith in the endeavors 
of Government and individuals to overcome 
the natural dryness of soil and climate by 
planting forests. On the contrary, he looks 
upon this dryness as the cause and not the 
effect of this lack of trees. 
Shall forests not therefore be planted? That 
is not the meauiug of this article. Whe -ever 
they will be of advantage for timber, for 
wind-breaks, for protection—well enough: but 
not here in Indiana, with exceptions, and not 
anywhere on the assumption that, they affect 
the rainfall or have any special effect on 
climate or production. It is well to be clear 
on any subject. 
Vigo Co., Ind. 
DO TREES PRODUCE OR INCREASE 
RAIN? 
I have been a reader of the Rural much 
of the time for more than thirty years. I aud 
miue have been and are interested, euter- 
tained aud, 1 believe, improved by leading it. 
We think very highly of it as a family paper. 
But the Rural, as J suppose ull papers must, 
ventilates some absurd theories—for instance, 
the theory of trees producing or increasing 
ruiufall. When the idea appeared iu some of 
the cheap uewsoupers, 1 passed over it with¬ 
out much thought. But when the Rural 
said it—I worked up my doubt, and wanted to 
give my opinion iu the negative. [We would 
really like to learn “when the Rural said it.” 
Within certain broad limits we allow our 
contributors to express their own opinions on 
all subjects of agricultural interests; but the 
fact that a certain opinion appears in the 
paper over or under the name or initials of a 
contributor is by no means proof that the 
Rural coincides with the opinion. A gener¬ 
ous latitude is necessary in such matters. It 
would be miserable policy for the conductors 
of a live journal whose pages are filled chiefly 
by the contributions of good writers from all 
parts of the country, to put every contrlbu - 
tion on the Procrustean bed of their own 
opinion and clip or remodel it to suit their 
own conviction ou the matter. For our own 
part, we are modestly willing to confess that 
there are just a few subjects on which we have 
not 3 r et formed a conviction. We hold our¬ 
selves responsible for all opinions expressed 
editorially in the paper, but that is quite as 
broad a responsibility as w: are. wiling 
to assume Eds.] 
It has been said that in Colorado, the plant¬ 
ing of trees causes more rainfall. As it is but 
a tew years siuce tree planting commenced 
there, uot much evidence can be given on the 
ground of truth or founded on experience? Is 
not this tale pure “ sophistry,” intended to en¬ 
courage people to settle there? Might it nor. 
as well be said the smoke from the chimneys 
has the same effect? The real reason why the 
climate of Colorado is so dry is that vapor 
sufficient cannot get over the Rockies. 
That more rain than usual has fallen there 
iu the last year or two, I do not doubt. So 
has there been more rainy weather in this sec¬ 
tion of the world, in the last plowing, plant¬ 
ing, hoeing, having and harvesting seasons than 
in the corresponding parts of any year in 
about half a century. About 50 years ago 
we had two or three very wet Springs and 
Summers—one iu particular in which the 
usual amount of plowing and seeding could not 
be done. Now, as my memory is uot reliable 
anterior to that time. I will only state that I 
then heard many middle-aged and old people 
say they never knew such a season. Much 
fear was expressed that the seasons generally 
were changing there was so much rain. Then 
for miles and miles around three-fourths of the 
land was iu woodland. Spriugs and streams 
were abuudaut, and there were a great many 
good mill privileges. Some were occupied 
then, and others were later. Evaporation 
from the timbered laud was less and drainage 
was retarded by natural causes. Now seveu- 
eights of the laud has been brought under 
cultivation; but one year with another we 
are generally blest with good supplies of rain. 
Indeed crops improve ou the whole very sen¬ 
sibly, except potatoes. These then pro¬ 
duced double the present yield. True, evapo¬ 
ration aud drainage are both more active, and 
bring drought more speedily now. The 
streams shrink more and sooner. Many that 
were continuous are dry for months in the 
year. Many springs have disappeared and 
many others intermit in the dry season. Alanv 
water powers have become valueless as such. 
Rain supply depends wholly ou evaporation 
aud this is chiefly from the surface of the 
great ocean. The vapor is condensed and 
falls back as rain into the ocean. No trees 
there to attract it. Tis true that some of it 
falls on land. Inland waters and all places 
where rain falls furnish their share. But if 
the broad ocean did not keep up the supply, 
the rivers would soon run all the water into it, 
and animal and vegetable life would cease. 
The ocean is the great heart that receives 
and gives out the life-sustaining fluid to all 
that has vitality. 
In the oases both the subsoil and surface 
soil have the conditions to retaiu the water 
necessary to fertility. Trees don’t cause rain 
there, but rain causes trees to grow. Portions 
of the desert receive rain enough, but evapo 
ration from such depth of hot sand is so rapid 
that if there were trees there they could not 
even bud. 
'Tis true a large portion of the Great Desert 
receives no rain. The trade winds (an eco¬ 
nomical provision) carry it farther south where 
it does great good. On the desert where the 
hard bottom fell out, enough wouldn’t be 
saved to water a camel. 
The fall of rain can be measured with some 
degi-ee of accuracy, but the measure of evap¬ 
oration is less accurate. The Mediterranean 
Sea is a good example of evaporation ou a 
large scale. A great number of rivers empty 
into it, and there is a constant flow of water 
through the Strait of Gibraltar from the At¬ 
lantic into the sea Now ruunitig faster and 
now slowe , it just keeps up the supply. This 
sea is nearly surrounded by .and aud the winds 
that pass over it are chiefly from otf the laud, 
and are warm and comparatively dry aud 
greatly assist the evaporation. The water 
received from all t hose sources is just equal to 
the amount evaporated from that sea. W hen 
aud where vapor must coudeusc and become 
rain, depends upon currents of air tar above 
the grounds. Trees serve as wind-breaks near 
