4885 
4ir 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
be taken from the pear tree. But it was 
round like an apple. The Tyson has a loug 
fruit and woody cells (grit) in the fruit, this 
had noue; but the flesh was, as far as could be 
detected in its rotten condition, apple flesh. 
This is the case quoted by Maximowicz as 
"observed” by Mr. Meehan. The apple that 
grew through the pear branches was said to 
be a Rhode Island Greening, which, before it 
decayed, the pear-apple was said to resemble. 
But as we kuow change of character comes 
with change of form, and as the pear seeds 
were not changed, this instance is in uo way 
evidence of immediate action of pollen. In 
fact, an apple so easily changes its character 
that it Is difficult for the best pomologist to 
tell u variety when it is grown under circum¬ 
stances different from those within his own 
experience. Other fruits are as changeable. 
I have even failed to recognize the well- 
known Bartlett Pears, when they have been 
grown in Charleston, South Carolina. 
Against all these guesses—guesses made in 
the main by parties who have no idea of the 
great range in nature of what we may term 
the innate power to vary—we have the state¬ 
ments of those who have made crossing a life¬ 
long study and practice, and who never saw 
any change, except where it could be account¬ 
ed for without the guess that it was due to the- 
immediate action of pollen. I was auxiousto 
get a hybrid betweeu the Chinese Rose Hibis¬ 
cus and the hardy Hibiscus xnilitaris; but 
though the ovarium would increase a little in 
size over those wholly unfertilized, it always 
fell before maturity. Believing from this that 
more nutrition was required to perfect these 
seeds than the normal ones, no other flowers 
on the spike were permitted to open but 
tne one fertilized. Then I got a pod with ouly 
three seeds in it; but that pod was panduri 
form and not conical. The lair inferpnce is 
that it was a matter of nutrition and not of 
pollen, Thomas Andrew Knight, in the Trans¬ 
actions of the Royal Horticultural Society, 
declares that with a continuously life-long 
experience in hybridizing, he had never seen 
any immediate change. Mr. Williams, in 
the same publication, says that after 16 years 
of continuous experience, he had never seen 
change. Donald Beaton, a prince of cross¬ 
fertilizers among florists’ flowers, says some¬ 
where, though 1 cannot now quote, that he 
never saw a single instance of immediate 
change. Dr. Herbert Doan of Manchester, 
who possibly gave more attention to cross- 
fertilizing monocotyledons than auy person 
ever did, saw so little change that he ventures 
to express his total disbelief in many reported 
crosses of Gici t.ner, Ivolveuter, Wiesmann and 
Sagarut (Horticulturist 1846, p. 22). 
C. W. Garfield, formerly of the Michigan 
Agricultural College, is the ouiy one we cau 
iiud on record, who made direct attempts to 
test the matter. In 1875, he made 100 experi¬ 
ments— iiJ lu each case—thut is, he cross- 
fertilized 1,000 flowers. There was no change 
except iu three instances. It was found that 
Talman Sweet Apple, crossed with Wagener, 
had a sub-ucid flavor. Red Astruchau with 
pollen of Talman Sweet had its flavor 
"quite mild,” color “much modified,” aud the 
form was “rather flat,” Wagener crossed by 
Talman SweOl had the "color much modified,” 
Only lor the fact that changes such as these 
are well known to occur w here there cau bo 
no pollen iullnence, these very slight chauges 
among so extensive a trial might slightly lavor 
the Darwinian theory. 
But how about corn aud squashes! Here 
we are again without any direct experiments 
to speak of. The Rev. L. J. Templin, an ad¬ 
mirable observer, says, in the Gardiner’s 
Monthly for 1878 (p. 178): "Everybody knows 
thut corn will mix." “1 have Observed such 
results, I think, in numbers of instances.” But 
who is everybody! Nobody! "Everybody 
has observed” the changes, no doubt. But 
why may these changes uot have boeu brought 
about by tbo innate power to change thut 
originated the cbuLge of color iu the first 
instance. Mr. Jacob Moore, raiser of the 
Brighton aud other cross-bred grapes, assorts, 
that iu no instance did he ever see auy im¬ 
mediate effect iu that fruit. To test corn, ho 
got a plant of the yellow flint variety, and 
planted w hite sweet corn all around it. Ho 
cut off the tassel, and forced the plant to use 
pollen of the white sweet corn, but every 
grain of the product was yellow (Gardener’s 
Monthly, 1872, p. 219). Charles Arnold, of 
Paris, Ontario (sumo magazine, 1878, p. 104) 
reports a successful experiment, and contends 
from it tlu» truth of his view of su perforation, 
lie found two colors in one grain from the 
use of pollen from two varieties on the female. 
"But surely yon w ill not deny what ‘every¬ 
body knows,' that corn will show admixture 
at oQCeI” i am willing to admit that if ever 
there was a case in which Cicero’s “ Vox 
populi " should be taken as the “ 1’o.r /><*/,” it. 
should be here. But 1 am dealing with the 
record of actual experiment, and the above 
are all 1 kuow. And melons and squashes! 
The only actual tests that I kuow of were 
made by Hon. Simon Brown, one of the 
mo8t careful aud most eminent of the agri¬ 
culturists of New England. In a very full 
paper in the Reports of the United States De¬ 
partment of Agriculture, 1868, p. 857, he tells 
us that he has planted together Crook-Necked, 
Hubbard, and Boston Marrow Squashes 
field pumpkins, Marrow aud Crook necked 
squashes, musk-melou aud water-melon; but 
uone have shown by the seedlings any cross, 
much less auy influence immediately on the 
fruit. There is absolutely nothing whatever 
on record to show thut there is any immedi¬ 
ate influence of polleu on the fruit of cucur- 
bitaceous plants, except that when a fruit is 
not quite as long or as round as the original; 
not as much or less netted than the original; 
not as sweet or as harsh as the original, 
“everybody Knows” it has been cross-fertil¬ 
ized. Mr. Carman, the highly intelligent 
editor of the Rural New-Yorker, and Pro¬ 
fessor Lazenby have recently published state¬ 
ments that they believe they have seen im¬ 
mediate changes in pears and strawberries; 
but as these gentlemen and others propose to 
repeat these experiments, they need not be 
introduced here. 
[We beg to gay to Prof. Meehan that we 
have never noticed a single instance of change 
in any plant, that we attributed to the direct 
influence of pollen—except in the one case of 
corn. Six years ago wo planted about 50 dif¬ 
ferent (!) kiuds of corn in the same field. None 
of the plants were emasculated. Many of the 
ears of the crop were spriukled with kernels 
of red, white, and yellow. Last year we 
planted in alternate plots a white dent corn 
(originally called Blount’s) and 60 different (!) 
kiuds received from all parts of the country. 
The tassels of the white dent were all cut off 
before the pollen was ripe. Many of the ears 
bore kernels of half a-dozeu different colors— 
dark-red, mottled, light, aud dark-yellow. 
Some were flint, aud several kernels were 
sweet corn.—Ens.] 
On tiie other hand, the writer of this has 
shown that the white-berried Milcbella repens 
(Partridge-Berry) fertile only when it has 
pollen from another plant, has still white ber¬ 
ries, though receiving pollen from the dark- 
red variety; aud that the white-berried 
Prinos verticillaiua (Common Winter berry) 
behaves iu the same way (Proc. Ac. Nat. 
Sciences Pbila., 298, 1884). 
1 have often thought that Mr. Darwin’s 
power to analyze the value of facts was not 
equal to his ability to collect and place can¬ 
didly all such statements together. My great 
admiratiou for the man and for his work in 
general has given me no disposition to be 
ranged with those iconoclasts who utay love 
to see so popular a scientific idol overthrown. 
It seems, however, but justice to myself, from 
Dr. Gray’s criticisms, to show that Darwin’s 
chapter on this topic is not prepared with his 
usual good judgment, nor is Dr. Gray's in¬ 
dorsement thereof iu accordance with the care 
he is noted for, before offering an opinion. It 
must be evident to every one, 1 think, that 
with the light which modern experience throws 
on innate or natural variation, the changes 
which our forefathers supposed due to the 
immediate action of polleu on fruit, were hut 
a mere guess which we iu these days can let¬ 
ter explain, and that there is uo evidence— 
Indian corn scarcely excepted, ai d this 
may be couuted iu the Cotyledon class—which 
the trained scientific man would call evidence 
that auy immediate change in fruit is possible. 
—■ ♦ » » 
RAYS. 
Xanthoceras sorbikolia.—O u page 350, 
the Rural asks about this little tree, and I 
venture to tell how it has behaved with us 
a 
We have two plants. Last Winter one was a 
little bare stick 11 inches high, aud the other 
a similar one ouly 12 inches high. About the 
first of May both plants began to grow and 
bear branches aud flower-racemes. About 
the 20th of Muy the flowers began to open; 
they lasted in good condition for seven or 
eight days, and now—June 8d—nil are about 
over. The twelve-inch plant has borne five 
racemes, each live inches long; aud the four¬ 
teen inch plant, three racemes, one of which 
is seven inches long. The flowers are one nud- 
a*third inch across, white with red eye, and 
numerous. The plants are iu ordinary gur- 
den ground, and were unprotected in any¬ 
way iu Winter. You ask how “does the In¬ 
florescence compare with that shown in the 
pictures published several years ago!” In the 
(Loudon) Garden, Vol. vfit , page 634, is a col¬ 
ored plate of this plant, which is a true and 
excellent likeness; so, too, is the descriptive 
mutter accompanying it a truthful description. 
This Xanthoceras is hardy at Boston, ex 
eeedingly free flowering, very oruuuicuta| 
when in bloom, and it seoius to sot fruit free, 
ly—al>out a dozen fruits have "set” ou our 
little plauts, aud 1 have known it, some years 
ago, to mature fruits iu Dr. Walcot’s garden 
at Cambridge, Mass. But I shall not let our 
little plants carry any fruit this year, as they 
are too small, and fruit-bearing is too exhaust¬ 
ing for such young stock. 
The California Privet got consider¬ 
ably hurt last Winter; most of the small 
branches have been killed,and u good deal of 
the old wood too. Still it is too good an ever¬ 
green like shrub to dispense with; such an¬ 
other “cutting,” as it got last Winter, may uot 
again occur for years. 
Deciduous Azaleas.— In one massive bed 
we have some 2,500 specimens of these, and 
most of them are now—June8rd—in bloom. 
A. amo-na is about over. A. mollis,with very 
large, showy flowers, is in perfection; it is a 
little more tender than the others. Of the 
many varieties of "Ghent” azaleas some are 
iu full bloom, some just beginning to flower, 
and others will not blossom for a week or two 
yet. In many cases the Ghent azaleas are 
“worked,”and sprouts and suckers arise from 
the stocks in like manner as they do from 
roses; but I let them alone, as they blossom so 
copiously and, oftentimes, the flowers of the 
stock are prettier than those of the cion. 
Viburnum kotundifolxum is a handsome 
Snowball bush in the way of aud much like 
V. plicatum; but if you want to find the round 
leaves, you must look for them at the base of 
the twigs, as the leaves toward the ends of 
the branches are not round. It is now iu full 
beauty; so too is the common Snowball (V. 
Opulus), but the V. plicatum will not be in 
full beauty for a week or so yet. 
Lo.nickra hispida is unlike any other Bush 
Honeysuckle that I know of; but it is a little 
beauty, in full bloom now, aud its pretty pink- 
purple flowers are deliciously sweet with the 
fragrance of primroses and violets. It is of a 
very dense, vine, bushy habit, with small 
whitish-green leaves, perfectly hardy, and it 
suckers with the persistency of that mildewy 
wretch—the Indian Curraut. 
Yarrow-leaved Spir.eaiS. millefolia).— 
Wheu I first had this shrub, half a dozen years 
ago, 1 expected a good deal of it, but am dis¬ 
appointed with it. Its flowers don’t amount 
to anythiug in an ornamental sense, and its 
foliage, though very distinct and pretty, is 
never, so far as I have seen, produced in 
sufficient quantity to render it an attraction; 
besides, the habit of the plant itself is scraggy. 
8piu.ea l.kvkiata is another spiraea that 
has disappointed me. We have it now in fine 
condition, stocky, very full of handsome 
leaves, aud beuriug lots of whitish flowers. 
But the dirty-white blossoms are no attraction, 
and the hot sunshine of July will destroy the 
mass of foliage—then what’s the use of it as a 
garden shrub! 
Van Bouttk’b Spir-ka is to-day the 
whitest and fullest among its fellows. The 
shrub is compact, neat, hardy and a free 
grower, and the snowy wreaths, in arching- 
form lap, over one another till they reach the 
ground. 
Rosa rugosa has given us the first out¬ 
door rose of the season. 
Deutzia parviflora is iu full bloom, and, 
in a general way, more resembles a spirma 
than a deutzia. Its flowers are pretty, white. 
In umbels on arching-wands of last year’s 
wood. It blossoms a few days earlier than 
does 1> gracilis, but does not last long. It is 
hardy and of free but compact growth. 
Styrax Japonica, one of the loveliest of 
all Silver-bell trees, and on which 1 doted so 
much, got killed back last Fall to within a 
few inches of the ground. 
Tomatoes. —“It is time to sow tomato seeds 
in boxes, for plautiug out May 15th,” said the 
Rural, p. 60, January 24th. Not for plant¬ 
ing out-of-doors by any means, but for fruit¬ 
ing indoors. I happened to make a sowing 
thut week. These plants have been grown 
along in a temperature of 55-’at night by arti¬ 
ficial means — greenhouse grown tomatoes 
dislike a high temperature—und now are 
bearing a full and ripening crop. 1 have been 
picking ripe tomatoes off these plants for a 
week. For out door plautiug, I sow about the 
first week in April. 
Again for experiment’s sake iu the above 
sowing, I included Cardinal, Trophy, Acme, 
Livingston’s Favorite, Livingston's Perfec¬ 
tion, Mayflower and Early Essex, an x fiud 
that my plants of Early Essex have twice as 
rnauy tomatoes as have those of any of the 
other varieties. Although my first piekiug 
was from Early Essex, 1 will not say that it is 
earlier thuu uuy of the othei-s, as all have 
come iu about the same time. This Early 
Essex is uot at all what is sold as Eai'ly Essex 
in New York, judging from specimens shown 
as such by Messx-s Scudder Townsend at 
their canning factory near hero last year; 
but that form so long and successfully growu 
for winter forcing by Mr. Winter, of Mans¬ 
field, Mass. As a summer, out door tomato 
1 would rather have Perfection, Mayflower or 
Cardinal. 
Lilium auratum, dead —Last Summer we 
had iu bloom at one time hundreds aud hun¬ 
dreds of blossoms of this, the Gold-banded 
Lily of Japan, and as the bulbs had been 
growing in the same bed for years past, we 
hardly expected mischief would overcome 
them in Winter. But it did, and a large ma¬ 
jority of them have been winter-killed. In 
the time to come I shall not trust them as I 
used to, but shall mulch them deeply anyway. 
Regarding these lilies, 1 may say that we have 
restored our losses by buying from the dealers 
here, and that, too, at one-third the price at 
which we coaid get them from the bulb- 
growers of Holland. LEON. 
Queens Co , N. Y. 
Vfimnanj. 
STOCKMAN’S MISTAKES. 
(Concluded.) 
D E. SALMON, D. V. M. 
In Stockman’s recent arguments t.hei - e are 
many minor points equally objectionable, 
that plainly convey an impression that is not 
in accordance with the facts. “I have no 
personal feeling agaiust Dr. Salmon,” he says, 
"but what I object to is that he, as a profes¬ 
sional aud a government official, should so 
industriously keep alive all this undue excite¬ 
ment about contagious diseases, which exist 
nowhere except in the herds of speculators in 
Jerseys and a few swill dairies.” In regard 
to the first part of this sentence, which, like 
most of bis charges in the past, is indefinite 
and in its present form can neither be proved 
nor disproved, 1 defy him to point to one single 
instance where I have said there was a conta¬ 
gions disease that did not exist. I defy him, 
also, to show that I have in any way exag¬ 
gerated the extent of disease or the danger 
therefrom. Besides my official reports, which 
it is my duty under the law to make, I have 
scarcely written anything on this subject dur¬ 
ing the two years I have been iu Washington. 
In regard to the last part of the sentence, I 
would like to ask if the beautiful breeding 
herds of O. J. Bailey and the Tripp Brothers, 
at Peoria, Hi , of John Boyd, at Elmhurst, 
III., of the Lunatic Asylum, at Fulton, Mo., 
or the grade Short-horn herds ou the fine 
farms in Chester County, Pa., referred to in 
my last report, come under either of these 
classes, and if so, which one! 
How deceptive is the statement that pleuro 
pneumonia exists only iu the herds of specu¬ 
lators in Jex-seys and a few swill dairies. Our 
inspections, made by order of Congress, dur¬ 
ing the last year, have discovered this disease 
in nearly 800 herds, which have contained 
about 1,000 sick cattle. The affected animals 
were largely native cattle without Jersey blood, 
and while some had been fed on swill, many 
of them had never seen this article of food. 
As to the losses to our cattle iudustry from 
pleuro-pueuraouia, I am not iucliued to under¬ 
estimate them, but 1 must differ radically 
fx*om Stockman as to the parties who are re¬ 
sponsible for keeping up such losses. A million 
dollars is annually lost ou our fat cattle ship¬ 
ped to England, because they are slaughtered 
on the docks instead of being allowed to go 
inland. Five to six millions over and above 
what can be obtained here, could be realized 
from store cattle, if we could have a market 
for them in England. We have lost during 
the last year by the feeling of insecurity and 
by the restrictions ou interstate commerce not 
less than two millions. Aud these eight or 
nine millions of dollars are iu addition to the 
actual losses from the disease. 
Now,the question is, how can these losses be 
prevented? And here is the great difference 
between Stockman and myself. Stockman’s 
policy is to try to hide the disease; to keep our 
own people ignorant of its existence; to de¬ 
ceive our customers abroad ; to assail and 
villify those who try to teach our cattle 
owuers the nature of the plague, or who at¬ 
tempt to arrest its spread or check its ravages; 
to prevent legislation for the protection of our 
uniufeeted territory by the free use of insinu¬ 
ations, false charges against officials,and mis¬ 
representation of evei*y kind; to allow the 
disease to spread to every part of our laud 
and bring ruin tc the cattle industry rather 
than give to the facts that publicity which is 
necessary to secure the ueeded efforts for its 
extirpation. 
If he knew more of the subject, however,he 
would see that,although his policy may defeat 
legislation and secure the extension of the 
disease, it is too late to hide its existence or 
deceive either our own people or our foreign 
customers in regard to it. England did not 
place restrictions upon our live cattle trade 
because of "exaggerated and senseless excite¬ 
ment in regard to contagious disease,” but 
because investigations which she caused to be 
made here, showed the existence of pleuro. 
pneumonia, while hor inspectors on the other 
side asserted that they occasionally fouud this 
disease among the cattle which we shipped 
