Chapter X (1)

PLANTS _continued_--FRUITS--ORNAMENTAL TREES--FLOWERS.

FRUITS.--GRAPES--VARY IN ODD AND TRIFLING PARTICULARS.--MULBERRY.--THE
ORANGE GROUP--SINGULAR RESULTS FROM CROSSING.--PEACH AND
NECTARINE--BUD-VARIATION--ANALOGOUS VARIATION--RELATION TO THE
ALMOND.--APRICOT.--PLUMS--VARIATION IN THEIR
STONES.--CHERRIES--SINGULAR VARIETIES
OF.--APPLE.--PEAR.--STRAWBERRY--INTERBLENDING OF THE ORIGINAL
FORMS.--GOOSEBERRY--STEADY INCREASE IN SIZE OF THE FRUIT--VARIETIES
OF.--WALNUT.--NUT.--CUCURBITACEOUS PLANTS--WONDERFUL VARIATION OF.

ORNAMENTAL TREES--THEIR VARIATION IN DEGREE AND
KIND--ASH-TREE--SCOTCH-FIR--HAWTHORN.

FLOWERS--MULTIPLE ORIGIN OF MANY KINDS--VARIATION IN CONSTITUTIONAL
PECULIARITIES--KIND OF VARIATION.--ROSES--SEVERAL SPECIES
CULTIVATED.--PANSY.--DAHLIA.--HYACINTH, HISTORY AND VARIATION OF.

_The Vine_ (_Vitis vinifera_).--The best authorities consider all our
grapes as the descendants of one species which now grows wild in
western Asia, which grew during the Bronze-age wild in Italy,[615] and
which has recently been found fossil in a tufaceous deposit in the
south of France.[616] Some authors, however, entertain much doubt about
the single parentage of our cultivated varieties, owing to the number
of semi-wild forms found in Southern Europe, especially as described by
Clemente,[617] in a forest in Spain; but as the grape sows itself
freely in Southern Europe, and as several of the chief kinds transmit
their characters by seed,[618] whilst others are extremely variable,
the existence of many different escaped forms could hardly fail to
occur in countries where this plant has been cultivated from the
remotest antiquity. That the vine varies much when propagated by seed,
we may infer from the largely increased number of varieties since the
earlier historical records. New hot-house varieties are produced almost
every year; for instance,[619] a golden-coloured variety has been
recently raised in England from a black grape without the aid of a
cross. {333} Van Mons[620] reared a multitude of varieties from the
seed of one vine, which was completely separated from all others, so
that there could not, at least in this generation, have been any
crossing, and the seedlings presented "les analogues de toutes les
sortes," and differed in almost every possible character both in the
fruit and foliage.

The cultivated varieties are extremely numerous; Count Odart says that
he will not deny that there may exist throughout the world 700 or 800,
perhaps even 1000 varieties, but not a third of these have any value.
In the Catalogue of fruit cultivated in the Horticultural Gardens of
London, published in 1842, 99 varieties are enumerated. Wherever the
grape is grown many varieties occur: Pallas describes 24 in the Crimea,
and Burnes mentions 10 in Cabool. The classification of the varieties
has much perplexed writers, and Count Odart is reduced to a
geographical system; but I will not enter on this subject, nor on the
many and great differences between the varieties. I will merely specify
a few curious and trifling peculiarities, all taken from Odart's highly
esteemed work,[621] for the sake of showing the diversified variability
of this plant. Simon has classed grapes into two main divisions, those
with downy leaves and those with smooth leaves, but he admits that in
one variety, namely the Rebazo, the leaves are either smooth or downy;
and Odart (p. 70) states that some varieties have the nerves alone, and
other varieties their young leaves, downy, whilst the old ones are
smooth. The Pedro-Ximenes grape (Odart, p. 397) presents a peculiarity
by which it can be at once recognised amongst a host of other
varieties, namely, that when the fruit is nearly ripe the nerves of the
leaves or even the whole surface becomes yellow. The Barbera d'Asti is
well marked by several characters (p. 426), amongst others, "by some of
the leaves, and it is always the lowest on the branches, suddenly
becoming of a dark red colour." Several authors in classifying grapes
have founded their main divisions on the berries being either round or
oblong; and Odart admits the value of this character; yet there is one
variety, the Maccabeo (p. 71), which often produces small round, and
large oblong, berries in the same bunch. Certain grapes called Nebbiolo
(p. 429) present a constant character, sufficient for their
recognition, namely, "the slight adherence of that part of the pulp
which surrounds the seeds to the rest of the berry, when cut through
transversely." A Rhenish variety is mentioned (p. 228) which likes a
dry soil; the fruit ripens well, but at the moment of maturity, if much
rain falls, the berries are apt to rot; on the other hand, the fruit of
a Swiss variety (p. 243) is valued for well sustaining prolonged
humidity. This latter variety sprouts late in the spring, yet matures
its fruit early; other varieties (p. 362) have the fault of being too
much excited by the April sun, and in consequence suffer from frost. A
Styrian variety (p. 254) has brittle foot-stalks, so that the clusters
of fruit are often blown off; this variety is said to be particularly
attractive to wasps and bees. Other varieties have tough stalks, which
resist the wind. Many other variable characters could be given, but the
foregoing facts are sufficient to show in how many small structural and
{334} constitutional details the vine varies. During the vine disease
in France certain whole groups of varieties[622] have suffered far more
from mildew than others. Thus "the group of the Chasselas, so rich in
varieties, did not afford a single fortunate exception;" certain other
groups suffered much less; the true old Burgundy, for instance, was
comparatively free from disease, and the Carminat likewise resisted the
attack. The American vines, which belong to a distinct species,
entirely escaped the disease in France; and we thus see that those
European varieties which best resist the disease must have acquired in
a slight degree the same constitutional peculiarities as the American
species.

_White Mulberry_ (_Morus alba_).--I mention this plant because it has
varied in certain characters, namely, in the texture and quality of the
leaves, fitting them to serve as food for the domesticated silkworm, in
a manner not observed with other plants; but this has arisen simply
from such variations in the mulberry having been attended to, selected,
and rendered more or less constant. M. de Quatrefages[623] briefly
describes six kinds cultivated in one valley in France: of these the
_amourouso_ produces excellent leaves, but is rapidly being abandoned
because it produces much fruit mingled with the leaves: the _antofino_
yields deeply cut leaves of the finest quality, but not in great
quantity: the _claro_ is much sought for because the leaves can be
easily collected: lastly, the _roso_ bears strong hardy leaves,
produced in large quantity, but with the one inconvenience, that they
are best adapted for the worms after their fourth moult. MM.
Jacquemet-Bonnefont, of Lyon, however, remark in their catalogue (1862)
that two sub-varieties have been confounded under the name of the
_roso,_ one having leaves too thick for the caterpillars, the other
being valuable because the leaves can easily be gathered from the
branches without the bark being torn.

In India the mulberry has also given rise to many varieties. The Indian
form is thought by many botanists to be a distinct species; but as
Royle remarks,[624] "so many varieties have been produced by
cultivation that it is difficult to ascertain whether they all belong
to one species;" they are, as he adds, nearly as numerous as those of
the silkworm.

_The Orange Group._--We here meet with great confusion in the specific
distinction and parentage of the several kinds. Gallesio,[625] who
almost devoted his life-time to the subject, considers that there are
four species, namely, sweet and bitter oranges, lemons, and citrons,
each of which has given rise to whole groups of varieties, monsters,
and supposed hybrids. One high authority[626] believes that these four
reputed species are all {335} varieties of the wild _Citrus medica_,
but that the shaddock (_Citrus decumana_), which is not known in a wild
state, is a distinct species; though its distinctness is doubted by
another writer "of great authority on such matters," namely, Dr.
Buchanan Hamilton. Alph. De Candolle,[627] on the other hand--and there
cannot be a more capable judge--advances what he considers sufficient
evidence of the orange (he doubts whether the bitter and sweet kinds
are specifically distinct), the lemon, and citron, having been found
wild, and consequently that they are distinct. He mentions two other
forms cultivated in Japan and Java, which he ranks as undoubted
species; he speaks rather more doubtfully about the shaddock, which
varies much, and has not been found wild; and finally he considers some
forms, such as Adam's apple and the bergamotte, as probably hybrids.

I have briefly abstracted these opinions for the sake of showing those
who have never attended to such subjects, how perplexed with doubt they
are. It would, therefore, be useless for my purpose to give a sketch of
the conspicuous differences between the several forms. Besides the
ever-recurrent difficulty of determining whether forms found wild are
truly aboriginal or are escaped seedlings, many of the forms, which
must be ranked as varieties, transmit their characters almost perfectly
by seed. Sweet and bitter oranges differ in no important respect except
in the flavour of their fruit, but Gallesio[628] is most emphatic that
both kinds can be propagated by seed with absolute certainty.
Consequently, in accordance with his simple rule, he classes them as
distinct species; as he does sweet and bitter almonds, the peach and
nectarine, &c. He admits, however, that the soft-shelled pine-tree
produces not only soft-shelled but some hard-shelled seedlings, so that
a little greater force in the power of inheritance would, according to
this rule, raise the soft-shelled pine-tree into the dignity of an
aboriginally created species. The positive assertion made by
Macfayden[629] that the pips of sweet oranges produce in Jamaica,
according to the nature of the soil in which they are sown, either
sweet or bitter oranges, is probably an error; for M. Alph. De Candolle
informs me that since the publication of his great work he has received
accounts from Guiana, the Antilles, and Mauritius, that in these
countries sweet oranges faithfully transmit their character. Gallesio
found that the willow-leafed and the Little China oranges reproduced
their proper leaves and fruit; but the seedlings were not quite equal
in merit to their parents. The red-fleshed orange, on the other hand,
fails to reproduce itself. Gallesio also observed that the seeds of
several other singular varieties all reproduced trees having a peculiar
physiognomy, but partly resembling their parent-forms. I can adduce
another case: the myrtle-leaved orange is ranked by all authors as a
variety, but is very distinct in general aspect: in my father's
greenhouse, during many years, it rarely yielded any seed, but at last
produced one; and a tree thus raised was identical with the
parent-form.

Another and more serious difficulty in determining the rank of the
several forms is that, according to Gallesio,[630] they largely
intercross without {336} artificial aid; thus he positively states that
seeds taken from lemon-trees (_C. lemonum_) growing mingled with the
citron (_C. medica_), which is generally considered as a distinct
species, produced a graduated series of varieties between these two
forms. Again, an Adam's apple was produced from the seed of a sweet
orange, which grew close to lemons and citrons. But such facts hardly
aid us in determining whether to rank these forms as species or
varieties; for it is now known that undoubted species of Verbascum,
Cistus, Primula, Salix, &c., frequently cross in a state of nature. If
indeed it were proved that plants of the orange tribe raised from these
crosses were even partially sterile, it would be a strong argument in
favour of their rank as species. Gallesio asserts that this is the
case; but he does not distinguish between sterility from hybridism and
from the effects of culture; and he almost destroys the force of this
statement by another,[631] namely, that when he impregnated the flowers
of the common orange with the pollen taken from undoubted _varieties_
of the orange, monstrous fruits were produced, which included "little
pulp, and had no seeds, or imperfect seeds."

In this tribe of plants we meet with instances of two highly remarkable
facts in vegetable physiology: Gallesio[632] impregnated an orange with
pollen from a lemon, and the fruit borne on the mother tree had a
raised stripe of peel like that of a lemon both in colour and taste,
but the pulp was like that of an orange and included only imperfect
seeds. The possibility of pollen from one variety or species directly
affecting the fruit produced by another variety or species, is a
subject which I shall fully discuss in the following chapter.

The second remarkable fact is that two supposed hybrids[633] (for their
hybrid nature was not ascertained) between an orange and either a lemon
or citron produced, on the same tree, leaves, flowers, and fruit of
both pure parent-forms, as well as of a mixed or crossed nature. A bud
taken from any one of the branches and grafted on another tree produces
either one of the pure kinds or a capricious tree reproducing the three
kinds. Whether the sweet lemon, which includes within the same fruit
segments of differently flavoured pulp,[634] is an analogous case, I
know not. But to this subject I shall have to recur.

I will conclude by giving from A. Risso[635] a short account of a very
singular variety of the common orange. It is the "_citrus aurantium
fructu variabili_," which on the young shoots produces rounded-oval
leaves spotted with yellow, borne on petioles with heart-shaped wings;
when these leaves fall off, they are succeeded by longer and narrower
leaves, with undulated margins, of a pale-green colour embroidered with
yellow, borne on foot-stalks without wings. The fruit whilst young is
pear-shaped, yellow, longitudinally striated, and sweet; but as it
ripens, it becomes spherical, of a reddish-yellow, and bitter.

_Peach and Nectarine (Amygdalus Persica)._ The best authorities are
{337} nearly unanimous that the peach has never been found wild. It was
introduced from Persia into Europe a little before the Christian era,
and at this period few varieties existed. Alph. De Candolle,[636] from
the fact of the peach not having spread from Persia at an earlier
period, and from its not having pure Sanscrit or Hebrew names, believes
that it is not an aboriginal of Western Asia, but came from the _terra
incognita_ of China. The supposition, however, that the peach is a
modified almond which acquired its present character at a comparatively
late period, would, I presume, account for these facts; on the same
principle that the nectarine, the offspring of the peach, has few
native names, and became known in Europe at a still later period.

{338}

Andrew Knight,[637] from finding that a seedling-tree, raised from a
sweet almond fertilised by the pollen of a peach, yielded fruit quite
like that of a peach, suspected that the peach-tree is a modified
almond; and in this he has been followed by various authors.[638] A
first-rate peach, almost globular in shape, formed of soft and sweet
pulp, surrounding a hard, much furrowed, and slightly-flattened stone,
certainly differs greatly from an almond, with its soft, slightly
furrowed, much flattened, and elongated stone, protected by a tough,
greenish layer of bitter flesh. Mr. Bentham[639] has particularly
called attention to the stone of the almond being so much more
flattened than that of the peach. But in the several varieties of the
almond, the stone differs greatly in the degree to which it is
compressed, in size, shape, strength, and in the depth of the furrows,
as may be seen in the accompanying drawings (Nos. 4 to 8) of such kinds
as I have been able to collect. With peach-stones, also (Nos. 1 to 3)
the degree of compression and elongation is seen to vary; so that the
stone of the Chinese Honey-peach (fig. 3) is much more elongated and
compressed than that of the (No. 8) Smyrna almond. Mr. Rivers of
Sawbridgeworth, to whom I am indebted for some of the specimens above
figured, and who has had such great horticultural experience, has
called my attention to several varieties which connect the almond and
the peach. In France there is a variety called the Peach-almond, which
Mr. Rivers formerly cultivated, and which is correctly described in a
French catalogue as being oval and swollen, with the aspect of a peach,
including a hard stone surrounded by a fleshy covering, which is
sometimes eatable.[640] A remarkable statement by M. Luizet has
recently appeared in the 'Revue Horticole,'[641] namely, that a
Peach-almond, grafted on a peach, bore during 1863 and 1864 almonds
alone, but in 1865 bore six peaches and no almonds. M. Carriere, in
commenting on this fact, cites the case of a double-flowered almond
which, after producing during several years almonds, suddenly bore for
two years in succession spherical fleshy peach-like fruits, but in 1865
reverted to its former state and produced large almonds.

Again, as I hear from Mr. Rivers, the double-flowering Chinese peaches
resemble almonds in their manner of growth and in their flowers; the
fruit is much elongated and flattened, with the flesh both bitter and
sweet, but {339} not uneatable, and it is said to be of better quality
in China. From this stage one small step leads us to such inferior
peaches as are occasionally raised from seed. For instance, Mr. Rivers
sowed a number of peach-stones imported from the United States, where
they are collected for raising stocks, and some of the trees raised by
him produced peaches which were very like almonds in appearance, being
small and hard, with the pulp not softening till very late in the
autumn. Van Mons[642] also states that he once raised from a
peach-stone a peach having the aspect of a wild tree, with fruit like
that of the almond. From inferior peaches, such as these just
described, we may pass by small transitions, through clingstones of
poor quality, to our best and most melting kinds. From this gradation,
from the cases of sudden variation above recorded, and from the fact
that the peach has not been found wild, it seems to me by far the most
probable view, that the peach is the descendant of the almond, improved
and modified in a marvellous manner.

One fact, however, is opposed to this conclusion. A hybrid, raised by
Knight from the sweet almond by the pollen of the peach, produced
flowers with little or no pollen, yet bore fruit, having been
apparently fertilised by a neighbouring nectarine. Another hybrid from
a sweet almond by the pollen of a nectarine produced during the first
three years imperfect blossoms, but afterwards perfect flowers with an
abundance of pollen. If this slight degree of sterility cannot be
accounted for by the youth of the trees (and this often causes lessened
fertility), or by the monstrous state of the flowers, or by the
conditions to which the trees were exposed, these two cases would
afford a strong argument against the peach being the descendant of the
almond.

Whether or not the peach has proceeded from the almond, it has
certainly given rise to nectarines, or smooth peaches, as they are
called by the French. Most of the varieties both of the peach and
nectarine reproduce themselves truly by seed. Gallesio[643] says he has
verified this with respect to eight races of the peach. Mr. Rivers[644]
has given some striking instances from his own experience, and it is
notorious that good peaches are constantly raised in North America from
seed. Many of the American sub-varieties come true or nearly true to
their kind, such as the white-blossom, several of the yellow-fruited
freestone peaches, the blood clingstone, the heath, and the
lemon-clingstone. On the other hand, a clingstone peach has been known
to give rise to a freestone.[645] In England it has been noticed that
seedlings inherit from their parents flowers of the same size and
colour. Some characters, however, contrary to what might have been
expected, often are not inherited; such as the presence and form of the
glands on the leaves.[646] With respect to nectarines, both cling and
{340} freestones are known in North America to reproduce themselves by
seed.[647] In England the new white nectarine was a seedling of the old
white, and Mr. Rivers[648] has recorded several similar cases. From
this strong tendency to inheritance, which both peach and nectarine
trees exhibit,--from certain slight constitutional differences[649] in
their nature,--and from the great difference in their fruit both in
appearance and flavour, it is not surprising, notwithstanding that the
trees differ in no other respects and cannot even be distinguished, as
I am informed by Mr. Rivers, whilst young, that they have been ranked
by some authors as specifically distinct. Gallesio does not doubt that
they are distinct; even Alph. De Candolle does not appear perfectly
assured of their specific identity; and an eminent botanist has quite
recently[650] maintained that the nectarine "probably constitutes a
distinct species."

Hence it may be worth while to give all the evidence on the origin of
the nectarine. The facts in themselves are curious, and will hereafter
have to be referred to when the important subject of bud-variation is
discussed. It is asserted[651] that the Boston nectarine was produced
from a peach-stone, and this nectarine reproduced itself by seed.[652]
Mr. Rivers states[653] that from stones of three distinct varieties of
the peach he raised three varieties of nectarine; and in one of these
cases no nectarine grew near the parent peach-tree. In another instance
Mr. Rivers raised a nectarine from a peach, and in the succeeding
generation another nectarine from this nectarine.[654] Other such
instances have been communicated to me, but they need not be given. Of
the converse case, namely, of nectarine-stones yielding peach-trees
(both free and cling-stones), we have six undoubted instances recorded
by Mr. Rivers; and in two of these instances the parent nectarines had
been seedlings from other nectarines.[655]

With respect to the more curious case of full-grown peach-trees
suddenly producing nectarines by bud-variation (or sports as they are
called by gardeners), the evidence is superabundant; there is also good
evidence of the same tree producing both peaches and nectarines, or
half and half fruit;--by this term I mean a fruit with the one-half a
perfect peach, and the other half a perfect nectarine.

Peter Collinson in 1741 recorded the first case of a peach-tree
producing a nectarine,[656] and in 1766 he added two other instances.
In the same work, the editor, Sir J. E. Smith, describes the more
remarkable case of a tree in Norfolk, which usually bore both perfect
nectarines and perfect peaches; but during two seasons some of the
fruit were half-and-half in nature.

{341} Mr. Salisbury in 1808[657] records six other cases of peach-trees
producing nectarines. Three of the varieties are named; viz., the
Alberge, Belle Chevreuse, and Royal George. This latter tree seldom
failed to produce both kinds of fruit. He gives another case of a
half-and-half fruit.

At Radford in Devonshire[658] a clingstone peach, purchased as the
Chancellor, was planted in 1815, and in 1824, after having previously
produced peaches alone, bore on one branch twelve nectarines; in 1825
the same branch yielded twenty-six nectarines, and in 1826 thirty-six
nectarines together with eighteen peaches. One of the peaches was
almost as smooth on one side as a nectarine. The nectarines were as
dark as, but smaller than, the Elruge.

At Beccles a Royal George peach[659] produced a fruit, "three parts of
it being peach and one part nectarine, quite distinct in appearance as
well as in flavour." The lines of division were longitudinal, as
represented in the engraving. A nectarine-tree grew five yards from
this tree.

Professor Chapman states[660] that he has often seen in Virginia very
old peach-trees bearing nectarines.

A writer in the 'Gardener's Chronicle' says that a peach-tree planted
fifteen years previously[661] produced this year a nectarine between
two peaches; a nectarine-tree grew close by.

In 1844[662] a Vanguard peach-tree produced, in the midst of its
ordinary fruit, a single red Roman nectarine.

Mr. Calver is stated[663] to have raised in the United States a
seedling peach which produced a mixed crop of both peaches and
nectarines.

Near Dorking[664] a branch of the Teton de Venus peach, which
reproduces itself truly by seed,[665] bore its own fruit "so remarkable
for its prominent point, and a nectarine rather smaller but well formed
and quite round."

The previous cases all refer to peaches suddenly producing nectarines,
but at Carclew[666] the unique case occurred, of a nectarine-tree,
raised twenty years before from seed and never grafted, producing a
fruit half peach and half nectarine; subsequently it bore a perfect
peach.

To sum up the foregoing facts: we have excellent evidence of
peach-stones producing nectarine-trees, and of nectarine-stones
producing peach-trees,--of the same tree bearing peaches and
nectarines,--of peach-trees suddenly producing by bud-variation
nectarines (such nectarines reproducing nectarines by seed), as well as
fruit in part nectarine and in part peach,--and lastly of one
nectarine-tree first bearing half-and-half fruit, and subsequently true
peaches. As the peach came into existence before the nectarine, it
might have been expected from the law of reversion that {342}
nectarines would give birth by bud-variation or by seed to peaches,
oftener than peaches to nectarines; but this is by no means the case.

Two explanations have been suggested to account for these conversions.
First, that the parent-trees have been in every case hybrids[667]
between the peach and nectarine, and have reverted by bud-variation or
by seed to one of their pure parent-forms. This view in itself is not
very improbable; for the Mountaineer peach, which was raised by Knight
from the red nutmeg peach by pollen of the violette hative
nectarine,[668] produces peaches, but these are said _sometimes_ to
partake of the smoothness and flavour of the nectarine. But let it be
observed that in the previous list no less than six well-known
varieties and several other unnamed varieties of the peach have once
suddenly produced perfect nectarines by bud-variation; and it would be
an extremely rash supposition that all these varieties of the peach,
which have been cultivated for years in many districts, and which show
not a vestige of a mixed parentage, are, nevertheless, hybrids. A
second explanation is, that the fruit of the peach has been directly
affected by the pollen of the nectarine: although this certainly is
possible, it cannot here apply; for we have not a shadow of evidence
that a branch which has borne fruit directly affected by foreign pollen
is so profoundly modified as afterwards to produce buds which continue
to yield fruit of the new and modified form. Now it is known that when
a bud on a peach-tree has once borne a nectarine the same branch has in
several instances gone on during successive years producing nectarines.
The Carclew nectarine, on the other hand, first produced half-and-half
fruit, and subsequently pure peaches. Hence we may confidently accept
the common view that the nectarine is a variety of the peach, which may
be produced either by bud-variation or from seed. In the following
chapter many analogous cases of bud-variation will be given.

The varieties of the peach and nectarine run in parallel lines. In both
classes the kinds differ from each other in the flesh of the fruit
being white, red, or yellow; in being clingstones or freestones; in the
flowers being large or small, with certain other characteristic
differences; and in the leaves being serrated without glands, or
crenated and furnished with globose or reniform glands.[669] We can
hardly account for this parallelism by supposing that each variety of
the nectarine is descended from a corresponding variety of the peach;
for though our nectarines are certainly the descendants of several
kinds of peaches, yet a large number are the descendants of other
nectarines, and they vary so much when thus reproduced that we can
scarcely admit the above explanation.

The varieties of the peach have largely increased in number since the
Christian era, when from two to five varieties alone were known;[670]
and the nectarine was unknown. At the present time, besides many
varieties said to exist in China, Downing describes in the United
States seventy-nine {343} native and imported varieties of the peach;
and a few years ago Lindley[671] enumerated one hundred and sixty-four
varieties of the peach and nectarine grown in England. I have already
indicated the chief points of difference between the several varieties.
Nectarines, even when produced from distinct kinds of peaches, always
possess their own peculiar flavour, and are smooth and small.
Clingstone and freestone peaches, which differ in the ripe flesh either
firmly adhering to the stone, or easily separating from it, also differ
in the character of the stone itself; that of the freestones or melters
being more deeply fissured, with the sides of the fissures smoother
than in clingstones. In the various kinds, the flowers differ not only
in size, but in the larger flowers the petals are differently shaped,
more imbricated, generally red in the centre and pale towards the
margin; whereas in the smaller flowers the margins of the petal are
usually more darkly coloured. One variety has nearly white flowers. The
leaves are more or less serrated, and are either destitute of glands,
or have globose or reniform glands;[672] and some few peaches, such as
the Brugnon, bear on the same tree both globular and kidney-shaped
glands.[673] According to Robertson[674] the trees with glandular
leaves are liable to blister, but not in any great degree to mildew;
whilst the non-glandular trees are more subject to curl, to mildew, and
to the attacks of aphides. The varieties differ in the period of their
maturity, in the fruit keeping well, and in hardiness,--the latter
circumstance being especially attended to in the United States. Certain
varieties, such as the Bellegarde, stand forcing in hot-houses better
than other varieties. The flat-peach of China is the most remarkable of
all the varieties; it is so much depressed towards the summit, that the
stone is here covered only by roughened skin and not by a fleshy
layer.[675] Another Chinese variety, called the Honey-peach, is
remarkable from the fruit terminating in a long sharp point; its leaves
are glandless and widely dentate.[676] The Emperor of Russia peach is a
third singular variety, having deeply and doubly serrated leaves; the
fruit is deeply cleft with one-half projecting considerably beyond the
other; it originated in America, and its seedlings inherit similar
leaves.[677]

The peach has also produced in China a small class of trees valued for
ornament, namely the double-flowered; of these five varieties are now
known in England, varying from pure white, through rose, to intense
crimson.[678] One of these varieties, called the camellia-flowered,
bears flowers above 21/4 inches in diameter, whilst those of the
fruit-bearing kinds do not at most exceed 11/4 inch in diameter. The
flowers of the {344} double-flowered peaches have the singular
property[679] of frequently producing double or treble fruit. Finally,
there is good reason to believe that the peach is an almond profoundly
modified; but whatever its origin may have been, there can be no doubt
that it has yielded during the last eighteen centuries many varieties,
some of them strongly characterised, belonging both to the nectarine
and peach form.

_Apricot_ (_Prunus armeniaca_).--It is commonly admitted that this tree
is descended from a single species, now found wild in the Caucasian
region.[680] On this view the varieties deserve notice, because they
illustrate differences supposed by some botanists to be of specific
value in the almond and plum. The best monograph on the apricot is by
Mr. Thompson,[681] who describes seventeen varieties. We have seen that
peaches and nectarines vary in a strictly parallel manner; and in the
apricot, which forms a closely allied genus, we again meet with
variations analogous to those of the peach, as well as to those of the
plum. The varieties differ considerably in the shape of their leaves,
which are either serrated or crenated, sometimes with ear-like
appendages at their bases, and sometimes with glands on the petioles.
The flowers are generally alike, but are small in the Masculine. The
fruit varies much in size, shape, and in having the suture little
pronounced or absent; in the skin being smooth, or downy as in the
orange-apricot; and in the flesh clinging to the stone, as in the
last-mentioned kind, or in readily separating from it, as in the
Turkey-apricot. In all these differences we see the closest analogy
with the varieties of the peach and nectarine. In the stone we have
more important differences, and these in the case of the plum have been
esteemed of specific value: in some apricots the stone is almost
spherical, in others much flattened, being either sharp in front or
blunt at both ends, sometimes channelled along the back, or with a
sharp ridge along both margins. In the Moorpark, and generally in the
Hemskirke, the stone presents a singular character in being perforated,
with a bundle of fibres passing through the perforation from end to
end. The most constant and important character, according to Thompson,
is whether the kernel is bitter or sweet; yet in this respect we have a
graduated difference, for the kernel is very bitter in Shipley's
apricot; in the Hemskirke less bitter than in some other kinds;
slightly bitter in the Royal; and "sweet like a hazel-nut" in the
Breda, Angoumois, and others. In the case of the almond, bitterness has
been thought by some high authorities to indicate specific difference.

In N. America the Roman apricot endures "cold and unfavourable
situations, where no other sort, except the Masculine, will succeed;
and its blossoms bear quite a severe frost without injury."[682]
According to Mr. Rivers[683] seedling apricots deviate but little from
the character of {345} their race: in France the Alberge is constantly
reproduced from seed with but little variation. In Ladakh, according to
Moorcroft,[684] ten varieties of the apricot, very different from each
other, are cultivated, and all are raised from seed, excepting one,
which is budded.

_Plums_ (_Prunus insititia_).--Formerly the sloe, _P. spinosa_, was
thought to be the parent of all our plums; but now this honour is very
commonly accorded to _P. insititia_ or the bullace, which is found wild
in the Caucasus and N.-Western India, and is naturalised in
England.[685] It is not at all improbable, in accordance with some
observations made by Mr. Rivers[686] that both these forms, which some
botanists rank as a single species, may be the parents of our
domesticated plums. Another supposed parent-form, the _P. domestica_,
is said to be found wild in the region of the Caucasus. Godron
remarks[687] that the cultivated varieties may be divided into two main
groups, which he supposes to be descended from two aboriginal stocks;
namely, those with oblong fruit and stones pointed at both ends, having
narrow separate petals and upright branches; and those with rounded
fruit, with stones blunt at both ends, with rounded petals and
spreading branches. From what we know of the variability of the flowers
in the peach and of the diversified manner of growth in our various
fruit-trees, it is difficult to lay much weight on these latter {346}
characters. With respect to the shape of the fruit, we have conclusive
evidence that it is extremely variable: Downing[688] gives outlines of
the plums of two seedlings, namely, the red and imperial gages, raised
from the greengage; and the fruit of both is more elongated than that
of the greengage. The latter has a very blunt broad stone, whereas the
stone of the imperial gage is "oval and pointed at both ends." These
trees also differ in their manner of growth: "the greengage is a very
short-jointed, slow-growing tree, of spreading and rather dwarfish
habit;" whilst its offspring, the imperial gage, "grows freely and
rises rapidly, and has long dark shoots." The famous Washington plum
bears a globular fruit, but its offspring, the emerald drop, is nearly
as much elongated as the most elongated plum figured by Downing,
namely, Manning's prune. I have made a small collection of the stones
of twenty-five kinds, and they graduate in shape from the bluntest into
the sharpest kinds. As characters derived from seeds are generally of
high systematic importance, I have thought it worth while to give
drawings of the most distinct kinds in my small collection; and they
may be seen to differ in a surprising manner in size, outline,
thickness, prominence of the ridges, and state of surface. It deserves
notice that the shape of the stone is not always strictly correlated
with that of the fruit: thus the Washington plum is spherical and
depressed at the pole, with a somewhat elongated stone, whilst the
fruit of the Goliath is more elongated, but the stone less so, than in
the Washington. Again, Denyer's Victoria and Goliath bear fruit closely
resembling each other, but their stones are widely different. On the
other hand, the Harvest and Black Margate plums are very dissimilar,
yet include closely similar stones.

The varieties of the plum are numerous, and differ greatly in size,
shape, quality, and colour,--being bright yellow, green, almost white,
blue, purple, or red. There are some curious varieties, such as the
double or Siamese, and the Stoneless plum: in the latter the kernel
lies in a roomy cavity surrounded only by the pulp. The climate of
North America appears to be singularly favourable for the production of
new and good varieties; Downing describes no less than forty, seven of
which of first-rate quality have been recently introduced into
England.[689] Varieties occasionally arise having an innate adaptation
for certain soils, almost as strongly pronounced as with natural
species growing on the most distinct geological formations; thus in
America the imperial gage, differently from almost all other kinds, "is
peculiarly fitted for _dry light_ soils where many sorts drop their
fruit," whereas on rich heavy soils the fruit is often insipid.[690] My
father could never succeed in making the Wine-Sour yield even a
moderate crop in a sandy orchard near Shrewsbury, whilst in some parts
of the same county and in its native Yorkshire it bears abundantly: one
of my {347} relations also repeatedly tried in vain to grow this
variety in a sandy district in Staffordshire.

Mr. Rivers has given[691] a number of interesting facts, showing how
truly many varieties can be propagated by seed. He sowed the stones of
twenty bushels of the greengage for the sake of raising stocks, and
closely observed the seedlings; "all had the smooth shoots, the
prominent buds, and the glossy leaves of the greengage, but the greater
number had smaller leaves and thorns." There are two kinds of damson,
one the Shropshire with downy shoots, and the other the Kentish with
smooth shoots, and these differ but slightly in any other respect: Mr.
Rivers sowed some bushels of the Kentish damson, and all the
seedlings-had smooth shoots, but in some the fruit was oval, in others
round or roundish, and in a few the fruit was small, and, except in
being sweet, closely resembled that of the wild sloe. Mr. Rivers gives
several other striking instances of inheritance: thus, he raised eighty
thousand seedlings from the common German Quetsche plum, and "not one
could be found varying in the least, in foliage or habit." Similar
facts were observed with the Petite Mirabelle plum, yet this latter
kind (as well as the Quetsche) is known to have yielded some
well-established varieties; but, as Mr. Rivers remarks, they all belong
to the same group with the Mirabelle.

_Cherries (Prunus cerasus, avium_, &c.).--Botanists believe that our
cultivated cherries are descended from one, two, four, or even more
wild stocks.[692] That there must be at least two parent-species we may
infer from the sterility of twenty hybrids raised by Mr. Knight from
the morello fertilized by pollen of the Elton cherry; for these hybrids
produced in all only five cherries, and one alone of these contained a
seed.[693] Mr. Thompson[694] has classified the varieties in an
apparently natural method in two main groups by characters taken from
the flowers, fruit, and leaves; but some varieties which stand widely
separate in this classification are quite fertile when crossed; thus
Knight's Early Black cherry is the product of a cross between two such
kinds.

Mr. Knight states that seedling cherries are more variable than those
of any other fruit-tree.[695] In the Catalogue of the Horticultural
Society for 1842, eighty varieties are enumerated. Some varieties
present singular characters: thus the flower of the Cluster cherry
includes as many as twelve pistils, of which the majority abort; and
they are said generally to produce from two to five or six cherries
aggregated together and borne on a single peduncle. In the Ratafia
cherry several flower-peduncles arise from a common peduncle, upwards
of an inch in length. The fruit of Gascoigne's Heart has its apex
produced into a globule or drop: that of the white {348} Hungarian Gean
has almost transparent flesh. The Flemish cherry is "a very odd-looking
fruit," much flattened at the summit and base, with the latter deeply
furrowed, and borne on a stout very short footstalk. In the Kentish
cherry the stone adheres so firmly to the footstalk, that it can be
drawn out of the flesh; and this renders the fruit well fitted for
drying. The Tobacco-leaved cherry, according to Sageret and Thompson,
produces gigantic leaves, more than a foot and sometimes even eighteen
inches in length, and half a foot in breadth. The Weeping cherry, on
the other hand, is valuable only as an ornament, and, according to
Downing, is "a charming little tree with slender weeping branches,
clothed with small almost myrtle-like foliage." There is also a
peach-leaved variety.

Sageret describes a remarkable variety, _le griottier de la Toussaint_,
which bears at the same time, even as late as September, flowers and
fruit of all degrees of maturity. The fruit, which is of inferior
quality, is borne on long, very thin footstalks. But the extraordinary
statement is made that all the leaf-bearing shoots spring from old
flower-buds. Lastly, there is an important physiological distinction
between those kinds of cherries which bear fruit on young or on old
wood; but Sageret positively asserts that a Bigarreau in his garden
bore fruit on wood of both ages.[696]

_Apple (Pyrus malus)._--The one source of doubt felt by botanists with
respect to the parentage of the apple is whether, besides _P. malus_,
two or three other closely allied wild forms, namely, _P. acerba_ and
_praecox_ or _paradisiaca_, do not deserve to be ranked as distinct
species. The _P. praecox_ is supposed by some authors[697] to be the
parent of the dwarf paradise stock, which, owing to the fibrous roots
not penetrating deeply into the ground, is so largely used for
grafting; but the paradise stock, it is asserted,[698] cannot be
propagated true by seed. The common wild crab varies considerably in
England; but many of the varieties are believed to be escaped
seedlings.[699] Every one knows the great difference in the manner of
growth, in the foliage, flowers, and especially in the fruit, between
the almost innumerable varieties of the apple. The pips or seeds (as I
know by comparison) likewise differ considerably in shape, size, and
colour. The fruit is adapted for eating or for cooking in different
ways, and keeps for only a few weeks or for nearly two years. Some few
kinds have the fruit covered with a powdery secretion, called bloom,
like that on plums; {349} and "it is extremely remarkable that this
occurs almost exclusively among varieties cultivated in Russia."[700]
Another Russian apple, the white Astracan, possesses the singular
property of becoming transparent, when ripe, like some sorts of crabs.
The _api etoile_ has five prominent ridges, hence its name; the _api
noir_ is nearly black: the _twin cluster pippin_ often bears fruit
joined in pairs.[701] The trees of the several sorts differ greatly in
their periods of leafing and flowering; in my orchard the _Court Pendu
Plat_ produces its leaves so late, that during several springs I have
thought it dead. The Tiffin apple scarcely bears a leaf when in full
bloom; the Cornish crab, on the other hand, bears so many leaves at
this period that the flowers can hardly be seen.[702] In some kinds the
fruit ripens in midsummer; in others, late in the autumn. These several
differences in leafing, flowering, and fruiting, are not at all
necessarily correlated; for, as Andrew Knight has remarked,[703] no one
can judge from the early flowering of a new seedling, or from the early
shedding or change of colour of the leaves, whether it will mature its
fruit early in the season.

The varieties differ greatly in constitution. It is notorious that our
summers are not hot enough for the Newtown Pippin,[704] which is the
glory of the orchards near New York; and so it is with several
varieties which we have imported from the Continent. On the other hand,
our Court of Wick succeeds well under the severe climate of Canada. The
_Calville rouge de Micoud_ occasionally bears two crops during the same
year. The Burr Knot is covered with small excrescences, which emit
roots so readily that a branch with blossom-buds may be stuck in the
ground, and will root and bear a few fruit even during the first
year.[705] Mr. Rivers has recently described[706] some seedlings
valuable from their roots running near the surface. One of these
seedlings was remarkable from its extremely dwarfed size, "forming
itself into a bush only a few inches in height." Many varieties are
particularly liable to canker in certain soils. But perhaps the
strangest constitutional peculiarity is that the Winter Majetin is not
attacked by the mealy bug or coccus; Lindley[707] states that in an
orchard in Norfolk infested with these insects the Majetin was quite
free, though the stock on which it was grafted was affected: Knight
makes a similar statement with respect to a cider apple, and adds that
he only once saw these insects just above the stock, but that three
days afterwards they entirely disappeared; this apple, however, was
raised from a cross between {350} the Golden Harvey and the Siberian
Crab; and the latter, I believe, is considered by some authors as
specifically distinct.

The famous St. Valery apple must not be passed over; the flower has a
double calyx with ten divisions, and fourteen styles surmounted by
conspicuous oblique stigmas, but is destitute of stamens or corolla.
The fruit is constricted round the middle, and is formed of five
seed-cells, surmounted by nine other cells.[708] Not being provided
with stamens, the tree requires artificial fertilisation; and the girls
of St. Valery annually go to "_faire ses pommes_," each marking her own
fruit with a ribbon; and as different pollen is used, the fruit
differs, and we here have an instance of the direct action of foreign
pollen on the mother-plant. These monstrous apples include, as we have
seen, fourteen seed-cells; the pigeon-apple,[709] on the other hand,
has only four, instead of, as with all common apples, five cells; and
this certainly is a remarkable difference.

In the catalogue of apples published in 1842 by the Horticultural
Society, 897 varieties are enumerated; but the differences between most
of them are of comparatively little interest, as they are not strictly
inherited. No one can raise, for instance, from the seed of the Ribston
Pippin, a tree of the same kind; and it is said that the "Sister
Ribston Pippin" was a white, semi-transparent, sour-fleshed apple, or
rather large crab.[710] Yet it is a mistake to suppose that with most
varieties the characters are not to a certain extent inherited. In two
lots of seedlings raised from two well-marked kinds, many worthless,
crab-like seedlings will appear, but it is now known that the two lots
not only usually differ from each other, but resemble to a certain
extent their parents. We see this indeed in the several sub-groups of
Russetts, Sweetings, Codlins, Pearmains, Reinettes, &c.,[711] which are
all believed, and many are known, to be descended from other varieties
bearing the same names.

_Pears (Pyrus communis)._--I need say little on this fruit, which
varies much in the wild state, and to an extraordinary degree when
cultivated, in its fruit, flowers, and foliage. One of the most
celebrated botanists in Europe, M. Decaisne, has carefully studied the
many varieties;[712] although he formerly believed that they were
derived from more than one species, he is now convinced that all belong
to one. He has arrived at this conclusion from finding in the several
varieties a perfect gradation between the most extreme characters; so
perfect is this gradation that he maintains it to be impossible to
classify the varieties by any natural method. M. Decaisne raised many
seedlings from four distinct kinds, and has carefully recorded the
variations in each. Notwithstanding this extreme degree of {351}
variability, it is now positively known that many kinds reproduce by
seed the leading characters of their race.[713]

_Strawberries (Fragaria)._--This fruit is remarkable, on account of the
number of species which have been cultivated, and from their rapid
improvement within the last fifty or sixty years. Let any one compare
the fruit of one of the largest varieties exhibited at our Shows with
that of the wild wood strawberry, or, which will be a fairer
comparison, with the somewhat larger fruit of the wild American
Virginian Strawberry, and he will see what prodigies horticulture has
effected.[714] The number of varieties has likewise increased in a
surprisingly rapid manner. Only three kinds were known in France, in
1746, where this fruit was early cultivated. In 1766 five species had
been introduced, the same which are now cultivated, but only five
varieties of _Fragaria vesca_, with some sub-varieties, had been
produced. At the present day the varieties of the several species are
almost innumerable. The species consist of, firstly, the wood or Alpine
cultivated strawberries, descended from _F. vesca_, a native of Europe
and of North America. There are eight wild European varieties, as
ranked by Duchesne, of _F. vesca_, but several of these are considered
species by some botanists. Secondly, the green strawberries, descended
from the European _F. collina_, and little cultivated in England.
Thirdly, the Hautbois, from the European _F. elatior_. Fourthly, the
Scarlets, descended from _F. Virginiana_, a native of the whole breadth
of North America. Fifthly, the Chili, descended from _F. Chiloensis_,
an inhabitant of the west coast of the temperate parts both of North
and South America. Lastly, the Pines or Carolinas (including the old
Blacks), which have been ranked by most authors under the name of _F.
grandiflora_ as a distinct species, said to inhabit Surinam; but this
is a manifest error. This form is considered by the highest authority,
M. Gay, to be merely a strongly marked race of _F. Chiloensis_.[715]
These five or six forms have been ranked by most botanists as
specifically distinct; but this may be doubted, for Andrew Knight,[716]
who raised no less than 400 crossed strawberries, asserts that the _F.
Virginiana_, _Chiloensis_, and _grandiflora_ "may be made to breed
together indiscriminately," and he found, in accordance with the
principle of analogous variation, "that similar varieties could be
obtained from the seeds of any one of them."

Since Knight's time there is abundant and additional evidence[717] of
the extent to which the American forms spontaneously cross. We owe
{352} indeed to such crosses most of our choicest existing varieties.
Knight did not succeed in crossing the European wood-strawberry with
the American Scarlet or with the Hautbois. Mr. Williams, of Pitmaston,
however, succeeded; but the hybrid offspring from the Hautbois, though
fruiting well, never produced seed, with the exception of a single one,
which reproduced the parent hybrid form.[718] Major E. Trevor Clarke
informs me that he crossed two members of the Pine class (Myatt's B.
Queen and Keen's Seedling), with the wood and hautbois, and that in
each case he raised only a single seedling; one of these fruited, but
was almost barren. Mr. W. Smith, of York, has raised similar hybrids
with equally poor success.[719] We thus see[720] that the European and
American species can with some difficulty be crossed; but it is
improbable that hybrids sufficiently fertile to be worth cultivation
will ever be thus produced. This fact is surprising, as these forms
structurally are not widely distinct, and are sometimes connected in
the districts where they grow wild, as I hear from Professor Asa Gray,
by puzzling intermediate forms.

The energetic culture of the strawberry is of recent date, and the
cultivated varieties can in most cases still be classed under some one
of the above five native stocks. As the American strawberries cross so
freely and spontaneously, we can hardly doubt that they will ultimately
become inextricably confused. We find, indeed, that horticulturists at
present disagree under which class to rank some few of the varieties;
and a writer in the 'Bon Jardinier' of 1840 remarks that formerly it
was possible to class all of them under some one species, but that now
this is quite impossible with the American forms, the new English
varieties having completely filled up the gaps between them.[721] The
blending together of two or more aboriginal forms, which there is every
reason to believe has occurred with some of our anciently cultivated
productions, we now see actually occurring with our strawberries.