The results of the 1919 contest on nuts of the various species are as noted below:

HICKORIES—128 ENTRIES

The results of the tests on the prize winning hickories are shown in the table on page 151.

What is said of the difficulty of identification as to species is particularly applicable to the hickory where it is known that many of the fine nuts that we have are hybrids. While no nut is noted as a hybrid unless it has been so proven by evidence which it is believed is beyond question, there is considerable question as to whether a number of the nuts noted as shagbarks are really pure shagbarks. It will take more observation and study than it has as yet been possible to give them to determine this point. It is to be noted, however, that the more study we put on the hickories notable for the excellence of the nuts they bear, the more we find that give suggestion of hybrid parentage.

Beside the hickories noted above which received a sufficient number of points to entitle them to one of the eight prizes awarded the measurements are given of the Hatch and Halesite bitternuts because they have the thinnest shell and highest proportion of kernel of any hickories yet discovered and of the Stanley hickory because it is the best shellbark of which we yet know.



HICKORIES

KEY: A: Species B: Prize awarded C: Average weight of nut D: Average weight of kernel E: Average weight of kernel that dropped out after cracking F: Average weight of kernel that could be easily picked out with fingers after cracking G: Average cracking pressure H: Proportion of kernel I: Cracking quality absolute J: Cracking quality commercial K: Size (10) K: Form (5) M: Color of shell (5) N: Husking quality (5) O: Thinness of shell (10) P: Cracking quality commercial (20) Q: Cracking quality absolute (5) R: Color of kernel (5) S: Proportion of kernel (15) T: Quality of kernel (20) U: Total points awarded (100)

NAME ADDRESS DESIGNATION A B C D E F G H I ==================================================================== Luther W. Vest Blacksburg, Va. G 1 5.0g 2.5g 0.0g 2.5g 46kg 49.6 0.0 Vest hickory G. W. Manahan Sabillasville. Md. G 1 7.8g 3.8g 2.3g 3.4g 99kg 48.5 61.2 Manahan hickory Eugene J. Clark Ludlow, Mass. G 2 6.5g 2.6g 0.0g 2.6g 83kg 40.8 0.0 Ralph T. Olcott Rochester, N. Y. GxB 2 6.9g 4.0g .7g 3.6g 46kg 57.5 17.6 Laney hickory Snyder Bros. Center Point, Ia. GxB 2 7.6g 3.6g 1.8g 3.6g 64kg 48.1 49.5 Fairbanks hickory Mort Sturts Hazel Dell, Ill. G 3 4.7g 2.2g 1.2g 2.2g 49kg 46.1 55.6 Hickory No. 1 Howard G. Barnes Fayetteville, O. G 4 5.0g 2.6g 2.6g 2.6g 79kg 51.4 100.0 Hickory No. 1 E. C. Beam Mt. Oreb, O. G 4 3.7g 1.9g .6g 1.9g 43kg 50.0 33.3 Hickory No. 2 Charles Swaim South Bend, Ind. G 4 5.1g 2.4g 2.3g 2.4g 42kg 47.5 97.2 Swaim hickory G. E. Beaver Millerstown, Pa. GxB 5 6.7g 3.4g 0.0g 3.4g 29kg 50.3 0.0 Beaver hickory Mrs. Augusta Patton Walnut Hill. Ill. G 5 6.5g 2.7g 2.2g 2.5g 77kg 40.5 81.6 E. C. Beam Mt. Oreb, O. G 6 4.6g 1.9g 1.2g 1.7g 33kg 41.9 61.8 Hickory No. 1 E. C. Beam Mt. Oreb, O. G 6 4.8g 1.6g .8g 1.6g 68kg 33.4 46.9 Hickory No. 7 James L. Glover Shelton, Conn. G 6 5.0g 1.9g 1.8g 1.9g 106kg 38.6 94.7 Hickory No. 1 James L. Glover Shelton, Conn. G 6 4.7g 1.9g .9g 1.9g 68kg 40.0 50.0 Hickory No. 2 J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. GxL C 8.8g 3.1g 1.5g 3.1g 102kg 35.3 48.1 Weiker hickory Sarah Kronk Minford. O. G 6 4.2g 1.6g 1.3g 1.6g 140kg 37.6 83.6 Hickory No. 3 Mort Sturts Hazel Dell, Ill. G 6 5.6g 2.3g 1.4g 2.3g 52kg 41.0 61.4 Hickory No. 3 W. C. Deming Wilton. Conn. G 7 5.5g 2.9g 1.4g 2.9g 63kg 52.8 48.3 Terpenny hickory William Gobble Holston, Va. G 7 9.7g 3.9g .2g 3.9g 142kg 40.6 5.1 W. P. Griffin Creal Spring, Ill. G 7 5.2g 2.0g 1.5g 2.0g 113kg 38.5 75.0 Kate Yawger Port Byron, N. Y. G 7 4.9g 1.9g .2g 1.9g 95kg 39.0 11.4 Hickory No. 2 Kate Yawger Port Byron, N. Y. G 7 6.0g 2.4g 1.8g 2.0g 121kg 39.1 76.3 Hickory No. 4 E. C. Beam Mt. Oreb, O. G 8 3.6g 1.5g .5g 1.5g 45kg 43.2 34.4 Hickory No. 4 Sarah Kronk Minford, O. G 8 3.1g 1.3g .6g 1.3g 82kg 41.3 4.7 Hickory No. 2 Reuben J. Kurtz Holly, Mich. G 8 4.4g 1.7g 1.1g 1.6g 111kg 39.4 64.0 Hickory No. 2 E. Pomeroy Windsor, Conn. G 8 6.8g 2.4g 1.2g 2.2g 78kg 35.9 50.0 Hickory No. 2 R. C. Hatch Central City, Ia. B 4.7g 3.1g .2g 3.1g 19kg 65.0 6.5 Willard G. Bixby Baldwin, N. Y. B 2.3g 1.6g .0g 1.3g 13kg 69.0 0.0 Halesite bitternut S. A. Sipe Carthage, Ind. L 19.2g 5.9g 1.2g 2.9g 138kg 30.7 20.5 Stanley hickory

NAME ADDRESS DESIGNATION J K L M N O P Q R S T U ======================================================================= Luther W. Vest Blacksburg, Va. 100.0 3 4 4 5 6 20 0 4 9 20 75 Vest hickory - G. W. Manahan Sabillasville. Md. 90.5 5 4 4 5 4 17 3 4 9 20 75 Manahan hickory - Eugene J. Clark Ludlow, Mass. 100.0 4 5 5 5 4 20 0 4 7 20 74 - Ralph T. Olcott Rochester, N. Y. 90.4 5 5 4 5 6 17 0 3 11 18 74 Laney hickory - Snyder Bros. Center Point, Ia. 100.0 5 5 5 5 5 20 2 3 9 15 74 Fairbanks hickory - Mort Sturts Hazel Dell, Ill. 100.0 3 3 5 5 6 20 2 3 8 18 73 Hickory No. 1 Howard G. Barnes Fayetteville, O. 100.0 3 4 4 5 4 20 5 2 10 15 72 Hickory No. 1 - E. C. Beam Mt. Oreb, O. 100.0 2 4 3 5 6 20 1 2 9 20 72 Hickory No. 2 - Charles Swaim South Bend, Ind. 100.0 4 3 4 4 6 20 4 3 9 15 72 Swaim hickory - G. E. Beaver Millerstown, Pa. 100.0 4 5 4 5 7 20 0 2 9 15 71 Beaver hickory - Mrs. Augusta Patton Walnut Hill. Ill. 92.8 4 4 4 5 5 18 4 2 7 18 71 - E. C. Beam Mt. Oreb, O. 87.8 3 3 4 5 7 16 3 2 7 20 70 Hickory No. 1 - E. C. Beam Mt. Oreb, O. 100.0 3 4 3 5 5 20 2 3 5 20 70 Hickory No. 7 - James L. Glover Shelton, Conn. 100.0 3 1 4 5 4 20 4 3 6 20 70 Hickory No. 1 - James L. Glover Shelton, Conn. 100.0 3 2 4 5 5 20 2 2 7 20 70 Hickory No. 2 - J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 100.0 5 4 4 5 4 20 2 3 5 18 70 Weiker hickory - Sarah Kronk Minford. O. 100.0 3 4 4 5 3 20 4 3 6 18 70 Hickory No. 3 - Mort Sturts Hazel Dell, Ill. 100.0 4 4 4 5 6 20 3 2 7 15 70 Hickory No. 3 - W. C. Deming Wilton. Conn. 100.0 4 3 4 5 5 20 2 1 10 15 69 Terpenny hickory - William Gobble Holston, Va. 100.0 6 3 3 5 3 20 0 2 7 20 69 - W. P. Griffin Creal Spring, Ill. 100.0 4 1 4 5 3 20 3 3 6 20 69 - Kate Yawger Port Byron, N. Y. 100.0 3 4 4 5 4 20 0 3 6 20 69 Hickory No. 2 - Kate Yawger Port Byron, N. Y. 82.6 4 4 5 5 3 15 3 4 6 20 69 Hickory No. 4 - E. C. Beam Mt. Oreb, O. 100.0 2 3 3 5 6 20 1 1 7 20 68 Hickory No. 4 - Sarah Kronk Minford, O. 100.0 2 4 4 5 4 20 0 4 7 18 68 Hickory No. 2 - Reuben J. Kurtz Holly, Mich. 93.0 2 5 4 5 3 18 3 3 6 18 68 Hickory No. 2 - E. Pomeroy Windsor, Conn. 88.6 4 4 4 5 4 17 2 3 5 20 68 Hickory No. 2 - R. C. Hatch Central City, Ia. 100.0 3 5 3 3 9 20 0 2 13 0 58 - Willard G. Bixby Baldwin, N. Y. 80.1 1 5 3 3 10 15 0 2 15 0 54 Halesite bitternut - S. A. Sipe Carthage, Ind. 49.5 8 4 4 5 3 7 1 3 4 15 54 Stanley hickory -

The abbreviations used under the species column are G for shagbark (Carya ovata), L for shellbark (Carya laciniosa), and B for bitternut (Carya cordiformis). Where two letters appear with an x between it means that the nut in question is a hybrid between the two species.

Following out the plan adopted last year (when no prizes were offered for specific species of hickories) when a nut other than a shagbark sent judged by the hickory standard received sufficient points to put it among the prize winners, a special class was made for that. Some of the nuts in the above list are disqualified for receiving prizes as they are being "propagated." This term has been somewhat difficult of definition and in default of action of the Association or of some committee appointed for the purpose I have held it to mean those nuts which are listed in the catalog of any nurseryman. That is to say, a nut is eligible for prizes more than one year, and the mere growing a few grafted or budded trees of a variety and distributing them privately does not constitute "propagation" in the sense that the word is used in the nut contests. As soon, however, as any nurseryman considers a variety of sufficient merit so that he lists it is his catalog or in any printed supplement to a catalog and states that he can furnish grafted or budded trees of this variety, from that time on it is debarred from receiving the prizes offered annually.

Other hickories were received from:

D. S. Bassett, Fisherville, Mass. E. C. Beam, Mt. Orab, Ohio. (Nuts No. 5, No. 6). W. F. Cook, Moscow, Ky. W. E. Cornell, 302 Stewart Ave., Ithaca, N. Y. F. N. Decker, Syracuse, N. Y. (Nuts No. 1, No. 2). Joan Deming, Danbury, Conn., Route 2. F. Earland Gilson, Groton, Mass. Wm. H. Kuhne, Woodbury, Conn. Reuben J. Kurtz, Holly, Mich., R. No. 3, Box 32. Harvey Losee, Upper Red Hook, N. Y. Mrs. F. A. Patch, West Townsend, Mass, Box 77. E. Pomeroy, Windsor, Conn. (Nut No. 1). Ruth A. Reeves, Newark, N. Y. Snyder Bros., Center Point, Ia. (Nut No. 1, seedling). Mort Stuarts, Hazel Dell, Ill. (Nuts No. 4, No. 5, No. 6). Walter K. Wilson, Watertown, Conn., Lock Box 2. Kate Yawger, Port Bryon, N. Y. (Nut No. 1). Grant Yeagley, Jamestown, Penn., R. R. No. I.

BLACK WALNUTS—51 ENTRIES

The prize winning black walnuts exhibited and the prizes awarded are noted in the table of page 154. There is but one species of walnuts of the black walnut class native in the north eastern United States, the eastern black walnut, Juglans nigra. In this contest specimens of the Texas black walnut, Juglans rupestris, and of the California black walnut, Juglans hindsii were entered. Tests on these two black walnuts are noted for the purpose of record although no characteristics of value were noted. The California black walnut has a smoother shell than the eastern black walnut. The Texas black walnut has beautiful willowy foliage and grows very late in the fall and holds its leaves much longer than the other walnuts and it is of dwarf habit of growth. Tests on the Werner black walnut are noted because it is the largest black walnut we have. The black walnuts sent in this year were much poorer on the whole than those exhibited in some years. Some well known trees bore scarcely a nut. Some well known propagated black walnuts were tested but only two of them tested out high enough to get into the prize winning class, the Thomas and Ten Eyck. From what we know of the variation of nuts particularly of black walnuts, it is evident that we must test black walnuts more than one year to get a good idea of their value.

The nut sent in by John S. Bomberges is particularly noticeable on account of the unusually fine flavor of the kernel and would seem to be a standard of excellence for black walnut kernels.

Other black walnuts received from:

William A. Agner, Rockport, Ind., R. F. D. No. 1. George A. Ede, Cobden, Ill. M. H. Hoover, Lockport, N. Y. C. S. Ketchum, Middlefield, Ohio. (Nuts No. 1, 3, 5, 11, 12). A. H. Lang, 1628 Collingwood Ave., Toledo, Ohio, (Nut No. 1). James E. Ripley, Tippecanoe, O., R. F. D. No. 2. (Nut No. 2). S. A. Toy, Freeman, W. Va. (Nut No. 1). G. G. Truman, Perrysville, Ohio. Box 167. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. Peanut black walnut. Ira C. Wilson, New Truxton, Mo.

BLACK WALNUTS

KEY: A: Species B: Prize awarded C: Average weight of nut D: Average weight of kernel E: Average weight of kernel that dropped out after cracking F: Average weight of kernel that could be easily picked out with fingers after cracking G: Average cracking pressure H: Proportion of kernel I: Cracking quality absolute J: Cracking quality commercial K: Size (10) K: Form (5) M: Color of shell (5) N: Husking quality (5) O: Thinness of shell (10) P: Cracking quality commercial (20) Q: Cracking quality absolute (5) R: Color of kernel (5) S: Proportion of kernel (15) T: Quality of kernel (20) U: Total points awarded (100)

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION A B C D E F G H I ======================================================================== C. S. Ketchum Middlefield, O. B 1 14.1g 3.6g 2.9g 3.6g 185kg 25.5 80.5 Nut No. 10 John S. Bomberges Lebanon, Pa. B 2 16.4g 3.9g 2.5g 3.4g 208kg 23.8 64.1 Henry Hicks Westbury, N. Y. B 3 13.6g 3.1g 1.6g 3.1g 222kg 22.8 51.6 Amy A. Alley Lagrangeville, N.Y. B 4 15.8g 3.3g 2.1g 3.3g 177kg 20.9 53.7 Not the 1918 prize nut James E. Ripley Tippecanoe, O. B 4 26.7g 6.3g 3.7g 6.3g 247kg 23.6 58.8 Nut No. 1 Snyder Bros. Center Point, Ia. B 19.7g 4.7g 3.6g 3.9g 247kg 23.9 76.6 Thomas black walnut A. H. Lang Toledo, O. B 5 20.5g 4.6g 2.9g 4.1g 313kg 22.4 63.1 Nut No. 2 Kate Yawger Port Byron, N. Y. B 5 20.3g 4.5g 2.4g 3.8g 291kg 22.2 53.4 E. M. Ten Eyck So. Plainfield, N. J. B 16.7g 3.5g 1.8g 3.1g 154kg 21.0 51.5 Ten Eyck black walnut C. S. Ketchum Middlefield, O. B 6 20.1g 4.7g 2.4g 3.5g 297kg 23.4 51.2 Nut No. 9 S. A. Toy Freeman, W. Va. B 7 21.9g 5.5g 1.6g 3.9g 225kg 20.5 29.1 Nut No. 2 Arnold Arboretum Jamaica Pl'n., Mass. R 6.1g 0.9g 0.7g 0.8g 357kg 14.8 67.8 From Rochester, N. Y. G. Hunger Tolhouse, Calif. C 22.3g 5.0g 1.9g 3.1g 407kg 22.4 38.0 California black walnut Edward A. Werner Marion, Ia. R5 B 30.4g 6.5g 1.4g 2.5g 353kg 21.4 21.5

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION J K L M N O P Q R S T U =========================================================================== C. S. Ketchum Middlefield, O. 100.0 2 4 3 3 7 20 4 4 7 18 71 Nut No. 10 - John S. Bomberges Lebanon, Pa. 87.1 3 1 4 4 6 16 3 4 5 23 69 - Henry Hicks Westbury, N. Y. 100.0 1 3 3 4 6 20 2 4 5 20 68 - Amy A. Alley Lagrangeville, N.Y. 100.0 2 3 3 4 7 20 3 4 3 18 67 Not the 1918 prize nut - James E. Ripley Tippecanoe, O. 100.0 8 3 3 3 5 20 2 3 5 15 67 Nut No. 1 - Snyder Bros. Center Point, Ia. 83.0 4 4 4 4 5 15 3 3 5 20 67 Thomas black walnut - A. H. Lang Toledo, O. 89.2 5 3 3 4 3 17 3 2 4 20 64 Nut No. 2 - Kate Yawger Port Byron, N. Y. 84.5 5 3 3 4 3 16 2 4 4 20 64 - E. M. Ten Eyck So. Plainfield, N. J. 88.6 3 3 4 4 8 17 2 2 4 15 62 Ten Eyck black walnut - C. S. Ketchum Middlefield, O. 74.5 5 3 3 3 6 13 2 3 5 18 61 Nut No. 9 - S. A. Toy Freeman, W. Va. 71.0 5 3 4 4 6 12 1 2 3 20 60 Nut No. 2 - Arnold Arboretum Jamaica Pl'n., Mass. 89.0 1 4 5 4 1 17 3 1 0 15 51 From Rochester, N. Y. - G. Hunger Tolhouse, Calif. 62.0 6 5 5 4 0 10 1 2 4 20 57 California black walnut - Edward A. Werner Marion, Ia. R5 38.4 10 2 2 3 1 4 1 4 4 20 51 -

The abbreviations used under the species column are: B for Black walnut (Juglans nigra), C for California black walnut (Juglans hindsii), R for (Juglans rupestris).

[TN: last column in row 11 corrected to 51 from 49]



BUTTERJAPS—BUTTERNUTS, JAPAN WALNUTS, AND HYBRIDS—33 ENTRIES

The butternut and Japan walnuts and hybrids between them are grouped together as they were last year although but one hybrid appeared this year. The need of a name to include these is apparent and the name butterjaps to include butternuts, Japan walnuts, and hybrids between them is used this year following out last year's suggestion. It was a very poor year for these nuts, many well known trees bearing no crop at all. The one hybrid exhibited which was sent in as a curiosity not for the purpose of being entered in the contest but it is interesting to note that it took a prize, although not a high one.

The prize winning nuts and prizes awarded are noted in the table on page 156.

Other butternuts received from:

C. Delp, Morrison, Ohio. (Nut No. 4).

Snyder Bros., Center Point, Ia. (Fairbanks butternut).

G. G. Truman, Perrysville, Ohio. (Nuts No. 2, 3).

Other Japan walnuts received from:

L. H. & P. J. Jr. Berckmans, 1213 Lamar Bldg., Augusta, Ga.

BUTTERNUTS

KEY: A: Species B: Prize awarded C: Average weight of nut D: Average weight of kernel E: Average weight of kernel that dropped out after cracking F: Average weight of kernel that could be easily picked out with fingers after cracking G: Average cracking pressure H: Proportion of kernel I: Cracking quality absolute J: Cracking quality commercial K: Size (10) K: Form (5) M: Color of shell (5) N: Husking quality (5) O: Thinness of shell (10) P: Cracking quality commercial (20) Q: Cracking quality absolute (5) R: Color of kernel (5) S: Proportion of kernel (15) T: Quality of kernel (20) U: Total points awarded (100)

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION A B C D E F G H I ======================================================================== G. G. Truman Perrysville, O. B 1 9.6g 1.6g 1.1g 1.6g 280kg 16.8 67.8 Nut No. 5 C. Delp Morrison, O. B 2 17.2g 2.7g 2.7g 2.7g 320kg 15.7 100.0 Nut No. 1 S. W. Snyder Center Point, Ia. B 2 19.5g 3.4g 2.6g 3.4g 348kg 17.4 76.5 Pumfrey 2nd C. Delp Morrison, O. B 3 13.3g 2.4g 2.4g 2.4g 326kg 18.0 100.0 Nut No. 3 C. Delp Morrison, O. B 4 12.6g 2.1g 2.1g 2.1g 308kg 16.7 100.0 Nut No. 5 Joe P. Wilson Landon, Miss. SxB 5 12.4g 2.4g 0.7g 1.8g 244kg 19.4 28.1 Butterjap Wm. H. Kuhne Woodbury, Conn. B 6 8.7g 1.7g 1.0g 1.6g 232kg 19.0 59.0 C. Delp Morrison, O. B 7 10.7g 2.1g .0g 1.5g 250kg 19.6 0.0 Nut No. 2 S. W. Snyder Center Point, Ia. B 7 17.5g 3.1g 1.3g 1.8g 300kg 17.7 42.0 Pumfrey 1st Postmaster Balsam, N. C. B 8 13.9g 2.2g 0.6g 1.6g 249kg 16.0 27.2 G. G. Truman Perrysville, O. B 22.6g 3.3g 0.2g 1.9g 320kg 14.6 6.0 Nut No. 4 G. G. Truman Perrysville, O. B 14.4g 2.3g 0.5g 1.1g 293kg 15.7 22.1 Nut No. 1, Round shape

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION J K L M N O P Q R S T U =========================================================================== G. G. Truman Perrysville, O. 100.0 4 1 3 4 5 20 3 4 3 20 67 Nut No. 5 - C. Delp Morrison, O. 100.0 8 0 3 2 1 20 5 3 3 18 63 Nut No. 1 - S. W. Snyder Center Point, Ia. 100.0 10 0 2 3 0 20 3 2 3 20 63 Pumfrey 2nd - C. Delp Morrison, O. 100.0 6 1 2 4 1 20 5 3 4 15 61 Nut No. 3 - C. Delp Morrison, O. 100.0 5 0 2 4 1 20 5 2 3 18 60 Nut No. 5 - Joe P. Wilson Landon, Miss. 72.7 6 1 3 4 4 9 1 4 5 20 57 Butterjap - Wm. H. Kuhne Woodbury, Conn. 94.3 3 1 1 4 4 18 2 2 5 15 55 - C. Delp Morrison, O. 71.5 4 1 3 4 3 11 0 3 5 18 52 Nut No. 2 - S. W. Snyder Center Point, Ia. 58.0 9 0 2 4 1 8 2 2 4 20 52 Pumfrey 1st - Postmaster Balsam, N. C. 73.9 7 1 2 2 4 9 1 3 3 18 50 - G. G. Truman Perrysville, O. 57.5 12 0 1 3 1 7 0 3 2 18 47 Nut No. 4 - G. G. Truman Perrysville, O. 47.7 7 1 3 3 2 0 1 2 3 15 37 Nut No. 1, Round shape -

The abbreviations used under the species column are: B for butternut (Juglans cinerea), SxB for Siebold walnut, x butternut hybrid (Juglans Sieboldiana x cinerea).

JAPAN WALNUTS

KEY: A: Species B: Prize awarded C: Average weight of nut D: Average weight of kernel E: Average weight of kernel that dropped out after cracking F: Average weight of kernel that could be easily picked out with fingers after cracking G: Average cracking pressure H: Proportion of kernel I: Cracking quality absolute J: Cracking quality commercial K: Size (10) K: Form (5) M: Color of shell (5) N: Husking quality (5) O: Thinness of shell (10) P: Cracking quality commercial (20) Q: Cracking quality absolute (5) R: Color of kernel (5) S: Proportion of kernel (15) T: Quality of kernel (20) U: Total points awarded (100)

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION A B C D E F G H I ======================================================================== R. Bates Jackson, S. C. H 1 7.6g 2.2g 1.8g 2.2g 79kg 28.3 83.8 Stranger Heartnut R. Bates Jackson, S. C. H 2 4.8g 1.4g 0.8g 1.4g 79kg 29.7 52.7 Tokio Heartnut O. F. Witte Amherst, O. H 3 5.1g 1.5g 1.5g 1.5g 178kg 29.6 100.0 Heartnut R. Bates Jackson, S. C. H 4 7.2g 1.8g 1.5g 1.8g 172kg 25.2 80.2 Heartnut near Mobile pecan O. F. Witte Amherst, O. S 4 8.5g 2.2g 1.8g 2.2g 260kg 25.9 81.9 Siebold walnut No. 2 Joe P. Wilson Landon, Miss. ? 4 9.8g 2.7g 0.9g 1.9g 75kg 27.6 31.1 O. F. Witte Amherst, O. S 5 5.7g 1.5g 1.1g 1.5g 215kg 26.3 73.3 Siebold walnut No. 1 O. D. Faust Bamberg, S. C. H 6 9.0g 2.8g 0.5g 2.4g 234kg 31.1 17.8 Heartnut L. J. Bryant & Son Newark, N. Y. S 7 6.8g 1.7g 0.9g 1.1g 138kg 26.1 55.8 Siebold walnut O. D. Faust Bamberg, S. C. S 8 8.7g 1.9g 0.0g 1.7g 142kg 22.5 0.0 Siebold walnut R. Bates Jackson, S. C. HxP 12.2g 2.8g 1.3g 2.2g 419kg 22.6 46.4 Cording walnut R. Bates Jackson, S. C. PxS 13.0g 2.2g 0.0g 0.5g 370kg 16.9 0.0 Siebosian walnut

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION J K L M N O P Q R S T U =========================================================================== R. Bates Jackson, S. C. 100.0 2 4 2 5 9 20 4 3 11 18 78 Stranger Heartnut - R. Bates Jackson, S. C. 97.2 0 4 3 4 9 19 4 3 12 18 76 Tokio Heartnut - O. F. Witte Amherst, O. 100.0 1 3 4 4 6 20 5 4 12 15 74 Heartnut - R. Bates Jackson, S. C. 100.0 2 3 3 5 8 20 4 3 9 15 72 Heartnut near Mobile pecan - O. F. Witte Amherst, O. 100.0 3 3 3 4 3 20 4 4 10 18 72 Siebold walnut No. 2 - Joe P. Wilson Landon, Miss. 72.6 4 4 3 4 10 12 1 3 11 20 72 - O. F. Witte Amherst, O. 100.0 1 4 3 4 5 20 3 4 10 15 69 Siebold walnut No. 1 - O. D. Faust Bamberg, S. C. 85.6 3 5 3 4 4 15 0 3 13 18 68 Heartnut - L. J. Bryant & Son Newark, N. Y. 66.3 2 4 4 4 7 10 2 3 10 18 64 Siebold walnut - O. D. Faust Bamberg, S. C. 88.8 3 3 4 4 7 16 0 1 7 18 63 Siebold walnut - R. Bates Jackson, S. C. 78.2 5 3 3 4 0 13 2 2 8 20 60 Cording walnut - R. Bates Jackson, S. C. 22.7 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 1 3 15 27 Siebosian walnut -

The abbreviations under the species column are: H for heartnut (Juglans cordifornis), S for Siebold walnut (Juglans Sieboldiana), HxP for heartnut x Persian walnut hybrid (Juglans cordifornis x regia), PxS for Persian walnut x Siebold walnut hybrid (Juglans regia x Sieboldiana). In the case of hybrids the species first named is the pistillate parent.

PECANS—13 VARIETIES

Some very good northern pecans were sent in to the 1918 contest and two of them are deemed worthy of experimental propagation. One of these Dunn No. 1, had a particularly delicious flavor and the other the Koontz, was also a desirable nut. They are not large but are almost exactly the size of the Moore pecan, a southern variety now attracting a good deal of attention.

Specimens of three nuts of larger size were received, the Norton, McCallister and Kline, but not in sufficient quantity to test. The weights are given for reference. Tests of nine standard southern pecans are also shown. It will be noticed that the best pecans sent to the 1919 contest compare very favorably with these fine southern pecans, only the Schley being shown superior. The northern pecans are generally smaller than the southern, have lighter colored shell and lighter colored kernel, flavor every bit as good, and shell just as thin. The prize winning nuts and the prizes awarded are shown in the table on page 158.

The results of tests of southern pecans is inserted with some hesitation. These pecans are judged by the same score cards as are the northern pecans which is the one used for hickories. Inasmuch as the pecans, both northern and southern, are judged by the same standards, it is hoped that the figures may be of some value. The writer makes no claim to being an expert on the southern pecan and does not wish these figures taken as his opinion on the relative merits of southern pecans, which have been grown in orchard form long enough so that regularity of bearing, size of crops, resistance to disease, etc., have been determined to a considerable extent. These are of such importance to the practical pecan grower as to overbalance to quite an extent the merits of the nut itself which are the only qualities that can be considered in a nut contest.

Other pecans received from:

G. M. Brown, Van Buren, Ark.

J. H. Burkett, Clyde, Texas. (Young grafted tree).

Mrs. W. W. Evans, Blackwell, Okla.

Mr. J. B. Shultz, Fulton, Ark.

Snyder Bros., Center Point, Ia. (Pumfrey 1st, 2nd).

PECANS

KEY: A: Species B: Prize awarded C: Average weight of nut D: Average weight of kernel E: Average weight of kernel that dropped out after cracking F: Average weight of kernel that could be easily picked out with fingers after cracking G: Average cracking pressure H: Proportion of kernel I: Cracking quality absolute J: Cracking quality commercial K: Size (10) K: Form (5) M: Color of shell (5) N: Husking quality (5) O: Thinness of shell (10) P: Cracking quality commercial (20) Q: Cracking quality absolute (5) R: Color of kernel (5) S: Proportion of kernel (15) T: Quality of kernel (20) U: Total points awarded (100)

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION A B C D E F G H I ======================================================================== D. K. Dunn Wynne, Ark. P 1 5.8g 3.2g 0.0g 3.2g 34kg 55.1 0.0 Pecan No. 1 E. J. Koontz Richards, Mo. P 2 5.6g 3.1g 0.0g 3.1g 35Kg 55.4 0.0 J. F. Clifford Crossville, Ill. P 3 5.0g 2.4g 1.1g 1.7g 53kg 48.0 45.8 Prolific J. F. Clifford Crossville, Ill. P 4 4.4g 2.6g 1.3g 2.6g 61kg 59.1 50.0 Sweetmeat D. K. Dunn Wynne, Ark. P 5 6.3g 3.1g 0.0g 3.1g 38kg 49.3 0.0 Pecan No. 3 Mrs. Maida R. Wears Rich Hill, Mo. P 5 3.1g 1.5g 1.4g 1.4g 21kg 45.3 93.2 S. W. Snyder Center Point, Ia. P 5 3.6g 2.0g 0.0g 2.0g 34kg 55.5 0.0 Oberman D. K. Dunn Wynne, Ark. P 6 5.4g 2.7g 0.0g 2.7g 31kg 50.0 0.0 Pecan No. 2 A. G. Shanklin Clemson College, S. C. P 7 5.1g 2.6g 0.4g 2.6g 64kg 51.0 15.4 Mrs. Addie G. Evans Blackwell, Okla. P 8 5.0g 2.0g 0.0g 2.0g 35kg 40.0 0.0 P 8.1g Norton PxL 17.7g McCallister PxL 22.0g Klein

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION J K L M N O P Q R S T U =========================================================================== D. K. Dunn Wynne, Ark. 100.0 4 5 3 5 7 20 0 4 11 20 79 Pecan No. 1 - E. J. Koontz Richards, Mo. 100.0 4 5 4 5 7 20 0 5 11 17 78 - J. F. Clifford Crossville, Ill. 70.8 4 4 3 5 6 12 2 5 9 17 77 Prolific - J. F. Clifford Crossville, Ill. 100.0 3 5 2 5 5 20 2 4 12 17 75 Sweetmeat - D. K. Dunn Wynne, Ark. 100.0 4 4 3 5 7 20 0 4 9 18 74 Pecan No. 3 - Mrs. Maida R. Wears Rich Hill, Mo. 93.2 2 4 3 5 8 18 4 5 8 17 74 - S. W. Snyder Center Point, Ia. 100.0 2 5 4 5 7 20 0 5 11 15 74 Oberman - D. K. Dunn Wynne, Ark. 100.0 4 5 3 5 7 20 0 4 9 15 72 Pecan No. 2 - A. G. Shanklin Clemson College, S. C. 100.0 4 4 4 5 5 20 0 4 10 15 71 - Mrs. Addie G. Evans Blackwell, Okla. 100.0 4 4 3 5 7 20 0 5 7 15 70 - Norton - McCallister - Klein -

Standard Southern Varieties

KEY: A: Species B: Prize awarded C: Average weight of nut D: Average weight of kernel E: Average weight of kernel that dropped out after cracking F: Average weight of kernel that could be easily picked out with fingers after cracking G: Average cracking pressure H: Proportion of kernel I: Cracking quality absolute J: Cracking quality commercial K: Size (10) K: Form (5) M: Color of shell (5) N: Husking quality (5) O: Thinness of shell (10) P: Cracking quality commercial (20) Q: Cracking quality absolute (5) R: Color of kernel (5) S: Proportion of kernel (15) T: Quality of kernel (20) U: Total points awarded (100)

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION A B C D E F G H I ====================================================================== P 9.5g 5.9g 0.0g 5.9g 29kg 62.1 0.0 Schley P 8.6g 4.8g 0.0g 4.8g 28kg 55.8 0.0 Burkett P 5.8g 2.9g 0.0g 2.9g 25kg 50.0 0.0 Moore P 8.3g 5.4g 0.0g 5.4g 39kg 54.3 0.0 Alley P 10.1g 4.9g 0.0g 4.9g 98kg 48.5 0.0 Delmas P 7.8g 3.5g 0.0g 3.5g 20kg 44.9 0.0 Moneymaker P 8.7g 3.9g 0.0g 3.9g 59kg 44.8 0.0 Pabst P 8.8g 4.1g 0.0g 4.1g 56kg 46.6 0.0 Stuart P 8.1g 3.9g 0.0g 8.9g 96kg 48.2 0.0 Vandeman

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION J K L M N O P Q R S T U ========================================================================= 100.0 6 5 3 5 7 20 0 3 13 20 82 Schley - 100.0 5 5 3 5 7 20 0 4 11 18 78 Burkett - 100.0 4 5 4 5 8 20 0 4 9 18 78 Moore - 100.0 5 5 3 5 6 20 0 3 11 19 77 Alley - 100.0 6 5 3 5 4 20 0 4 9 20 76 Delmas - 100.0 5 5 4 5 8 20 0 3 8 18 76 Moneymaker - 100.0 5 5 4 5 5 20 0 3 8 19 74 Pabst - 100.0 5 5 3 5 5 20 0 3 8 18 72 Stuart - 100.0 5 5 3 5 4 20 0 3 9 18 72 Vandeman -

The abbreviations used under the species column are: P for pecan (Carya pecan), PxL for pecan x shellbark hybrid (Carya pecan x laciniosa).

HAZELS—6 ENTRIES

This is the first time I have had opportunity of testing Rush hazel which was found by Mr. Rush 35 years ago, but which, so far as I know, has never been propagated in the sense in which the word is used in the contests where it means listed in the catalog of some nurseryman who is prepared to furnish grafted or budded or layered plants. The value of this hazel is now being recognized and doubtless it will not be long that this will be the case for it is by far the best American hazel now known. The prize winning nuts and the prizes awarded are shown in the table on page 160.

Following the list of American hazels are 9 varieties of Mr. Conrad Vollertsen's, Rochester, N. Y., most of them of German origin. These are given with their German names. These names are given here for convenience for readers and only for that, for they violate one of the rules followed in naming nuts. They will be referred to the nomenclature committee at its next session. Following Mr. Vollertsen's hazels are five standard market hazels grown on the Pacific coast which are noted as matters of record.

It will be noted that the White Aveline hazel has been placed higher than the Barcelona when judged by the score card used. Inasmuch as orchards of White Aveline hazels in the Pacific northwest are being replaced by Barcelona and Duchilly because White Aveline nuts are too small to be saleable commercially, it was questioned as to whether the score card was not at fault and whether much more emphasis should not be put on size and less on quality than is the case with the score card used. Inasmuch as the same score card has been used for all nuts except where it seemed entirely unadapted (because when this was done the figures have a value they otherwise would not in expressing the relative value of each species) it seems very desirable this common score card be retained for as many nuts as possible. There are some notable instances where fruits commercially important do not rank highest in quality, e. g., the Elberta peach, Ben Davis apple, and Kiefer pear, therefore it is thought better not to emphasize size too strongly in the case of hazels. It is only fair to state, however, that much less work has been put on judging hazels than on some other nuts and perhaps our ideas will have to be revised later.

HAZELS

KEY: A: Species B: Prize awarded C: Average weight of nut D: Average weight of kernel E: Average weight of kernel that dropped out after cracking F: Average weight of kernel that could be easily picked out with fingers after cracking G: Average cracking pressure H: Proportion of kernel I: Cracking quality absolute J: Cracking quality commercial K: Size (10) K: Form (5) M: Color of shell (5) N: Husking quality (5) O: Thinness of shell (10) P: Cracking quality commercial (20) Q: Cracking quality absolute (5) R: Color of kernel (5) S: Proportion of kernel (15) T: Quality of kernel (20) U: Total points awarded (100)

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION A B C D E F G H I ========================================================================== J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. Am 1 2.1g 1.0g 1.0g 1.0g 39kg 45.7 100.0 Rush hazel Miss Louise Littlepage Bowie, Md Am 2 2.7g .8g .8g .8g 59kg 28.3 100.0 J. W. Strassel Rockport, Ind Am 2 1.9g .7g .7g .7g 36kg 36.5 100.0 Mrs. Priscilla Randall Freeport, O. Am 3 1.8g .4g .4g .4g 51kg 22.7 100.0 Luther W. Vest Blacksburg, Va. Am 4 1.8g .6g .6g .6g 49kg 31.8 100.0 William H. Kuhne Woodbury, Conn. Am 5 1.4g .4g .4g .4g 50kg 27.9 100.0 Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. ? 2.2g .9g .9g .9g 46kg 41.4 100.0 Medium Long Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. P 2.8g 1.1g 1.1g 1.1g 57kg 40.4 100.0 Italienische Rothe Zeller Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. M 2.3g .8g .8g .8g 42kg 35.6 100.0 Lambertnuss Rothe Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. M 2.5g .9g .9g .9g 49kg 37.4 100.0 Merveille de Bollwiller Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. M 2.2g .9g .9g .9g 60kg 40.5 100.0 Lambertnuss Weisse Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. P 1.7g .8g .8g .8g 58kg 20.4 100.0 Gunzelebener Zeller Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. Av 1.8g .7g .7g .7g 63kg 37.7 100.0 Althaldensleben Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. Av 1.9g .8g .8g .8g 70kg 41.6 100.0 Grosse Kugelnuss Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. P 2.1g .7g .7g .7g 49kg 32.6 100.0 Minna's Zeller J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 3.1g 1.6g 1.6g 1.6g 33kg 51.0 100.0 Daviana J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 2.1g 1.1g 1.1g 1.1g 26kg 49.3 100.0 White Aveline J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 4.8g 2.1g 2.1g 2.1g 79kg 42.5 100.0 Noce Lunghe J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 3.5g 1.2g 1.2g 1.2g 51kg 33.1 100.0 Imperial J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 4.8g 1.8g 1.8g 1.8g 42kg 41.8 100.0 Barcelona

NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION J K L M N O P Q R S T U =========================================================================== J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 100.0 3 4 3 5 7 20 2 4 12 18 78 Rush hazel - Miss Louise Littlepage Bowie, Md 100.0 4 3 2 5 3 20 4 4 2 15 62 - J. W. Strassel Rockport, Ind 100.0 2 3 1 5 8 20 3 1 7 12 62 - Mrs. Priscilla Randall Freeport, O. 100.0 2 3 2 5 5 20 4 5 0 15 61 - Luther W. Vest Blacksburg, Va. 100.0 2 3 0 5 5 20 2 2 4 15 58 - William H. Kuhne Woodbury, Conn. 100.0 1 3 3 5 5 20 1 3 2 10 53 - Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. 100.0 3 5 5 5 6 20 3 5 9 20 81 Medium Long - Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. 100.0 4 5 5 5 4 20 3 4 9 20 79 Italienische Rothe Zeller - Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. 100.0 3 5 5 5 7 20 4 4 6 18 77 Lambertnuss Rothe - Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. 100.0 3 5 4 5 5 20 4 4 7 18 75 Merveille de Bollwiller - Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. 100.0 3 5 5 5 3 20 3 3 9 18 74 Lambertnuss Weisse - Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. 100.0 1 5 4 5 4 20 1 3 9 20 72 Gunzelebener Zeller - Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. 100.0 2 5 5 5 3 20 4 5 7 15 71 Althaldensleben - Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. 100.0 2 5 4 5 1 20 2 3 10 15 67 Grosse Kugelnuss - Conrad Vollertsen Rochester, N. Y. 100.0 3 5 5 5 5 20 1 3 5 15 67 Minna's Zeller - J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 100.0 5 5 4 5 8 20 4 3 15 20 89 Daviana - J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 100.0 3 5 3 5 10 20 5 3 14 20 88 White Aveline - J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 100.0 10 5 4 5 0 20 4 3 10 18 79 Noce Lunghe - J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 100.0 6 5 4 5 5 20 2 3 5 18 78 Imperial - J. F. Jones Lancaster, Pa. 100.0 8 5 3 5 7 20 2 0 10 20 70 Barcelona -

The abbreviations used under the species column are: Am for American hazel (Corylus Americana), Av for Corylus Avellana, a European, species, M for Corylus maxima, a European species, P for Corylus pontica, a European species. It seems quite probable that many of the European varieties noted above are hybrids and not pure species. The species identification of the European varieties are those of Mr. Conrad Vollertsen.

PERSIAN WALNUTS—5 ENTRIES

The prize winning nuts and the prizes awarded are shown in the table on page 154.

This is the first time that I have had opportunity to test some of the propagated Persian walnuts. The results shown are given for what they are worth. A sufficient number of Persian walnuts have not as yet been examined to enable us to determine the constants so that they are as valuable as they will be later, and as they are on the hickories, black walnuts, and butternuts where hundreds of nuts have been examined. Consequently, conclusions based on the figures in the table should be conservatively drawn. The position of the Franquette at the bottom of the list of the propagated nuts it is believed will be materially changed with the redetermination of the constants that an examination of a large number of nuts would require.

OBSERVATIONS

The number of entries in the 1919 contest was about 50% greater than in 1918. No hickories, no black walnuts or butternuts deemed worthy of experimental propagation appeared as was the case in 1918, but on the other hand, two pecans, the Dunn No. 1 and Koontz, it is believed, are well worth while propagating experimentally even though the Dunn nut comes from a somewhat more southern section than the other northern pecans now being propagated. The need for additional heartnuts makes it seem advisable to propagate experimentally the Stranger heartnut, even though it comes from Jackson, S. C., a section so far south that the southern pecan grows and bears well. The contest has helped to bring out the value of the Rush hazel, which has been propagated experimentally for a long time but which, so far as I know, has never been offered to the public by nurserymen.

The following standards for hickories have been established: The largest nut found so far is still the Mott shellbark, which Dr. Morris found a number of years ago and which weighs 29.6g. The Vest hickory, which among the seemingly pure shagbarks, had the record of the thinnest shell up to the 1918 contest, has been surpassed by the Beam No. 1 of the 1919 contest, which takes but 33kg to crack the shell. The figure is surpassed by one bitternut hybrid the Beaver 29kg, and by the Hatch bitternut 19kg, and the Halesite bitternut 13kg. The Vest of the 1914 crop is still the seemingly pure shagbark with the largest percentage of kernel 57.7%. This is surpassed by the Hatch bitternut 65.0%, and the Halesite bitternut 69.0%. No hickory has been found to surpass the Vest in the excellence of flavor of the kernel. One hickory, the Barnes, 1919 contest, showed 100% cracking quality.

The following standards for black walnuts have been established. The Armknecht No. 2 which held the record last year has been surpassed by the Werner with a weight of 30.4g. The thinnest shelled one is still the Alley of the 1918 contest, with a cracking pressure of 110kg, although the Ten Eyck of the 1918 contest was only slightly higher, 120kg. The record for the greatest proportion of kernel is still with the Ten Eyck of the 1918 contest 36.4%. The Ten Eyck black walnut exhibited in 1919 had no such records of thinness of shell or proportion of kernel. The Stabler is believed to be the best cracker but the Alley of the 1918 contest showed 100%. The Bomberges black walnut of the 1919 contest showed unusually fine quality of kernel and is believed to hold the record for quality of kernel so far.

The following standards for butterjaps (i. e., butternuts, Japan walnuts and their hybrids) have been established. The Wasson butternut which held the record for size heretofore 18.8g has been surpassed by two nuts Pumfrey No. 2, 19.5g and Truman No. 4, 22.6g. The same high cracking quality among the pure butternuts noted last year still continues. The Ritchie heartnut of the 1918 contest still holds the record for percentage of kernel, 32.7%. One pure butternut, the Kuhne of the 1919 contest, with 19% kernel has been found. The Aiken butternut 200kg cracking pressure is the thinnest shelled pure butternut yet found. The thinnest shelled Japan walnut yet found is the Wilson Seibold walnut of the 1919 contest, 75kg cracking pressure.

The following standards for pecans have been established (including the pecan x shellbark hybrids which generally resemble pecans in flavor and appearance and would be classed with them). Largest, the Klein, 22.0g in weight. Of the pure northern pecans the Norton, 8.1g in weight is the largest. Of the pure southern pecans tested the Delmas 10.1g in weight is the largest. Of the northern pecans the greatest percentage of kernel yet found is the Clifford "Sweetmeat" of the 1919 contest, 57.6% of kernel, followed closely by the Koontz, 56.1% and the Dunn, 55.5%. Of the southern pecans the Schley, 62%, leads.

The thinnest shelled northern pecan yet tested is the Wears of the 1919 contest, 21kg cracking pressure; the thinnest southern pecan is the Burkett, 27kg followed closely by the Schley 29kg. The finest flavored among the northern pecans is Dunn No. 1, which has a kernel which is exceptionally delicious. The finest flavored among the southern pecans is the Schley.

The following standards for hazels have been established. The largest American hazel yet found is the Littlepage 2.7g but the Rush, although a smaller nut has a larger kernel 1.0g against .8g for the Littlepage. The Rush also has a greater proportion of kernel, 45.7%, than any other native hazel yet tested or any foreign one excepting the White Aveline which has 49.3%. The thinnest shelled American hazel is the Rush 39kg and the thinnest shelled foreign one, the White Aveline 26kg.

Those who have given the matter consideration are thoroughly convinced of the great possibilities of systematic hybridization of nut trees. Work of this kind will have to be carried on according to carefully thought out plans, the details of which are not yet quite clear in all particulars. The facts brought out by this contest have added to our knowledge of what may be expected from our work. Take the hickory for example; we have shellbark hickory nuts nearly three times the size of the best southern pecans; we have bitternut hickory nuts with a proportion of kernel greater than that of any pecan and with shell so thin, that they can be cracked with less pressure than any pecans I have ever seen; we have in the best shagbarks, flavor of kernel unsurpassed in any nut. Theoretically, it should be possible to produce nuts in which these qualities are combined to a large degree. Similar possibilities exist with the butternut and the Japan walnut where it is seemingly possible to produce nuts in which the qualities of both will be combined and get smooth, thin-shelled butternuts or well flavored Japan walnuts or desirable butterjaps, as I am inclined to call them.

An inspection of the table of hickories show that 4 out of the 28 receiving 68 points or over, are certainly hybrids. There are a number of others where it seems very probable that they are hybrids. There are a number of facts to suggest that some of our very thin shelled hickories, which at first sight seem to be shagbarks, are hybrids of which the shellbark or mockernut is one parent. Why the offspring of such thick shelled nuts as the shellbark or the mockernut and the shagbark should be thin shelled, is more than I can imagine. We have two occurrences however which are significant. On the list of Japan walnuts two hybrids of the Persian and Japan walnut, Cording and Siebosian are noted. I have never tested a Persian walnut where the cracking pressure runs much over 40kg and it is rather unusual for a Japan walnut to run much over 200kg, yet Cording is 419kg, a strength of shell greater than that of any other nut sent into the contest this year and which is only found among black walnuts and shellbark hickories. Siebosian is not very much less. If two comparatively thin shelled nuts will produce an offspring with a shell so much thicker than either parent, it does not seem more impossible for two thick shelled nuts to produce thin shelled offsprings.

THE END