I allude to this tree as it bears on the question of the greater variability of our hedgerow trees compared with those under strictly natural conditions. A well-informed writer (10/160. 'Gardener's Chronicle' 1849?, page 822.) states that the Scotch fir presents few varieties in its native Scotch forests; but that it "varies much in figure and foliage, and in the size, shape, and colour of its cones, when several generations have been produced away from its native locality." There is little doubt that the highland and lowland varieties differ in the value of their timber, and that they can be propagated truly by seed; thus justifying Loudon's remark, that "a variety is often of as much importance as a species, and sometimes far more so." (10/161. 'Arboretum et Fruticetum' volume 4 page 2150.) I may mention one rather important point in which this tree occasionally varies; in the classification of the Coniferae, sections are founded on whether two, three, or five leaves are included in the same sheath; the Scotch fir has properly only two leaves thus enclosed, but specimens have been observed with groups of three leaves in a sheath. (10/162. 'Gardener's Chronicle' 1852 page 693.) Besides these differences in the semi-cultivated Scotch fir, there are in several parts of Europe natural or geographical races, which have been ranked by some authors as distinct species. (10/163. See 'Beitrage zur Kenntniss Europaischer Pinus-arten von Dr. Christ: Flora, 1864.' He shows that in the Ober-Engadin P. sylvestris and montana are connected by intermediate links.) Loudon (10/164. 'Arboretum et Fruticetum' volume 4 pages 2159 and 2189.) considers P. pumilio, with its several sub- varieties, as mughus, nana, etc., which differ much when planted in different soils, and only come "tolerably true from seed," as alpine varieties of the Scotch fir; if this were proved to be the case, it would be an interesting fact as showing that dwarfing from long exposure to a severe climate is to a certain extent inherited.

THE HAWTHORN (Crataegus oxyacantha).

The Hawthorn has varied much. Besides endless slighter variations in the form of the leaves, and in the size, hardness, fleshiness, and shape of the berries, Loudon (10/165. Ibid volume 2 page 830; Loudon's 'Gardener's Mag.' volume 6 1830 page 714.) enumerates twenty-nine well-marked varieties. Besides those cultivated for their pretty flowers, there are others with golden-yellow, black, and whitish berries; others with woolly berries, and others with re-curved thorns. Loudon truly remarks that the chief reason why the hawthorn has yielded more varieties than most other trees, is that nurserymen select any remarkable variety out of the immense beds of seedlings which are annually raised for making hedges. The flowers of the hawthorn usually include from one to three pistils; but in two varieties, named monogyna and sibirica, there is only a single pistil; and d'Asso states that the common thorn in Spain is constantly in this state. (10/166. Loudon's 'Arboretum et Fruticetum' volume 2 page 834.) There is also a variety which is apetalous, or has its petals reduced to mere rudiments. The famous Glastonbury thorn flowers and leafs towards the end of December, at which time it bears berries produced from an earlier crop of flowers. (10/167. Loudon's 'Gardener's Mag.' volume 9 1833 page 123.) It is worth notice that several varieties of the hawthorn, as well as of the lime and juniper, are very distinct in their foliage and habit whilst young, but in the course of thirty or forty years become extremely like each other (10/168. Ibid volume 11 1835 page 503.) thus reminding us of the well-known fact that the deodar, the cedar of Lebanon, and that of the Atlas, are distinguished with the greatest ease whilst young, but with difficulty when old.

FLOWERS.

I shall not for several reasons treat the variability of plants which are cultivated for their flowers alone at any great length. Many of our favourite kinds in their present state are the descendants of two or more species crossed and commingled together, and this circumstance alone would render it difficult to detect the difference due to variation.

Charles Darwin

All Pages of This Book