year 1790 to 1894, but as I purpose dealing more with the present and future than with the distant past, I will refer here only to the statistics of the four years of the present decade, leaving out all reference to the tropical nuts, which are not supposed to be adapted to our climate.

Of almonds, not shelled, and on which there is a protective duty of three cents per pound, we imported from 1890 to the close of 1893, 12,443,895 pounds, valued at $1,100,477.65. Of almonds, shelled, on which the duty is now five cents, we imported 1,326,633 pounds. The total value of both kinds for the four years, amounted to $1,716,277.32. Whether this high protective duty is to remain or not is uncertain, but it is quite evident that it has had very little effect in stimulating the cultivation of this nut except in circumscribed localities on the Pacific coast.

Of filberts and walnuts, not shelled, and with a duty of two cents per pound, we imported during the same years from eleven to fifteen million pounds annually, or a total for the four years of 54,526,181 pounds, and in addition about two million pounds of the shelled kernels, on which the duty was six cents (now four) per pound. The total value of these importations amounted to $3,176,085.34.

I do not find the European chestnut mentioned in any list of imports, although an immense quantity must be received from France, Italy and Spain every year, and they are probably imported under the head of miscellaneous nuts, not specially provided for, and upon which the duty was two cents per pound in 1890-'91, but was later reduced to one and a half cents.

Under the head "miscellaneous nuts," or all other shelled and unshelled "not specially provided for," there was imported during the period named 6,442,908 pounds, valued at $235,976.05. The total for all kinds of edible nuts imported was $7,124,575.82. These figures are sufficient to prove that we are neglecting an opportunity to largely engage in and extend a most important and profitable industry. It is true that in the Southern States considerable attention has been given, of late, to the preservation of the old pecan nut trees and the planting of young stock, but it will be many years before the increase from this source can overtake the ever-increasing demand for this delicious native nut. Californians are also making an effort to raise several foreign varieties of edible nuts on a somewhat extensive scale, but all these widely scattered experiments are mere drops in the ocean of our wants. Under such conditions I ask, in all seriousness, if it is not about time that our farmers and rural population generally began to count their worthless and unproductive possessions, in the form of roadside and other shade trees—which have probably cost fully as much to secure, plant and care for during the few or many years since they were set out, as would have been expended upon the most beautiful and valuable nut-bearing kinds. If our ancestors were at fault in the selection of trees for planting, we need not expect that posterity will excuse us for continuing and repeating their folly, especially when our dear-bought experience should teach us better.

At the present time there might be some difficulty in procuring, at the nurseries, a choice selection of nut trees in any considerable quantity, suited to roadside planting, because heretofore there has been little demand for such stock; and nurserymen are only human, and conduct their establishments on business principles, propagating the kind of trees in greatest demand, regardless of their intrinsic or future value to purchasers. They will also continue producing such stock just so long as the demand will warrant it, and further, it is but natural that they should sometimes recommend and advise their customers to purchase worthless, and even pestiferous kinds, such as the ailanthus and white poplar, because the profits in raising these trees are large and there is little danger of loss in transplanting. But if purchasers will insist on having better kinds and refuse to accept any other, they will soon be accommodated; and if not, then let everyone who owns a plot of ground become his own propagator of trees. It is not beyond the ability of any moderately intelligent man (or woman, for that matter) to raise nut trees, and as readily as one could potatoes or corn.

Where farmers want a row of trees along the roadside, to be utilized for line fence posts, they cannot possibly find any kinds better adapted for this purpose than chestnut, walnut and hickory; and these will give just as dense a shade, and look as well—besides, in a few years they may yield enough to pay the taxes on the entire farm, the crop increasing in amount and value not only during the lifetime of the planter, but that of many generations of his descendants.

This appeal to the good sense of our rural population is made in all sincerity and with the hope that it will be heeded by every man who has a spark of patriotism in his soul, and who dares show it in his labors, and by setting up a few milestones in the form of nut-bearing trees along the roadsides—if for no other purpose than the present pleasure of anticipating the gratification such monuments will afford the many who are certain to pass along these highways years hence.

It is surely not good policy to enrich other nations at the expense of our own people, as we are now doing in sending millions of dollars annually to foreign countries in payment for such luxuries as edible nuts that could be readily and profitably produced at home. There need be no fear of an overproduction of such things, no matter how many may engage in their cultivation, because in such industries many will resolve to do, and even make an attempt, but a comparatively small number will reach any marked degree of success.

CHAPTER II.

THE ALMOND.

Amygdalus, Tournefort. Name supposed to be derived from amysso, to lacerate, because of the prominent sharp, knifelike margin of one edge of the deeply pitted, wrinkled nut. Martius, an Italian botanist, suggests that the name came from the Hebrew word shakad, signifying vigilant, or to awake, because after the rigors of winter the almond tree is one of the earliest to hail the coming of spring, with its flowers. The common English name is from the Latin amandola, corrupted from amygdala. In French it is amandier; in German, mandel; Portuguese, amendoa; Spanish, almendro; Italian, amandola, mandalo, mandorla, etc.; Dutch, amendel; Chinese, him-ho-gin.

Under the natural classification of plants the almond belongs to the order Rosaceæ, and in the tribe Drupaceæ. Linnæus placed the peach and almond in the same genus, and they are now generally considered to be only varieties of one species,—the wild almond tree is probably the parent from which all the cultivated peaches and nectarines have descended. In most of our modern botanical works these fruits are classed as a sub-section of Prunus, the plum. They are mainly deciduous shrubs, or small trees. The flowers are variable, both in size and color; but in the almond they are usually somewhat larger than in the peach, almost sessile, and from separate scaly buds on the shoots of the preceding season, appearing in early spring, before or with the unfolding leaves, the latter being folded lengthwise in the bud. Leaves three to four inches long, tapering, finely serrate, with few or no glands at the base of the blade, as seen in many varieties of the common peach. Fruit clothed with a fine dense pubescence in both peach and almond; but in the latter