Chapter L: K. Irvine, Menominee, Wis. cinerea 83 1 $ 50.00

H. J. Thill, Bloomer, Wis., Box 109 cinerea 78 2 15.00
C. F. Hostetter, Bird-In-Hand, Pa. cinerea 75 3 10.00
John F. Kenworthy, Rockton, Wis. cinerea 74 4 5.00
F. E. Devan, Rock Creek, Ohio cinerea 73 5 5.00
E. J. Lingle, Pittsfield, Pa. cinerea 70 6 3.00
John Hergert, St. Peter, Minn., Nut No. 1 cinerea 69 7 3.00
Evert E. Van Der Poppen, Hamilton, Mich. cinerea 66 8 3.00
Mrs. A. B. Simonson, Mondove, Wis. cinerea 66 8 3.00
Mrs. E. Sherman, Montague City, Mass. cinerea 64 9 3.00
W. A. Creitz, Cambridge City, Ind. Bixbyi ? 64 9 3.00
Mrs. Abbie C. Bliss, Bradford, Vt. Nut No. 1 cinerea 61 10 3.00

At first it might be thought that but one species of nuts would be sent in as butternuts, and this was true up to 15 or 20 years ago. The chance hybrids of the Japan walnut and the butternut, named Juglans Bixbyi by Prof. C. S. Sargent of the Arnold Arboretum, resemble the butternut so much that as time grows on it is increasingly probable that these will be sent in as butternuts. One came in to the 1919 contest and it is thought that the Creitz of this contest may possibly be such.

CHESTNUTS

The chestnuts received were relatively few in number but most of them were from sections where the blight had been present many years. Those that were from sections where this condition did not prevail were not allowed to enter. There were a few American chestnuts, some very good ones, from sections where the blight had not destroyed the native chestnut but these were not entered. As it happened all entered were of Japanese or Chinese species, which was somewhat of a disappointment to those who hope that a blight resistant American chestnut will yet be found. It certainly looks so far as if varieties of chestnuts for the blight area, of horticultural value, would be Japanese, Castanea crenata, or Chinese, Castanea mollissima.

The chestnuts were judged early and scions sent for in order to get a start on the second part of the chestnut problem, that of testing the resistance of these seemingly resistant varieties to the chestnut blight. The scions received were disappointing in quality and disappointing in the extent to which they were gotten started this year. The writer set scions on Chinese (mollissima) stock, Mr. Hershey set them on American (dentata) stock and the U. S. Dept. of Agriculture set them on Japanese (crenata) stock, but owing to the poor scions only part of them are growing. The writer got eight varieties out of twelve to start but it is questionable how they will do, for mollissima stock is thought to be good only for mollissima varieties and the varieties were all crenata, and so, while a start has been made on the problem of getting blight resistant chestnuts of horticultural value it is only a start and much work remains to be done.

The prizes awarded were as follows:

Name and Address Species Points Prize Amount

Frank B. Austin, Milford, Del. crenata 70 1 $50.00
C. Warren Swayne, West Grove, Pa. crenata 66 2 15.00
Charles V. Stein, Manheim, Pa.,
R. F. D. No. 1, Nut No. 1 crenata 61 3 10.00
Dr. W. C. Deming, Hartford, Conn. Mollissima 61 [A] -----
Charles V. Stein, Manheim, Pa.,
R. F. D. No. 1, Nut No. 2 crenata 59 4 5.00
Helen W. Smith, Linden Lodge, Stamford, Conn. crenata 54 5 5.00
May Cline, Route 2, Belvidere Rd.,
Phillipsburg, N. J., Nut No. 2 crenata 53 6 3.00
May Cline, Route 2, Belvidere Rd.,
Phillipsburg, N. J., Nut No. 1 crenata 51 7 3.00
Howard A. Folk, Brielle, N. J. crenata 51 7 3.00
W. Russell Parker, Box No. 2, Little
Silver, N. J. crenata 47 8 3.00
Ralph P. Atkinson, Setauket, N. Y. crenata 46 9 3.00
Victor Page, Elmsford, N. Y. crenata 41 10 3.00
Frank Atler, Edison, Pa. crenata 40 11 3.00

[A] Not entered in contest.

BEECHNUTS

Never before, so far as the writer is aware, has there been a score card proposed for beechnuts, but the need of one is apparent and the following is suggested till a better one is found. It is not doubted that one will appear, for our present score cards for hickories, walnuts, etc., are the result of changes made as nuts received in the contests have shown such to be advisable, and work on the beechnut is 10 years or so behind that on other nuts.

Size is the most important characteristic in the beechnut, for all are thin shelled and practically all are well flavored. If we had a beechnut the size of a chestnut we should have a most valuable addition to our nuts. The points awarded for size have therefore been on the basis that eventually we would get a beechnut the size of a chestnut, although we are very far from that now. Forty points are allowed for size and it is figured that eventually we will get a beechnut 4 grams in weight which is the weight of a medium size chestnut. The constants used in figuring the number to be awarded for other characteristics require little comment for they are figured on the basis of existing nuts as constants have hitherto been calculated. The suggested score card is as follows:

Weight 40 points
Color of shell 5 points
Percent of kernel 15 points
Ease of removing pellicle 15 points
Quality and flavor of kernel 25 points
Total 100 points

The details and methods used in judging beechnuts this year, also the calculations of the constants and the details of the awards, will be typed for the report.

The prizes awarded were as follows:

Mrs. John M. Pepaw, Johnson, Vt. grandiflora 40 1 $10.00
Mrs. George Marshey, Johnson Vt. grandiflora 39 2 5.00
James Radle, Harbor Springs, Mich. grandiflora 38 3 3.00
Anthony Andreson, Burke, N. Y. grandiflora 35 4 3.00
Fagus sylvatica sylvatica 44 [A] -----
Fagus sylvatica purpurea sylvatica 41 [A] -----
______
$21.00
[A] Not entered in the contest

It is not believed that nuts of Fagus sylvatica (European beech) will test out better, generally, than nuts of Fagus grandiflora (American beech) but the beechnuts were not tested till late, and the European beechnuts had been kept in a refrigerator, while the American beechnuts had not, which very likely may have been the cause for better retaining both the flavor and pellicle-removing quality, which made these nuts receive more points for these characteristics and so be awarded more points than the first four.

The meager results in getting beechnuts large enough to be of horticultural value in this contest, as well as in previous contests, and the failures of considerable effort on the part of the writer independently to locate large beechnuts, have caused him to put much thought on the matter and to have come to the conclusion that the search should be conducted in Europe as well as here, for the following reasons:

The beech in Europe is much more esteemed as a valuable tree than here, largely because of its value for fuel.

It has for many years, if not for centuries, been a tree that has been largely planted in those forests, state and private, which have been managed on the basis of sustained production, and it is not doubted that the men in charge are more familiar with the beech trees in the forests under their jurisdiction than is the case in America.

The European beech has shown the most amazing variation in color, size and shape of leaves, color of bark, and habits of growth, which have been perpetuated by grafting as ornamental varieties, and it seems likely that there are equal variations in the nuts which only remain to be discovered.

In short, while there may be no more large fruited beeches in Europe than here, it is believed that the chances of finding them are better.

ATTENDANCE RECORD

James A. Neilson, East Lansing, Michigan.
C. F. Walker, Cleveland Heights, Ohio.
Mr. and Mrs. John W. Hershey, Downingtown, Pennsylvania.
Mr. and Mrs. Harry R. Weber, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Dr. and Mrs. G. A. Zimmerman, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Mr. and Mrs. M. A. Yant, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Mr. and Mrs. Newton H. Russell, Hadley Center, Massachusetts.
Mr. and Mrs. E. W. Freel, Pleasantville, Iowa.
Mr. and Mrs. W. L. Crissman, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Mr. and Mrs. C. W. Bingham, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Mr. and Mrs. F. O. Harrington, Williamsburg, Iowa.
Frank H. Frey, Chicago, Illinois.
R. S. Herrick, Des Moines, Iowa.
Arthur Huston, Cropsey, Illinois.
Dr. W. C. Deming, Hartford, Connecticut.
J. K. Hershey, Ronk, Pennsylvania.
Hugh E. Williams, Ladora, Iowa.
C. W. Bricker, Ladora, Iowa.
Millard Harrington, Williamsburg, Iowa.
Dr. J. Russell Smith, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania.
Daniel Boyce, Winterset, Iowa.
T. J. Maney, Ames, Iowa.
J. F. Wilkinson, Rockport, Indiana.
Snyder Brothers, Center Point, Iowa.
Dr. R. J. Meyers, Moline, Illinois.
Rev. L. D. Stubbs, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Vance McCray, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Ray Anderson, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
A. B. Anthony, Sterling, Illinois.
George F. Stoltenberg, Moline, Illinois.
John H. Witte, Murlington, Iowa.
W. L. Van Meter, Adel, Iowa.
Miss Elva Becker, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
N. F. Drake, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Prof. A. S. Colby, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois.