THE PEACH IN AMERICA

"Myself will search our planted grounds at home,For downy peaches and the glossy plum."

Columella, writing in the next generation after Vergil, about 40A. D., adopts or starts the story of the peach being a poisonous gift sent from Persia to Egypt:

"And apples, which most barbarous Persia sent,With native poison arm'd (as fame relates):But now they've lost their pow'r to kill, and yieldAmbrosial juice, and have forgot to hurt;And of their country still retain the name."

Some hold, however, that Columella refers not to the peach, "persica" but to "persa" a quite different fruit. But unquestionably, according to commentators, Columella has the peach in mind in these lines:

"Those of small size to ripen make great haste;Such as great Gaul bestows observe due timeAnd season, not too early, nor too late."

By these tokens do we know that the peach was cultivated in Italy some years before the Christian era.

In Pliny's remarkable compend of the natural history lore that existed at the beginning of the Christian era, we have the first information worthy of note on the peach in Italy. His statements, though they throw more light on what the peach then was than the writings of any one until his time, taking a more utilitarian turn than those of the Greeks, are confusingand do not enlighten us greatly either as to the history of the peach, or as to its pomological standing. Still, Pliny's observations constitute an important landmark in the history of this fruit and we must give them full consideration. First, let us give attention to Pliny's account of the introduction of the peach into Italy. He devotes Chapter 13, Book XV, to "The Peach" confining his observations to historical references but in it so confounds peaches, plums and other trees that we learn but little as to when, whence or how the peach came to the Romans. Since this reference is much quoted, however, despite its indefiniteness, we give it in full.81

"The name of 'Persica,' or 'Persian apple,' given to this fruit, fully proves that it is an exotic in both Greece as well as Asia, and that it was first introduced from Persis. As to the wild plum, it is a well-known fact that it will grow anywhere; and I am, therefore, the more surprised that no mention has been made of it by Cato, more particularly as he has pointed out the method of preserving several of the wild fruits as well. As to the peach-tree, it has been only introduced of late years, and with considerable difficulty; so much so, that it is perfectly barren in the Isle of Rhodes, the first resting-place that it found after leaving Egypt.

It is quite untrue that the peach which grows in Persia is poisonous, and produces dreadful tortures, or that the kings of that country, from motives of revenge, had it transplanted in Egypt, where, through the nature of the soil, it lost all its evil properties—for we find that it is of the 'persea' that the more careful writers have stated all this, a totally different tree, the fruit of which resembles the red myxa, and, indeed, cannot be successfully cultivated anywhere but in the East. The learned have also maintained that it was not introduced from Persis into Egypt with the view of inflicting punishment, but say that it was planted at Memphis by Perseus; for which reason it was that Alexander gave orders that the victors should be crowned with it in the games which he instituted there in honour of his ancestor; indeed, this tree has always leaves and fruit upon it, growing immediately upon the others. It must be quite evident to every one that all our plums have been introduced since the time of Cato."

Our author's discussion of the kinds of peaches and of their market value is somewhat more satisfactory. In Chapter 11, Book XV, entitled "Six Varieties of the Peach," Pliny again discusses several fruits but in the last paragraph confines himself to the peach and puts on record the first account of varieties of this fruit. The chapter follows in full:82

"Under the head of apples, we include a variety of fruits, although of an entirely different nature, such as the Persian apple, for instance, and the pomegranate, of which, when speaking of the tree, we have already enumerated nine varieties. The pomegranate has a seed within, enclosed in a skin; the peach has a stone inside. Some among the pears, also, known as 'libralia,' show, by their name, what a remarkable weight they attain.

Among the peaches the palm must be awarded to the duracinus: the Gallic and the Asiatic peach are distinguished respectively by the names of the countries of their origin. They ripen at the end of autumn, though some of the early kinds are ripe in the summer. It is only within the last thirty years that these last have been introduced; originally they were sold at the price of a denarius apiece. Those known as the 'supernatia' come from the country of the Sabines, but the 'popularia' grow everywhere. This is a very harmless fruit, and a particular favourite with invalids: some, in fact, have sold before this as high as thirty sesterces apiece, a price that has never been exceeded by any other fruit. This, too, is the more to be wondered at, as there is none that is a worse keeper: for, when it is once plucked, the longest time that it will keep is a couple of days; and so sold it must be, fetch what it may."

The first of Pliny's six varieties is the "Persian Apple"—"malum persicum" in the original text. It is well to note the author's statement that "Under the head of apples, we include a variety of fruits." A literal translation of the Latin wordmalumin Pliny has brought about many misunderstandings. Beside the peach, pear and pomegranate grouped here as "apples," the apricot, orange, citron and no doubt other fruits come "under the head of apples." The "Persian apple," then, must be counted as one of Pliny's "six varieties of peaches." From the name we know whence the Romans had the peach.

The second variety is the duracinus, to which, among peaches, "the palm must be awarded." The name translated literally is "hard-berry" and must refer to the firmness of the flesh. Despite the fact that De Candolle83and others hold that Pliny does not mention the nectarine, "duracinus" can hardly be other than the nectarine—at least the name fits the nectarine better than it does any peach.

The third and fourth of Pliny's peaches are the "Gallic" and "Asiatic," "distinguished respectively by the names of the countries of their origin." Can it be possible that there is a peach native to France? We should say at once that this is but one of Pliny's inaccuracies were it not for the fact that several of the highest French pomological authoritiesstate that certain races of the peach are natives of southern France. Duhamel Du Monceau84and Leroy85are chief champions of this belief and the latter says that Mayer, Calvel and Carrière, other French authorities, are of the same opinion. These French writers offer no substantial proofs and botanists do not agree with them; it seems, weighing the evidence at this distance, as if they had copied Columella and Pliny too closely. The fact that the peach is a perfectly naturalized denizen of parts of France, of course, gives color to the belief that it is a native and not an exotic in that country. Quite similarly, our early botanists, including so careful an observer as Bartram, were of the opinion that the peach belonged to America for the reason that they found it growing wild in our southern woods—an escape from early Spanish settlers. Pliny's Gallic peach, probably, was a descendant of an early introduction from some outside source. How the "Asiatic peach" of our quotation differs from the "Persian apple" does not appear except in its origin, it probably having come more or less directly from Asia Minor which in Pliny's time seems to have been Asia.

The last two of Pliny's six varieties are those known as "supernatia" which "come from the country of the Sabines" and the "popularia" which "grow everywhere." Whether supernatia, meaning "from above," refers to the fact that this peach grows in the high and mountainous country of the Sabines or to its being a choice variety, cannot be said. Probably, however, it designates choice peaches while the "popularia" which grow everywhere refers to the common run of this fruit.

Peaches were profitable in Rome in Pliny's time, for they sold "as high as thirty sesterces apiece." A sesterce is four and one-half cents so that the possible price of a peach in Rome 1900 years ago was $1.35. The Roman peach-grower was at the mercy of the seasons as are those of nowadays for we read that when once plucked the peach could be kept but a couple of days, "so sold it must be, fetch what it may."

The statement that the peach is a "particular favorite with invalids," reminds us that the ancients ascribe various medicinal properties to nearly all plants and Pliny sets forth those of the peach as follows:86

"Peaches, again, are more wholesome than plums; and the same is the case with the juice of the fruit, extracted, and taken in either wine orvinegar. Indeed, what known fruit is there that is more wholesome as an aliment than this? There is none, in fact, that has a less powerful smell, or a greater abundance of juice, though it has a tendency to create thirst. The leaves of it, beaten up and applied topically, arrest haemorrhage: the kernels, mixed with oil and vinegar, are used as a liniment for head-ache."

One other consideration, and we are done with Pliny. In Chapter 13, quoted on page 28, we are told that the peach "has been only introduced of late years." This can hardly mean during the day of the author. The peach had probably been cultivated in ancient Rome for a considerable length of time before Pliny wrote. Vergil and Columella had mentioned it as a planted plant; Pliny, himself, speaks of the "popularia" as being grown "everywhere;" and the facts that it was a common article of food and used in medicine argue an earlier date of introduction than we might be lead to suppose from Pliny's statement "introduced of late years." Indeed, knowing the great length of time it takes in our days of rapid transportation and quick diffusion of knowledge to accustom ourselves to new food-plants and to persuade agriculturists to grow them, we should say that the peach must have been grown in Rome at least two or three centuries to have become so well known as it seems to have been in Pliny's time. The chief point established by these quotations is that the peach was well established in Italy at the beginning of the Christian era.

After leaving Pliny there is a boundless, uncharted waste before we find another landmark in the history of the peach. In all matters relating to agriculture and natural history Roman writers for several centuries but copied the men from whom we have quoted and it was not until the Sixteenth Century that we have any substantial account of the further progress of this fruit. During this century, curiously enough, about the only books on botany and horticulture were commentaries on Dioscorides, the Greek botanist, who lived and made his reputation in Christ's time and who for 1600 years thereafter was the sole authority on botany. Of the ten or twelve commentaries, that of Matthiolus is most replete with information on the fruits of the times and especially in the matter of varieties, which he describes in greater detail than any other man since Pliny. It must be remembered that at this time, the closing years of the Middle Ages, there was a great awakening in agriculture and horticulture in southern and western Europe. As the second descriptive list of peacheswe might well quote what Matthiolus wrote, but, as in Pliny, few of his varieties can be made out, and Gerarde, writing later in English, amplifies the Latin author so well that we shall wait for his account.

The peach in France.—Peach-culture in France probably began about as early as in Italy, for both Columella and Pliny, as we have seen, mention the peaches of Gaul with those of Rome. Introduced thus early, finding suitable soil and climate and easily propagated, so delicious a fruit as the peach must at once have become a prime favorite in the orchards of the monasteries, where, tended by monks who were the most skilled horticulturists of the times, the peach was disseminated throughout France with the spread of Christianity. France was the foster-mother of the peach in Europe—from her nurseries the Belgians, Dutch, Germans and English had their first peach-trees. The history of the peach in France, then, is an important chapter in the history of this fruit.

André Leroy, author of the great French work,Dictionnaire de Pomologie, gives in considerable detail the history of the peach in France and from him we briefly summarize the material he has brought together in regard to this fruit up to 1600 after which our purposes are best met by quoting directly from the originals.

According to Leroy87only peaches with a downy skin and soft flesh which adhered to the stone came from Asia—all others, in his belief, originated in southern France. That any peach came originally from France we do not agree, for reasons given on a foregoing page. Leaving the statements of origin in dispute, the first records of peaches in France are to be found in the quotations from Columella and Pliny which we have already discussed. Leroy mentions as the second record a reference to the peach by Bishop Fortunat of Portiers in 530; a third from the fourteenth Abbot of the monastery of Saint-Denis near Paris in the year 784; while the great Charlemagne, who in 800 mentions "peaches of different kinds," furnishes the fourth of Leroy's early records; the fifth account is taken from the letters of Lupus, Abbot of Ferrieres, near Amiens, who sent several varieties of peaches to a brother with instructions as to how to plant the pits, the approximate date being 860.

After these Leroy gives several references to show that the peach was commonly cultivated from the Ninth Century on but none of the writers whom he quotes gives a recognizable picture of the kinds of peaches in their day until we come to the epoch-making agricultural book of Olivierde Serres, who, in hisThéatre de Agriculture, published in 1604, names and describes twelve kinds of peaches. While these descriptions are so incomplete as to be most tantalizing to one trying to recognize varieties, yet Olivier de Serres is one of the outstanding historians of agriculture and his few paragraphs on the peach constitute a prominent landmark in the history of this fruit because he names a considerable number of sorts and makes it plain that the peach is no longer grown as a species but that varieties are receiving recognition, though, sorry to say, we cannot be sure from the fragmentary description whether or not any of his kinds have come down to our time.

From the beginning of the Seventeenth Century the history of the peach in France is common property to students of pomology. Botanists and agriculturists by this time had begun to break away from Dioscorides, Pliny and the other ancients of Greece and Rome; and in France, Germany and England one herbal after another was beginning to appear in nearly all of which the peach received attention. Perhaps, since France plays so important a part in the development of the peach, a brief recapitulation from French pomological authorities following Olivier de Serres, showing the increase in varieties of this fruit and bringing to mind the men who have written in pomology, may be of interest and profit.

Lectier, agent of the King at Orleans, in a catalog of an orchard in his charge, published a list of 27 varieties of peaches in 1628. Thirty-nine years later, 1667, Merlet in hisAbrégé des bons fruitsnames 38 sorts of this fruit. For the next hundred years the increase in number seems to have been small, for in 1768 Duhamel du Monceau inTraité des arbres fruitiers, the first great pomological work to be published, describes but 43 peaches. This century, however, was one in which peach-culture increased enormously throughout France. At the beginning of the period peaches began to be grown in the shelter of walls—a method the results of which greatly increased the culture of this fruit. Calvel, in 1805, names 60 varieties; Louis Noisette, 1839, lists 60 sorts; André Leroy, 1852, names but 41 varieties, but in an edition of the same work in 1865, describes 148 peaches; lastly, O. Thomas inGuide pratique(1876) publishes a list of 355 peaches.

The peach in Belgium, Holland, Germany and Spain.—In the search for prominent events in the development of the peach, we are absolved from the task of tracing in detail the history of this fruit in the countries named in the heading of this paragraph. These nations have furnished no landmarksin the history of the peach. France has provided all with their varieties of this fruit. Indeed, in none, unless perhaps it be Spain, does the peach find a congenial climate and certainly in none is the crop of any considerable commercial value. Amateurs, too, in all but Spain at least, give their attention to its orchard-associates rather than to the peach. It is true, as we shall see, that the peach first came to America from Spain and a considerable number of our varieties are now grouped in what is called the "Spanish race." But horticulture in Spain, from the few accounts to be had, is primitive in the extreme—there are no Spanish pomologies and one cannot conceive that this country has aided appreciably in the development of the peach.

It is possible—would that we could know the facts—that Spain may have played an important part in introducing peaches into Europe. For the earliest Spanish gardens were the work of the Moors and since Moorish gardens, wonderful in beauty of design, show a strong resemblance to the gardens of Persia, what more probable than that the Moor, half-Asiatic, early brought the peach from Persia to Spain.

The peach in England.—The peach and the gooseberry do not thrive side by side. England grows the gooseberry to highest perfection, fogs, rains and cloudy weather seemingly ministering to its wants. But the peach loves sun, heat and clear skies and if these come not naturally the peach-tree must be artificially grown. The peach is not, after centuries of cultivation, acclimatized in England. But in all times, and of all people, the English have been most fond of gardens and orchards and so beautiful and delectable a fruit as the peach could not escape their attention. And so, though under the necessity of growing this fruit on walls or under glass, England, since the Middle Ages, has done much toward the development of the peach, the difficulties of culture seeming to stimulate interest. Her pomological literature is particularly rich in references to this fruit. We in America, too, are greatly indebted to England for many varieties of peaches. The history of the peach in England, then, should afford much interesting and profitable material in this discussion.

There seems to be no record of the Romans having brought the peach to England, yet there can be little doubt that they did so. The remains in England of Roman houses, baths, roads, pavements and bridges, very similar if not quite so well built as those of Italy, suggest that there were Roman gardens about these early houses and villas in England just as there were about those in the great Empire on the Mediterranean. Moreover,there was an early Saxon name for the peach. The Latin is "Persica;" the early Anglo-Saxon is "Persoc treou;" the English, "peach."88But gardening in England for most part went as it came, with the Romans, and, during nearly a thousand years of struggling with barbarians after the fall of the Roman Empire, the peach, in common with all other garden-plants needing culture, seems to have disappeared and was not reintroduced until in the Thirteenth Century.

That the peach came to England, as a permanent asset, from France, is so certain from the general history of English horticulture, though there be no authentic record to substantiate the statement, that we need consider no alternative. One looks in vain for a satisfactory date for the beginning of peach-culture in England. In France the monastic orders, as we have seen, were the conservators of horticulture, as they were of all arts excepting war, and we feel sure that, as the Church reached England, some good bishop, father or brother planted peaches in a monastery garden. Yet our quest of a date is rewarded with nothing earlier than 1216, in which year, according to the Chronicle of Roger of Wendover,89"King John, at Newark, in the midst of his despair and disappointment, hastened his end by a surfeit of peaches and ale." From this we may certainly say that peach-culture was established in England at least as early as the beginning of the Thirteenth Century.

Two hundred years elapse before we find another reference to the peach in England. Lydgate, English monk and poet (1375-1440?), as quoted by the Hon. Mrs. Evelyn Cecil,90mentioned peaches among "the fruits which more common be." Possibly an earlier reference is found in Chaucer'sRomaunt of the Rose:

"And many hoomely trees there wereThat peches, coynes, and apples bere."

English fruit-books commonly accredit the introduction of the peach in England to a certain Wolf, gardener to Henry VIII, and fix the date at about 1524, but the quotations given show that this fruit was probably well established long before the Sixteenth Century. Perhaps it suffices to say that the peach began to be cultivated in England at the close of the Middle Ages—a time sufficiently vague to be convenient in the state of inexactness of our knowledge.

In the Sixteenth Century references to the peach become so numerous that one cannot reckon with all of them. Selecting only a few notable names of writers on plants, we have Turner, one of the first and perhaps the greatest of British herbalists, who mentions the peach in hisHerballof 1551, though rather disparagingly, for he says: "The peche is no great tre in England that I could se—the apples are soft flesshy when they are rype, something hory without." Tusser, author ofFive Hundred Points of Good Husbandrie, 1573, the best-known work on farming of the times, gives a list of fruits to be transplanted in January among which are "Peaches, white and red." Lastly, the century ends with John Gerarde'sThe Herball or Generall Historie of Plantes, 1597, in which the peach is treated at greater length and to better advantage than by any previous English author. An improved edition of Gerarde's herbal was brought out in 1633 by Thomas Johnson who adds very materially to the discussion of the peach in the first edition and from this we quote in full all that pertains to varieties:91

"There are divers sorts of Peaches besides the foure here set forth by our Author, but the trees do not much differ in shape, but the difference chiefly consists in the fruit, whereof I will give you the names of the choice ones, and such as are to be had from my friend Mr. Miller in Old-street, which are these; two sorts of Nutmeg Peaches; The Queenes Peach; the Newington Peach; The grand Carnation Peach; The Carnation Peach; The blacke Peach; The Melocotone; The White; The Romane; The Alberza; The Island Peach; Peach du Troy. These are all good ones. He hath also of that kinde of Peach which some callNucipersicaor Nectorins, these following kindes; the Roman red, the best of fruits; the bastard Red; the little dainty greene; the Yellow, the White; the Russet, which is not so good as the rest. Those that would see any fuller discourse of these may have recourse to the late work of Mr. John Parkinson, where they may find more varieties, and more largely handled, and therefore not necessary for me in this place to insist upon them.

1. The Peach tree is a tree of no great bignesse: it sendeth forth divers boughes, which be so brittle, as oftentimes they are broken with the weight of the fruit or with the winde. The leaves be long, nicked in the edges, like almost to those of the Walnut tree, and in taste bitter: the floures be of a light purple colour. The fruit of Peaches be round, and have as it were a chinke or cleft on the one side; they are covered with a soft and thin downe or hairy cotton, being white without, and of a pleasant taste; in the middle whereof is a rough or rugged stone, wherein is containeda kernell like unto the Almond; the meate about the stone is of a white color. The root is tough and yellowish.

2. The red Peach tree is likewise a tree of no great bignesse; it also sendeth forth divers boughes or branches which be very brittle. The leaves be long, and nicked in the edges like to the precedent. The floures be also like unto the former; the fruit or Peaches be round, and of a red colour on the outside; the meate likewise about the stone is of a gallant red colour. These kindes of Peaches are very like to wine in taste, and therefore marvellous pleasant.

3.Persica praecocia, or the d'avant Peach tree is like unto the former, but his leaves are greater and larger. The fruit or Peaches be of a russet colour on the one side, and on the other side next unto the Sun of a red colour, but much greater than the red Peach: the stones whereof are like unto the former: the pulpe or meate within is of a golden yellow colour, and of a pleasant taste.

4.Persica lutea, or the yellow Peach tree is like unto the former in leaves and flours, his fruit is of a yellow color on the out side, and likewise on the in side, harder than the rest: in the middle of the Peach is a wooddy hard and rough stone full of crests and gutters, in which doth ly a kernel much like to that of the almond, and with such a like skin: the substance within is white, and of taste somewhat bitter. The fruit hereof is of greatest pleasure, and of best taste of all the other of his kinde; although there be found at this day divers other sorts that are of very good taste, not remembered of the ancient, or set down by the later Writers, whereof to speake particularly would not bee great to our pretended purpose, considering wee hasten to an end.

5. There is also kept in some of our choice gardens a kind of Peach which hath a very double and beautifull floure, but it is seldom succeeded by any fruit: they call thisPersica flore pleno, The double blossomed Peach."

In the first edition Gerarde describes but four peaches, but Johnson, 36 years later, says "there are divers sorts besides the foure here set forth by our Author" and then names thirteen "choice ones, such as are to be had from my friend Miller in Old-street," who "hath also" six varieties "of that kinde of Peach which some callNucipersiaorNectorins." Either Gerarde neglects the peach or varieties increased greatly in 36 years—probably the former. We have not found the nectarine mentioned before Johnson's revision of Gerarde in 1633 and probably this fruit was not well known in England long before, for Parkinson, discussing them in 1629, says "they have been with us not many years." This brings us to Parkinson's list of peaches, which contains, as Johnson says, a "fuller discourse,"than Gerarde. John Parkinson (1567-1650), another British herbalist, who also cultivated a famous garden in London, devotes a chapter to the peach and another to the nectarine. These being short, and every word pertinent, we publish them in full:92

"The great white Peach is white on the outside as the meate is also, and is a good well rellished fruit.

The small white Peach is all one with the greater, but differeth in size.

The Carnation Peach is of three sorts, two are round, and the third long; they are all of a whitish colour, shadowed over with red, and more red on the side is next the sunne: the lesser round is the more common, and the later ripe.

The grand Carnation Peach is like the former round Peach, but greater, and is as late ripe, that is, in the beginning of September.

The red Peach is an exceeding well rellished fruit.

The russet Peach is one of the most ordinary Peaches in the Kingdome, being of a russet colour on the outside, and but of a reasonable rellish, farre meaner then many other.

The Island Peach is a faire Peach, and of a very good rellish.

The Newington Peach is a very good Peach, and of an excellent good rellish, being of a whitish greene colour on the outside, yet halfe reddish, and is ripe about Bartholmew tide.

The yellow Peach is of a deepe yellow colour; there be hereof divers sorts, some good and some bad.

The St. James Peach is the same with the Queenes Peach, here belowe set downe, although some would make them differing.

The Melocotone Peach is a yellow faire Peach, but differing from the former yellow both in forme and taste, in that this hath a small crooked end or point for the most part, it is ripe before them, and better rellished then any of them.

The Peachdu Troasis a long and great whitish yellow Peach, red on the outside, early ripe, and is another kinde of Nutmeg Peach.

The Queenes Peach is a faire great yellowish browne Peach, shadowed as it were over with deepe red, and is ripe at Bartholmew tide, of a very pleasant good taste.

The Romane Peach is a very good Peach, and well rellished.

The Durasme or Spanish Peach is of a darke yellowish red colour on the outside, and white within.

The blacke Peach is a great large Peach, of a very darke browne colour on the outside, it is of a waterish taste, and late ripe.

The Alberza Peach is late ripe, and of a reasonable good taste.

The Almond Peach, so called, because the kernell of the stone is sweete, like the Almond, and the fruit also somewhat pointed like the Almond in the huske; it is early ripe, and like the Newington Peach, but lesser.

The Man Peach is of two sorts, the one longer then the other, both of them are good Peaches, but the shorter is the better rellished.

The Cherry Peach is a small Peach, but well tasted.

The Nutmeg Peach is of two sorts, one that will be hard when it is ripe, and eateth not so pleasantly as the other, which will bee soft and mellow; they are both small Peaches, having very little or no resemblance at all to a Nutmeg, except in being a little longer than round, and are early ripe."

"Many other sorts of Peaches there are, whereunto wee can give no especial name; and therefore I passe them over in silence."

Agriculture seems to have received a great impetus in England about the middle of the Seventeenth Century, possibly with the beginning of Cromwell's Protectorate in 1653. Toward the end of the century the momentum began to carry pomology with it, the most apparent results of the movement at this distance, as it affects the peach, being a great output of new varieties and of fruit-books in which the new offerings were described. From this time the progress of peach-culture in England assumed so great proportions that space does not permit following it further in this brief account—a task unnecessary, too, for the pomological works of Lawrence, Switzer, Langley, Brookshaw, Miller, Rea, Hitt, Abercrombie and Forsyth, to select the most prominent names, cover the century well and are still accessible in large libraries. Moreover, by this time the peach was well established in America and we must take up its history there.

One of the first fruits of the heroic age of Spanish discovery in America was the naturalization in the New World of animals and plants which the discoverers brought with them. Most notable of these are the wild horses of the western plains and the Indian peaches of southern forests. Long before the English, Dutch, French or Swedes planted colonies in America, peaches, introduced by Spaniards, were common property of the Indians in southeastern and southwestern America. The Spaniards came to the New World to conquer and brought swords more often than fruits, but a cheery note in the long dirge of human woes suffered by the Aztecs is found in the rapid dissemination of the peach, among other domesticated plants,at an early period in Mexico. Which of the Spanish conquerors brought the peach or when it came does not appear but we have record that less than fifty years after Cortez conquered the country the peach was, apparently, commonly grown in Mexico. The beginnings of peach-culture on this continent are, then, to be sought in the region south of the Rio Grande.

The peach in Mexico.—Authority for the statement that the peach was cultivated in Mexico less than fifty years after the Spanish conquest is found in a Spanish book published by Molina in 1571, in which three peaches are described in Hispano-Aztec compound words as follows: "xuchipal durazno, 'red-colored peach,'cuztic durazno, 'yellow peach,' andxocotlmelocoton, 'peach fruit.'"93That the peach is to be found everywhere in Mexico, cultivated and as an escape from cultivation, where climate permits is common knowledge to pomologists, explorers having from time to time brought to light sorts worthy of introduction in our southern states, and frequent mention is made of this fruit by visitors to that country.

These Mexican peaches become of special interest to American fruit-growers because they constitute, with the offspring of early introductions in Florida, what pomologists call the "Spanish Race" of this fruit. "American Race" is a more fitting name, for these peaches are an American product. Four centuries of reproduction from seed, in a climate and soil different from any previously imposed upon them, and abnormally short generations have given to this continent a group of peaches with many characters in common.

Tracing further the history of the peaches that early came to Mexico, we find evidence that in a comparatively short time they had been taken northward into New Mexico, Arizona and the Californias. It is barely possible that from the same source the peach was eventually carried as far eastward as the Mississippi, for early explorers found naturalized peachesin the valley of this great river. No doubt the Jesuit and Franciscan fathers, chief representatives of the Roman Catholic Church in the early settlement of Mexico and southwestern America, early carried the peach from place to place, for, as advance guards of civilization, these men usually planted fruits, grains, vegetables and flowers at the missions they founded. Therefore, it is hardly too much to say that the history of the peach in the southwest follows the establishment, one after another, of the old missions, beginning in America with the settlement of Sante Fe in 1605 and continuing until Spanish rule passed into that of the United States.

That the padres of the early religious orders planted gardens and orchards as they planted the cross of Christianity among the Indian tribes in the southwest may be seen from such accounts of the mission as the following, written by a Spanish officer traveling in what is now New Mexico in 1799:94"The Moquinos are the most industrious of the many Indian nations that inhabit and have been discovered in that portion of America. They till the earth with great care, and apply to all their fields the manures proper for each crop. The same cereals and pulse are raised by them, that are everywhere produced by the civilized population in our provinces. They are attentive to their kitchen gardens, and have all the varieties of fruit-bearing trees it has been in their power to procure. The peach tree yields abundantly."

The antiquity of peach-culture among southern Indians, from Mexico to Florida, is shown by the fact that, among the prominent tribes of this region, there is a distinct name for the peach but the names of other introduced fruits, and of some native ones, are derived from that of the peach. Thus, according to W. R. Gerard,95who gave careful study to Indian names of plants in at least four Indian languages, the name of the peach is the radical while that of several plums is the equivalent of "little peach," "deer's peach" and "barren peach" while the cultivated apples and pears were by some Indians called "big peach."

As these Indian peaches have cut a prominent figure in furnishing stocks for American peach-orchards, are the source from which came a number of varieties, and, more than all else, gave inspiration for planting permanent orchards of this fruit on American soil, we may well consider them at greater length.

Indian peaches.—In many parts of the South, from the Ohio to theGulf and from the Atlantic to the Great Plains, the peach is naturalized and has run into many varieties of a peculiar and well-recognized type. This is the "Indian Peach" of this vast region, the chief distinguishing characters of which are: Trees with long, spreading limbs; young growth with purplish bark; small, flat, comparatively persistent leaves; blossoms large; season sometimes covering several weeks; fruit small, streaked with red beneath the skin, giving it a striped appearance, heavily pubescent; flesh usually yellow; ripening very late, season long, and of poor or indifferent quality. The trees of these Indian peaches have a smack of wildness which the best of pruning does not wholly subdue. The aborigines undoubtedly obtained peaches from Spaniards settling in both Mexico and Florida. The first source we have discussed. We come now to the second.

No doubt the Spaniards planted peaches in their first settlement of Florida at Saint Augustine in 1565. We have no record of the fact but early Indian traders found the natives of northern Florida and the neighboring states growing peaches in and about their villages in such quantity and with such familiarity as to suggest that the several tribes had long known this fruit. Hilton, an Englishman, who visited Florida a hundred years after the Spaniards established themselves at Saint Augustine, records that: "the country abounds with grapes, large figs and peaches."96The besetting sins of our early explorers were hasty generalization and exaggeration, and since the Indian peach, in what is now Florida at any rate, does not "abound" we must believe that Hilton was either farther north or was dissembling. Of the abundance of Indian peaches in the other Gulf States, there can be no doubt, for John Bartram, America's first great botanist, a man of note among all American naturalists, in the account of his travels through this region in 1765-1766 frequently mentions the peach as wild or as having been cultivated by the Indians.

Thus, Bartram says, speaking of the Cherokee town of Sticoe, on or near the Savannah River:97"On these towering hills appeared the ruins of the ancient famous town of Sticoe. Here was a vast Indian mount or tumulus and great terrace, on which stood the council-house, with banks encompassing their circus; here were also old Peach and Plumb orchards; some of the trees appeared yet thriving and fruitful." And again, discussingthe ruins of a French town near Mobile, Alabama, he says:98"I ascended the bank of the river, and penetrating the groves, came presently to old fields, where I observed ruins of ancient habitations, there being abundance of Peach and Fig trees, loaded with fruit, which affording a very acceptable dessert after the heats and toil of the day, and evening drawing on apace, I concluded to take up my quarters here for the night." And still again, he found on Pearl Island:99"Besides the native forest trees and shrubs already noted, manured fruit trees arrive in this island to the utmost degree of perfection, as Pears, Peaches, Figs, Grape Vines, Plumbs, &c."

Bartram in his travels found the peach so widely and abundantly naturalized that he was inclined to believe America to be its habitat. At least Kalm,100the Swedish naturalist, who visited Bartram in 1748-1749 reports that Bartram "looked upon peaches as an original American fruit, and as growing wild in the greater part of America."

In 1758 Le Page Du Pratz, who lived on a plantation in Louisiana for several years and wrote a history of the French colony, says that the natives had peaches and figs when the French settled in Louisiana in 1698. He probably errs, however, in stating that the natives got their trees from the English colony of Carolina since the English did not settle in Carolina until 1670. No doubt the Indians had long before had peaches and figs from the Spaniards of Florida or Mexico. The account which this historian gives of early peach-culture in Louisiana is worth printing in full:101"The natives had doubtless got the peach trees and fig trees from the English colony of Carolina, before the French established themselves in Louisiana. The peaches are of the kind which we call alberges; are of the size of the fist, adhere to the stone, and contain so much water that they make a kind of wine of it. The figs are either blue or white; are large and well enough tasted. Our colonists plant the peach stones about the end of February,and suffer the trees to grow exposed to all weathers. In the third year they will gather from one tree at least two hundred peaches, and double that number for six or seven years more, when the tree dies irrecoverably. As new trees are so easily produced, the loss of the old ones is not in the least regretted."

There are many indirect references to peaches in the Mississippi Valley most of which can be traced to Father Hennepin's account of peaches in Louisiana. He says:102"The peaches there are like those of Europe and bear very good fruit in such abundance that the savages are often obliged to prop up the trees with forked sticks." It turns out, however, that Father Hennepin was the Baron Munchausen of the early French explorers, it being doubtful whether he was ever farther down the Mississippi than the mouth of the Illinois. Probably, therefore, we must put much of what early writers say of the great abundance of peaches in this region to the soaring imagination of this early religious explorer. Yet these reports are credited by so careful a man as Kalm, who writes:103"I have been told by all those who have made journies to the southern parts of Canada, and to the river Mississippi, that the woods there abound with peach-trees, which bear excellent fruit, and that the Indians of those parts say that those trees have been there since times immemorial."

A little later we have reliable information that the peach was naturalized in parts of the Mississippi Valley at least, for Thomas Nuttall, leading botanist of his time and a thoroughly reliable reporter, traveling in Arkansas in 1819, writes:104"The thermometer towards noon rises to seventy degrees and the peach and plum trees, almost equally naturalized, have nearly finished blooming." And, again,105"The peach of Persia is already naturalized throughout the forests of Arkansa." From this we may picture wild peaches as having grown for generations in parts of Arkansas and, no doubt, of the now famous Ozark region, where, we are told, peach-trees in abundance now decorate, with flower and fruit, primeval forests.

Reserving the best description of Indian peaches to the last we now turn from Arkansas to the Carolinas. Here, in 1700, John Lawson, a surveyor, who in his work had ample opportunity to know the country, wrote about the wild and cultivated plants of the region. Lawson, althoughnot a trained naturalist, was a keen observer, a lover of nature and much interested in the agricultural development of the Carolinas. Moreover, he writes so simply, directly, and in a tone so temperate, in contrast to the declamatory style of the times, that one accepts without question what he says. We feel we are justified in quoting at some length Lawson's description of Indian peaches:106

"All peaches with us are standing; neither have we any wall fruit in Carolina, for we have heat enough, and therefore do not require it. We have a great many sorts of this fruit, which all thrive to admiration, peach trees coming to perfection, with us, as easily as the weeds. A peach falling to the ground brings a peach tree that shall bear in three years, or sometimes sooner. Eating peaches in our orchards makes them come up so thick from the kernel, that we are forced to take a great deal of care to weed them out, otherwise they make our land a wilderness of peach trees. They generally bear so full that they break great part of their limbs down. We have likewise very fair nectarines, especially the red, that clings to the stone; the other yellow fruit, that leaves the stone. Of the last I have a tree that most years brings me fifteen or twenty bushels. I see no foreign fruit like this, for thriving in all sorts of land, and bearing its fruit to admiration. I want to be satisfied about one sort of this fruit, which the Indians claim as their own, and affirm they had it growing amongst them before any Europeans came to America.

The fruit I will describe as exactly as I can. The tree grows very large, most commonly as big as a handsome apple tree; the flowers are of a reddish, murrey color, the fruit is rather more downy than the yellow peach, and commonly very large and soft, being very full of juice. They part freely from the stone, and the stone is much thicker than all the other peach stones we have, which seems to me that it is a spontaneous fruit of America; yet in those parts of America that we inhabit, I never could hear that any peach trees were ever found growing in the woods; neither have the foreign Indians, that live remote from the English, any other sort. And those living amongst us have a hundred of this sort for one other. They are a hardy fruit, and are seldom damaged by the north-east blast, asothers are. Of this sort we make vinegar; wherefore we call them vinegar peaches, and sometimes Indian peaches.

This tree grows to a vast bigness, exceeding most apple trees. They bear well, though sometimes an early spring comes on in February, and perhaps when the tree is fully blown, the cloudy, north-east winds, which attend the end of that month, or the beginning of March, destroy most of the fruit. The biggest apricot tree I ever saw, as they told me, was grafted on a peach stock in the ground. I know of no other sort with us, than the common. We generally raise this fruit from the stone, which never fails to bring the same fruit. Likewise our peach stones effect the same, without so much as once missing to produce the same sort that the stone came from."

Peaches in the colonies.—The first peaches in the American colonies must have been planted at Jamestown for, in 1629, Captain John Smith writes of "peaches in abundance."107The trees, however, seem to have been neglected for, continuing, Smith says: "Apples, Peares, Apricocks, Vines, figges, and other fruits some have planted, that prospered exceedingly; but their diligence about Tobacco left them to be spoiled by the cattell; yet now they beginne to revive." The settlement in Virginia at that time, so soon after the Indian massacres, was small and there could have been but few trees so that Smith's "abundance" was but as a grain of sand on the seashore with the many thousands of bushels required to make an abundance at the present time.

Despite the neglect of fruit to attend to tobacco which Smith laments, the planting of orchards must have gone on apace, for in 1633 a Dutch sea-captain named De Vries visiting Virginia describes the Menife plantation, famous in the colony at that time, as having a garden containing rosemary, sage, marjoram and thyme, the apple, pear and cherry while the house itself was surrounded by peach-trees.108Three years later, 1642, Berkeley became governor of the colony and we are told that about his house at Green Spring there were fifteen hundred apple, peach, apricot, quince and other fruit-trees.109Robert Evelyn, writing forty years after the settlement of Jamestown says: "Peaches better than Apricocks by some doe feed hogs, one man hath ten thousand trees."110

Fruit-growing in colonial Virginia was not without promoters and one, a Colonel Norwood, had the persuasive eloquence of the barkers for get-rich-quickorchard-planting concerns of our own times. Colonel Norwood, an Englishman, visited Virginia in 1649 and on his return wrote:111"Oranges, Lemons, Pine-aples, Plantanes, Peaches, Apricocks, Peares, Apels, in a word all sort of excellent Fruits will grow there in full perfection: you may sleepe whilst they are growing, after their setting or engrafting, there needes no more labour but your prayers, that they may prosper, and now and then an eye to prevent their casualties, wounds or diseases." No doubt Norwood is over enthusiastic in his praises and yet it is true that there were few pests of the peach at this time, most of these coming, one by one, with the development of the fruit-industry. About all that any fruit needed at this time was, to use a modern political phase, "watchful waiting."

Considering the agricultural efforts that must have been required to produce tobacco, then the medium of exchange at home and abroad, and of corn, which in Virginia was the staff of life, one wonders that fruit received the attention indicated by the following account written in 1656 of a still earlier period:112"The Country is full of gallant Orchards, and the fruit generally more luscious and delightful than here, witnesse the Peach and Quince, the latter may be eaten raw savourily, the former differs as much exceeds ours as the best relished apple we have doth the crabb, and of both most excellent and comfortable drinks are made." Perhaps the explanation of the popularity of fruits in Virginia is to be found in the statement that from fruits are made "most excellent and comfortable drinks." On the word of Captain John Smith we have it that "few of the upper-class planters drink any water."113Wine was not made in quantity in the colonies and liquors distilled from grains were not known so that thirst, in this case the mother of invention, caused the colonists to turn to peaches and apples for strong drink.

Prohibition was not preached in the colonies nor in the states until long after the Revolution and King Alcohol dominated every part of the New World. Distilling spirituous liquors from rye and corn seems not to have been practiced, if the art were known, until the beginning of the Nineteenth Century. The upper classes drank wine, but cider, perry, peach-vinegar and similar fermented fruit-juices were in common use bythe middle and lower classes while the carousing population of the whole country, and there seems to have been many liberal tipplers, slaked their thirst with rum, apple-jack and peach-brandy. So much on drinking, not to point a moral or adorn a tale, but to bring out the fact that fruit-growing in America had its beginning and for two hundred years had almost its whole sustenance in the demand for strong drink. This is shown in almost every page of the horticultural literature of the times and in the laws of the colonies restricting prices and levying taxes on liquors made from fruits. Peaches were grown in quantities wherever they could be made to succeed in the colonies, not for the fruit itself, but for the making of peach-vinegar, a sort of cider, and peach-brandy, a distilled liquor.

By the end of the first hundred years in America the English seem to have brought orcharding to a fine state of perfection in Virginia, the peach succeeding then, by all accounts, rather better than now. Bruce114gives an admirable summing-up of orchard-conditions at the end of the period named: "In the closing years of the seventeenth century, there were few plantations in Virginia which did not possess orchards of apple and peach trees, pear, plum, apricot, and quince. The number of trees was often very large. The orchard of Robert Hide of York contained three hundred peach and three hundred apple trees. There were twenty-five hundred apple trees in the orchard of Colonel Fitzhugh. Each species of fruit was represented by many varieties; thus, of the apple, there were mains, pippins, russentens, costards, marigolds, kings, magitens and batchelors; of the pear, bergamy and warden. The quince was greater in size, but less aciduated than the English quince; on the other hand, the apricot and plum were inferior in quality to the English, not ripening in the same perfection. Cherries grew in notable abundance. So great was the productive capacity of the peach that some of the landowners planted orchards of the tree for the mere purpose of using the fruit to fatten their hogs; on some plantations, as many as forty bushels are said to have been knocked down to the swine in the course of a single season."

Treasure after treasure of experience and narrative may be found in tracing the history of the peach in Virginia but space permits only the references that best illuminate the development and culture of this fruit in America. Two accounts must serve to give an idea of the peach in Virginia in the Eighteenth Century. Robert Beverly, in hisHistory of Virginiagives a good idea of the culture, kinds and uses of peaches in the early part of the Eighteenth Century:115"Peaches, nectarines and apricots,as well as plumbs and cherries, grow there upon standard trees. They commonly bear in three years from the stone, and thrive so exceedingly, that they seem to have no need of grafting or inoculating, if any body would be so good a husband; and truly I never heard of any that did graft either plum, nectarine, peach or apricot in that country, before the first edition of this book."

"Peaches and nectarines I believe to be spontaneous, somewhere or other on that continent, for the Indians have, and ever had greater variety, and finer sorts of them than the English. The best sort of these cling to the stone, and will not come off clear, which they call plum nectarines, and plum peaches or clint stones. Some of these are twelve or thirteen inches in the girt. These sorts of fruits are raised so easily there, that some good husbands plant great orchards of them, purposely for their hogs; and others make a drink of them, which they call mobby, and either drink it as cider, or distill it off for brandy. This makes the best spirit next to grapes."

The text for the only other account we have space to publish for the period under consideration is found in Washington's diary for February 22, 1760. "Laid in part, the Worm of a fence around the Peach orchard." The information in Washington's short statement is inconsequential but from it we form a pleasant picture of peach-growing at Mount Vernon. Washington owned a distillery and in another place we learn that "the distiller made every fall a good deal of apple, peach and persimmon brandy." To supply the needs of the plantation in fruit and brandy, there must have been a considerable number of trees, all seedlings, but set in straight rows, for Washington, the surveyor, would have no botch work in aligning and spacing. The fence, the worm of which Washington was laying on his twenty-eighth birthday, if typical of the times, was of split walnut-rails, laid zigzag. Eventually it became trellised with wild grapes, Virginia creepers, honeysuckles and morning-glories. The corners grew up to sassafras, brambles and other plants of the region. In spring, we picture then, the pink-petalled trees, in the peach-orchard at Mount Vernon, making obeisance to the Father of his Country as he rode the rounds of the plantation; in summer the shady shrub-grown corners of the worm-fence, sweet-scented with honeysuckle or aromatic with sassafras, furnished refreshing resting places as Washington watched his harvest; later, the orchard, voluptuous with fruit, gave gustatory promises of products to eat and drink and dazzled the eye with autumn colors of Virginia creeper, wild grape and sassafras. The peach-orchard not only served the appetite at Mount Vernon but was one of the most picturesque spots on the plantation.

Let the foregoing accounts of Smith, Bruce and Beverly suffice to give status to early peach-growing in Virginia. They apply equally well to Maryland, these neighboring colonies, it will be remembered, being called by one of our authors, "Leah and Rachel or the Two Fruitful Sisters." Of the peach in the states to the south at least a few words ought to be said.

In the discussion of Indian peaches we have had a good account of the early history of the peach in the Carolinas by Lawson. We now show the status of peach-growing in this region at a later period. In an account of South Carolina and Georgia, said to have been written by General Oglethorpe, printed in London in 1733, we find the following:116

"Mulberries, both black and white, are natives of this soil, and are found in the woods, as are many other sorts of fruit trees of excellent kinds, and the growth of them is surprisingly swift; for a peach, apricot, or nectarine tree will, from the stone, grow to be a bearing tree in four or five years' time."

"They have oranges, lemons, apples and pears, besides the peach and apricot mentioned before. Some of these are so delicious that whoever tastes them will despise the insipid, watery taste of those we have in England; and yet such is the plenty of them that they are given to the hogs in great quantities."

A little later, 1740, Mr. Thomas Jones of Savannah wrote to Mr. John Lyde concerning the contents of his town-garden as follows:117

"As to our fruit, the most common are peaches and nectarines (I believe that I had a hundred bushels of the former this year in my little garden in town); we have also apples of divers sorts, chincopin nuts, walnut, chestnut, hickory, and ground nuts."

The third writer is Sir John Oldmixon who quotes a Mr. Archdale in regard to the fruits of Carolina. He writes:118

"Everything generally grows there that will grow in any part of Europe, there being already many sorts of fruits, as apples, pears, apricots, nectarines, etc. They that once taste of them will despise the watery, washy taste of those in England. There's such plenty of them that they are given to the hogs. In four or five years they come from a stone to be bearing trees."

The same author is worth quoting in regard to the early culture of theMelocoton peach in Virginia.119"Here is such plenty of peaches that they give them to their hogs; some of them, called malachotoons, are as big as a lemon and resemble it a little." The history of the word melocoton, by the way, is interesting. It comes from the Latinmelum cotoneum,literally, apple-quince. The corruption is of Spanish origin and in Spain "melocoton" is a common name for the peach. The word, however, is now common enough in English, no less than 29 variant spellings being found in the dictionaries and every extensive list of peaches having a number of varieties with melocoton as a prefix or an affix to the name.

Passing now to the northern colonies we find that the history of the peach in Pennsylvania begins with the history of the State. William Penn founded Philadelphia in 1682 and a year later, in describing the new country, names the peach as one of its assets:120"There are also very good peaches, and in great quantities; not an Indian plantation without them, but whether naturally here at first, I know not. However, one may have them by bushels for little; they make a pleasant drink; and I think not inferior to any peach you have in England, except the true Newington."

It would be hard to find a part of the earth better fitted in soil and climate for sure and abounding harvests of peaches than the Chesapeake peach-belt extending up through Maryland and taking in Delaware, New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania. We may be sure, then, that if the Indians were growing peaches in the abundance described by Penn in what is now Philadelphia, peach-orchards were not less common in all of the Chesapeake belt. That the whole region was bountifully supplied with this delicious fruit when settled by whites is further indicated, however, in a letter written by Mahlon Stacy from the "Falls of the Delaware," New Jersey, in 1680, to his brother Revell in England. He says:121

"I have travelled through most of the places that are settled, and some that are not; and in every place I find the country very apt to answer the expectation of the diligent. I have seen orchards laden with fruit to admiration; their very limbs torn to pieces by the weight, and most delicious to the taste and lovely to behold. I have seen an apple tree from a pippin kernel yield a barrel of curious cider, and peaches in such plenty that some people took their carts a peach gathering; I could not but smile at the conceit of it; they are very delicate fruit, and hang almost like our onions that are tied on ropes."

We are told in Watson's Annals of Philadelphia122that one of the remarkable characteristics of Germantown, Pennsylvania, in 1700 was that the whole of the main street, one mile in length, "was fronted with blooming peach trees."

An account of peaches in the Delaware region as late as the middle of the Eighteenth Century shows that even then the peach was regarded as indigenous "like maize and tobacco." This quotation, too, is interesting because it gives a glimpse of cultural methods, kinds, uses and danger from frost. The author was a Swedish clergyman, a resident of the region for some years. He writes:123

"Peach trees stand within an enclosure by themselves; grow even in the stoniest places without culture. The fruit is the most delicious that the mouth can taste, and often allowable in fevers. One kind, called clingstones, are considered the best; in these the stones are not loose from the fruit as in the others. Many have peach orchards chiefly for the purpose of feeding their swine, which are not allowed to run at large. They first bloom, in March, the flowers coming out before the leaves, and are often injured by the frosts; they are ripe toward the close of August. This fruit is regarded as indigenous, like maize and tobacco; for as far as any Indians have been seen in the interior of the country these plants are found to extend."

Pressed for space, we must conclude the discussion of early peach-growing in this region by quoting an account of the industry as it existed in 1750 when the Swedish naturalist, Kalm, visited the colonies and spent some time in Pennsylvania and neighboring states. Writing of orchards he says:124"Every countryman, even a common peasant, has commonly an orchard near his house in which all sorts of fruit, such as peaches, apples, pears, cherries, and others, are in plenty. The peaches were now almost ripe. They are rare in Europe, particularly in Sweden, for in that country hardly any people besides the rich taste them. But here every countryman had an orchard full of peach trees, which were covered with such quantities of fruit, that we could scarcely walk in the orchard, without treading on those peaches which were fallen off; many of which were always left on the ground, and only part of them was sold in town, and the rest was consumed by the family and strangers; for every one that passed by, was at liberty to go into the orchard, and to gather as many of them as he wanted. Nay, this fine fruit was frequently given to the swine.

This fruit is, however, sometimes kept for winter use, and for this purpose they are prepared in the following manner. The fruit is cut into four parts, the stone thrown away, and the fruit put upon a thread, on which they are exposed to the sunshine in the open air, till they are sufficiently dry. They are then put into a vessel for winter. But this manner of drying them is not very good, because the rain of this season very easily spoils and putrifies them, whilst they hang in the open air. For this reason a different method is followed by others, which is by far the most eligible. The peaches are as before cut into four parts, are then either put upon a thread, or laid upon a board, and so hung up in the air when the sun shines. Being dried in some measure, or having lost their juice by this means, they are put into an oven, out of which the bread has but just been taken, and are left in it for a while. But they are soon taken out and brought into the fresh air; and after that they are again put into the oven, and this is repeated several times until they are as dry as they ought to be. For if they were dried up at once in the oven, they would shrivel up too much, and lose part of their flavour. They are then put up and kept for the winter. They are either baked into tarts and pyes, or boiled and prepared as dried apples and pears are in Sweden. Several people here dry and preserve their apples in the same manner as their peaches.

The peach trees have, as I am told, been first planted here by the Europeans. But at present they succeed very well, and require even less care than our apple and pear trees."

Kalm125also gives an account of the colonists' method of making peach-brandy, which, as we have seen, plays so important a part in the peach-industry of the times. Brandy-making, according to Kalm, was simplicity itself and it is not to be wondered that in those days of strong drink peach-brandy was popular. The following is Kalm's description: "They make brandy from peaches here, after the following method. The fruit is cut asunder, and the stones are taken out. The pieces of fruit are then put into a vessel, where they are left for three weeks or a month, till they are quite putrid. They are then put into the distilling vessel, and the brandy is made and afterwards distilled over again. This brandy is not for people who have a more refined taste, but it is only for the common kind of people, such as workmen and the like."

Kalm, travelling from Trenton to Princeton, found the country thickly settled and full of orchards:126

"During the greater part of the day we had very extensive corn fields on both sides of the road. * * * Near almost every farm was a spacious orchard full of peach and apple trees, and in some of themthe fruit had fallen from the trees in such quantities as to cover nearly the whole surface. Part of it they left to rot, because they could not take it all in and consume it. Wherever we passed by we were always welcome to go into the fine orchards and gather our hats and pockets full of the choicest fruit, without the possessors so much as looking after it."

The soil and climate of Long Island and the lower reaches of the Hudson, similar to those of the Chesapeake peach-belt, are so well adapted to peaches that we may be sure that the early settlers in New York eked out their scanty fare with this fruit soon after settlements were made. Trade with the colonies to the south, where peaches were common before the Dutch were established on Manhattan Island, began almost immediately after the arrival of the Hollanders in America, and knowledge of the adaptability of peaches to conditions in the New World was no doubt quickly acquired from Virginia, if, indeed, the aborigines were not cultivating this fruit in the region as Penn found them doing on the site of Philadelphia. Yet careful search in the colonial records of New York shows no early accounts of peaches, there being few such accounts, by the way, of any agricultural product, no one having undertaken the task of describing the natural and agricultural resources of this State as was done by several able observers for Virginia and the New England states.

Back to Index Next