arnoldia.arboretum.harvard.eduarnoldia.arboretum.harvard.edu/pdf/issues/64.pdfDR. ROBERT E. COOK IS NEW DIRECTOR OF THE ARNOLD ARBORETUM Dr. Robert Edward Cook, a biologist with a

ar~no iaVolume 48 Number 4 Fall 1988

Arnoldia (ISSN 0004-2633; USPS 866-100) ispublished quarterly, m wmter, spring, summer, andfall, by the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University.

Subscriptions are $12.00 per calendar year domestic,$15.00 per calendar year foreign, payable m advance.Single copies are $3.50. All remittances must be mU S dollars, by check drawn on a U S bank or bymternational money order. Send subscription orders,remittances, change-of-address notices, and all othersubscription-related communications to: Helen G.Shea, Circulation Manager, Arnoldia, The ArnoldArboretum, Jamaica Plam, MA 02130-3519.Telephone[G17) 524-1718.

Postmaster: Send address changes to:ArnoldiaThe Arnold ArboretumJamaica Plam, MA 02130-3519

Copyright @ 1988, The President and Fellows ofHarvard College.

Edmund A. Schofield, EditorPeter Del Tredici, Associate EditorHelen G. Shea, Circulation ManagerMarion D Cahan, Editorial Assistant (Volunteer)

Arnoldia is printed by the Office of the UniversityPubhsher, Harvard University.

Front cover "Two Bunches of Grapes," woodblock pnnt done m1943 by by Lmg Rtst /#20 m an edition of one hundred) CourtesyNew York Public Library, Astor, Lenox, and Tilden Foundations(Print Collection, Miriam and Ira D Wallach Division of Art,Prints, and Photographs) (See page e 4 J ~

Inside front cover

Photograph of Ephraim Wales Bull 1806-1895), originator of the’Concord’ grape, standing m front of the ongmal ’Concord’grapevine in Concord, Massachusetts Photograph by Alfred WHosmer (1890s) From the Archives of the Arnold Arboretum(See page 4 ) ~ Inside back cover Plant ofVms coigneux in theArnold Arboretum’s shrub collecrion ( 1916~ Photograph by G R.Kmg From the Archives of the Arnold Arboretum (See page 4 )Back cover Leaf of Vitis davidn (Romanet) Foex var cyano-carpa Sargent, showmg its cnmson autumnal color Native toChina, VW s damdn has pnckles on its stems and petioles andproduces black fruit, the vanety cyanocarpa, named by CharlesSprague Sargent, is less pnckly than the species and producesblmsh fruit During the early 1900s the vanety was sold commer-cially by James Veitch & Sons of Chelsea, England, as "Vitis sarmata var Veitchm " Unfortunately, Vitis davidn is hardy onlyto Zone 7 (USDA) In New England it dies to the ground in severewmters and rarely produces fruit From Journal of the RoyalHorticultural Society, Volume 28, Numbers 3 and 4 (1904~ (Seepage 4 J

Page2 Dr. Robert E. Cook Is New Director of the

Arnold Arboretum

4 "He Sowed; Others Reaped": EphraimWales Bull and the Origins of the ’Concord’GrapeEdmund A. Schofield

BOSTON’S PARKS AND OPEN SPACES: II I

17 7 Laura Dwight’s Magnoliasjudith Leet

26 The Arnold Arboretum: An Historic Park

PartnershipSheila Connor

29 Franklin Park, Boston’s "Central" ParkRichard Heath

32 "Full Foliage and Fme Growth": An-

Overview of Street-Tree Planting in BostonPhylhs Andersen

37 7 "So Near the Metropohs"-Lynn Woods, aSylvan Gem m an Urban SettingEhzabeth Hope Cushmg

52 2 The Introduction of Black Locust (Robiniapseudoacacia L./ to MassachusettsDamd C. Michener

58 BOOKS

61 1 Index to Volume 48 (1988) (

DR. ROBERT E. COOK IS NEW DIRECTOR OF THEARNOLD ARBORETUM

Dr. Robert Edward Cook, a biologist witha special interest in plant populationbiology, has been appointed Director ofthe Arnold Arboretum. Dr. Cook is cur-

rently Associate Professor of Ecology andSystematics at Cornell Plantations, theuniversity’s arboretum and botanic gar-den.

"We were delighted to recruit some-one of Bob Cook’s caliber who combines

outstanding managerial and leadershipskills with a strong scientific back-

ground," said Sally Zeckhauser, HarvardUniversity’s Vice President for Admini-stration and chair of the search commit-tee.

Cornell Plantations receives about

twenty percent of its operating budgetfrom Cornell; the remainder must beraised from private and public sources.Under Dr. Cook’s direction, Plantationshas undergone a five-year period of

growth, doubling its budget, its perma-nent staff, and its supporting member-ship. A successful fundraising programimplemented among alumni and friendsresulted in increased unrestricted givingto Cornell Plantations and a sixty per-cent rise in special gifts for capital proj-ects.

Major capital projects undertaken

during Dr. Cook’s tenure included gar-den, trail, and landscape renovations aswell as the acquisition of more than two

hundred fifty acres of ecologically impor-tant land. A new service building wasdesigned, funded, and constructed.

Dr. Cook also initiated a series ofresearch projects at Plantations with

funding from outside organizations.Ecological research on endangered plantspecies and a review of national recoveryplans, for example, were funded by theUnited States Fish and Wildlife Service,New York State, and the World WildlifeFund. The National Science Foundation

(NSF) is supporting ecological researchon grasses, trees, fire, and grazing in theKenyan savannah. Research on curricu-lum development for elementary-levelscience education (Project Leap-LEarn-ing About Plants) is being jointly fundedby NSF and New York State.

Dr. Cook’s own research interests arein plant propagation biology in generaland in the biology of clonal plants inparticular. A native of Warwick, RhodeIsland, and a 1968 graduate of HarvardCollege, he received his doctorate fromYale in 1973. He was a Cabot Fellow atHarvard in 1974 and 1975 and served asassistant professor in the Department ofBiology from 1975 to 1980 and as associ-ate professor from 1980 to 1982. Dr. hasalso been as program director in popula-tion biology and physiological ecology atNSF.

"He Sowed; Others Reaped": Ephraim Wales Bulland the Origins of the ‘Concord’ Grape

Edmund A. Schofield

While Emerson and his colleagues were designing a philosophy for the uniqueneeds of an expanding nation, one of their townsmen was quietly developing agrape to match the demands of its rigorous physical environment

The Origins and Spread of "The Vine"In their peregrinations over the ages, thegrape and mankind have crossed paths, haveeven trod the same path, many times. Eastand West, for millennia, they have followedsimilar routes of history, myth, and ro-

mance-first in the Northern Hemisphere, inAsia, in Europe, in North America, and then,within the last few centuries, in the SouthernHemisphere as well. Companion to mankindfrom dimmest antiquity, the grape has beenone of mankind’s most important, most es-teemed fruits.

In the West, the story of the grape has beenlargely the story of Vitis vinifera Linnxus-"the vine"-from which all cultivated varie-ties of grapes were derived before Europeanscame to North America. Cultivation of thevine-called viticulture-is a very ancientart: from earliest times and in every country,wherever it would thrive, the vine has beencultivated with care, especially here in theWest. What wheat is to other cereals the vineis to other fruits-the most important inWestern eyes, as rice is in Eastern eyes. Asia

Minor, somewhere between and south of theBlack and Caspian seas, apparently is itshome. From Asia Minor, its culture spreadboth west and east.

In early history viticulture was carried outlargely to supply grapes for winemaking.Long before the beginning of the Christian

era, grapes and wine were of considerableimportance to Middle Eastern and Mediterra-nean peoples. Thousands of years ago theEgyptians were well acquaintcd with the useand properties of wine, which their traditionssay were revealed to them by Osiris. Theirchief vineyards were planted on the banks ofthe Nile. Joseph’s dream, described in Gene-sis, gives evidence that the vine was culti-vated in Egypt at least eighteen hundred yearsbefore Christ. Grape seeds have been foundwith mummies in Egyptian tombs that are atleast three thousand years old, and details ofgrape growing appear in mosaics of the FourthDynasty of Egypt (2440 B.C.) and later.

Viticulture was practiced very early inPalestine ("And Noah began to be a husband-man, and planted a vineyard."-Genesis9:20). By 600 B.c., the Phoenicians probablyhad carried varieties of wine grapes to Greece,which were carried thence to Rome and on tosouthern France. Hundreds of varieties noware cultivated in the vineyards of the wine-growing country there. Ancient records showthat the Chinese had vineyards of nativegrapes at least one thousand years beforeChrist. During the second century B.C., Vitisvinifera was introduced into China fromwestern Asia, by way of Persia and India.

Viticulture flourished in Greece duringHomer’s time. It was Dionysus, god of revelryand protector of the vine, who gave them the

5

vine, they say, and taught them viticulture.Viticulture must have been introduced veryearly into Italy also, by the Greeks. TheRoman writers Virgil, Cato, the Plinys, Varro,and Columella describe numerous varietiesof the vine, list many types of wine, and givedirections for training and pruning vines andfor making wine.

For a time the Romans seemed to preferGrecian wines to their own; not until aboutthe first century of the Christian era didItalian wines begin to find favor in their ownland. In Virgil’s time the varieties in cultiva-tion seem to have been exceedingly numer-ous ; and the varied methods of training andculture now in use in Italy are in many casesidentical to those that Columella and otherRoman writers described.

Because viticulture was so important inRoman life, it is often referred to in Romanpoetry, such as Virgil’s Georgics. Bacchus,god of the vine, whom the Romans identifiedwith Dionysus, was enormously popular atPompeii, which was destroyed in A.D. 79 bythe eruption of Mount Vesuvius. Archxolo-gists have found the sites of many vineyardsat Pompeii, some of them surprisingly large.They have found also numerous wall paint-ings of the vine, countless wine shops, andinnumerable amphoras. All of this arch~ol-ogical evidence attests to the importance ofthe grape as a staple of daily life in Pompeiiand verifies the information on viticulturegiven in the writings of Pliny the Elder, Cato,Varro, and Columella.

During Roman times grape culture ex-tended inland from the coast, moving up theRhone River valley of France and as far northas the Rhine and Moselle valleys. By thesecond century A.D. the Romans had takenthe vine to Germany.

Well before the second century, raisin andtable grapes had spread around the easternend of the Mediterranean Sea to the countriesof North Africa. Because the customs andreligions of North Africa differed from thoseof the northern coast of the Mediterranean,the raisin and table grapes on the one hand,

and the wine varieties, on the other, spreadalong different routes.

Centuries later, when Europeans colo-nized lands around the globe, the grape wasalways among the plants they took along. Inthe fifteenth century viticulture became es-tablished in Madeira and the Canary Islands.Later it spread to South Africa, Australia, andSouth America. The first wine grapes werebrought to California from Mexico late in theeighteenth century. During the first half ofthe next century grape growing and wine-making became established in California andexpanded rapidly between I8G0 and 1900.

Grapes and Their UsesMost grapes (Vitis spp.) are coarse, woodyvines that cling to their supports by means oftendrils. Some species native to arid regionsare almost-erect shrubs rather than vines.Grapes are members of the Vitaceae, or Viti-dacex (the Grape, or Vine, Family). The genusname Vitis, which is the classical Latin namefor the grape, was conferred by CarolusLinnxus. Over the years Vitis has been vari-

ously defined to include or exclude the generaCissus and Ampelopsis, from which it is dis-tinguished on the basis of small differences infloral structure. (Cissus was the Greek namefor the ivy, and Ampelopsis, the name createdby Michaux, comes from the Greek ampelos,the vine-i.e., the grape-and opsis,appearance.) Vitis is widespread in the North-ern Hemisphere, especially in the temperateregions. Defined strictly, it includes aroundsixty species; when Ampelopsis and Cissusare included, it consists of some two hundredfifty species.As noted, grapes may be cultivated for any

of a number of purposes: for making wine, forexample; for eating out of hand as "tablegrapes"; for drying as currants and raisins; forpreserving as jams, jellies, and preserves or fornonalcoholic beverages; and, latterly-owingto the elegance and rich color of the leaves ofsome grapes or to the shade they afford-asornamentals, perhaps one of their leastknown uses.

Several species recommend themselves asornamentals:

Vitis coigneti~, known as the gloryvine, is a hand-some, fast-growing, climbing vine. Its very large,heavy leaves reach ten inches in diameter and turnred in the fall. Probably the fastest growing of thegrapes, gloryvine is ideal as a screen, its shootsincreasing their length by as much as fifty feet in asingle season, and a single plant of Vitis coignetia?can cover a thousand square feet of trellis in a fewyears. It produces inconspicuous and inediblefruits. Hardy to Zone 5, Vitis coigneti~ was intro-duced into the United States from Japan by theArnold Arboretum in 1875.

Vitis amurensis, the Amur grape, is a vigorous vinenative to the Amur River region of eastem Asia.Hardy to Zone 4, it is grown as an ornamental.Producing black fruit, Vitis amurensis comes intoits own in the fall, when its coarse foliage turnscrimson to purplish. Introduced to horticulturearound 1854, this species is hardier than Vitiscoignetia?.Vitis cahfornica, the California grape, is hardy toZone 7. It is native to the West Coast, from Oregonto California and like Vitis amurensis is effective inthe fall, its coarse leaves tuming red at that season.Although rather dry, its glaucous-white fruits are,nonetheless, pleasant-tasting.Vitis riparia, the riverbank grape, is a very hardy,high-climbing vine that is native to a large area ofthe United States. /It is hardy to Zone 2.) Vitisriparia produces purple-black fruit that are coveredwith a dense bloom, and it bears leaves with lus-trous, bright-green undersides. Its staminate flow-ers are fragrant, but they are too small to be effec-tive ornamentally.

Grapes of the New WorldNorth America has been called a naturalvineyard: the first record of the continent isalso a record of its grapes, which grow wild inthe greatest profusion in the wooded parts ofthe continent, from the Great Lakes to theGulf of Mexico and from the Atlantic to thePacific. When the early explorers visitedNorth America, wild grapevines were soprominent that the region was repeatedlycalled "Vineland." Leif Ericson, for example,reached our northeastern shores in about theyear 1000. "Farther south and westerly theywent," says Justin Winsor’s narrative, "andgoing up a river came to an expanse of water,where on the shores they built huts to lodge infor the winter, and sent out exploring parties.

In one of these ... a native of that part ofEurope where grapes grew ... found vineshung with their fruit, which induced Leif tocall the country Vineland." The Englishcolonists found the coast of what is now NewEngland to be profuse in grapes. In 1621,Edward Winslow wrote that in New England"are grapes, white and red, and very sweet andstrong also."

"

Governor’s Island, in Boston Harbor, wasgranted to Governor John Winthrop in 1632on condition that he plant a vineyard or or-chard on it. The island early became known as"The Governour’s Garden." In the MiddleAtlantic region, the native grapes also at-tracted the attention of colonists and travel-ers. In Virginia in 1607-09, for example,Captain John Smith saw "[o]f vines, greatabundance in many parts, that climbe thetoppes of the highest trees in some places, butthese beare but fewe grapes. But by the riversand Savage habitations where they are notovershadowed from the sunne, they are cov-ered with fruit, though never pruined normanured." The Spanish colonists of Floridaand the French voyageurs were attracted bythe abundance of grapes. Even as far north asMichigan the voyageurs found the banks ofstreams festooned with grapevines.

John Adlum’s vineyard near Georgetownin the District of Columbia, which wasplanted in 1820, first successfully producedgrapes on the Atlantic coast. His introductionof the ’Catawba’ into general culture wouldeventually yield valuable new cultivars. In1860, nine-tenths of the 5,600 acres of vine-yard established east of the Rocky Mountainswere ’Catawba’ grapes.The Mission Fathers in California were the

first to grow successfully a variety (’Mission’)of Vitis vinifera in what is now the UnitedStates; they brought it to San Diego in 1769.’Mission’ remained the leading variety grownuntil 1860, when European varieties wereintroduced. Between 1860 and 1870 in Cali-fornia there was a rapid increase in the acre-age of varieties derived from native Americangrapes. It was during this time that the culti-

7

var ’Concord’ became the leading commer-cially grown grape of American origin.The vine of Europe and of history, Vitis

vinifera has always led a precarious existencewhenever it was introduced into the easternUnited States. It has been supplanted there byderivatives of the native species-Vitis la-brusca (the northern fox grape), Vitis a?sti-valis (the summer grape), and Vitis rotundi fo-lia (the southern fox grape)-and by theirhybrids with Vitis vinifera. Being essentiallytable fruits, the American grapes are quitedifferent from their Old World counterpart,which, as has been said, is a wine fruit. Thus,European writings historically have dealtwith "the vine," American writings with"grapes." But early American writings alsodealt with the vine and with wine; it was notuntil the middle of the last century that thenative grape began to be appreciated andunderstood as a table grape.

Each species, native or introduced, hasmany varieties, is best adapted to specificregions of the country, and is managed ac-cording to its own special requirements. The"vinifera grapes," or "European grapes," asthey are sometimes called, are grown in Cali-fornia and other areas with mild climates and,as said, descend from Vitis vinifera. They arecultivated in vast quantities in all majorgrape-growing regions of the world excepteastern North America. Some of the Ameri-can varieties have been introduced intoFrance and other countries that became in-fested with phylloxera in the latter half of thenineteenth century, to serve as stocks for thebetter kinds of European vines, because theirroots suffer less injury from attacks of thisinsect than do European species.

Vitis labrusca produces purple-black fruitand has leaves that are dark green above. It isa rampant grower, ranging widely throughoutthe eastern United States, from New Englandto Georgia, Tennessee, and southern Indiana,and is hardy to Zone 5. Vitis labrusca is theparent of most of the American grapes now incultivation and is the mainstay of grape-growing east of the Rocky Mountains, with

the most extensive plantings near the south-ern shores of the Great Lakes.

’Concord’ may be the most famous Ameri-can cultivar; it is certainly the most widelygrown. Because of its wide adaptability it isproduced in almost every grape-growing stateof the Union. Although often considered aspure Vitis labrusca, it more likely is a hybridof that species with another species. In fact,most of the older American grapes are

thought to involve more than one species.Therefore, "Vitis labruscana L. H. Bailey," aname used in some horticultural literature,has been applied to American grape cultivarsof Vitis labrusca parentage.

’Concord’: A Hardy Grape for AmericanVineyardsThe story of ’Concord’ is one of the moreinteresting chapters in the history of NorthAmerican viticulture. While not the first oronly important cultivar developed in Amer-ica, ’Concord’ may well be the most notewor-thy. It and Ephraim Wales Bull, its originator,are the protagonists of the account that fol-lows. The past has been a long prologue totheir story.

Ephraim Wales Bull came to serious grape-growing and to the town of Concord, Massa-chusetts-after which his cultivar was

named-in a roundabout way. He was born inBoston on March 4, 1806, the day on whichThomas Jefferson was inaugurated for hissecond term as president. The farmhouse inwhich he was born stood in the area of Wash-ington Street that would later become knownas "Newspaper Row," around the corner anda mere five hundred feet from the house onMilk Street where Benjamin Franklin wasborn almost precisely a century before.Ephraim was the eldest son of Epaphras Bull,a silversmith who had left the hamlet of Bull’sPastures (now Bullsville), New York, forBoston. His family was descended from Cap-tain Thomas Bull, who had come to Americain 1635 on the ship Hopewell.

Boston was, in those days, a large, thrivingtown, and Washington Street, now one of the

8 ’j

principal and most congested thoroughfaresin the "Hub," was a village highway. Cowsgrazed on Boston Common. Behind the Bulls’house was a large garden where youngEphraim indulged a love of horticulture,experimenting in grape growing, among otherthings.A studious child, Ephraim received the

Franklin medal at school in 1817, when hewas only eleven years old. In 1821 he was ap-prenticed to Louis Lauriat in the trade of gold-beating-the beating of gold into leaf, thenmuch in demand by bookbinders and gilders.At about this time his family moved to nearbyDorchester, Massachusetts. While pursuinghis trade as goldbeater, young Bull devoted allhis spare time to horticultural pursuits, par-ticularly to small-scale grape growing, in hishome garden. (Bull raised the varieties ’Isa-bella’, ’Catawba’, and ’Sweetwater’.) Thiswas the period during which ’Isabella’ wasfirst grown in Boston.

In 1826 Bull acquired a shop of his own, andon September 10 of that year he married MaryEllen Walker, a relative of President JamesWalker of Harvard College. After their mar-riage the Bulls moved back to Boston, takinga small house on Fayette Street, in the SouthEnd. Bull was by now a first-class gold-beater,working long hours in a hot, dusty shop onCornhill (near modern Government Center).He continued to indulge his interest in horti-culture during his off hours, in the smallgarden garden behind his house.

Eventually, Bull developed lung trouble,and his doctor advised him to live in fresh airand away from Boston’s chill east winds. InAugust 1836, therefore, he quit Boston, buy-ing seventeen acres of land in Concord, atown located some twenty miles northwestof Boston. There the Bulls lived in a littlewhite house on the road to Lexington.Though he continued his trade as goldbeaterin a tiny shop behind his home, Bull lovedfarming more. Whenever the gold businessslumped he would have time to putter in hisgarden. His passion by now was the grape, and

the ’Isabella’, ’Catawba’, and ’Sweetwater’grapes he had cultivated in Boston had comewith him to Concord. He was unable to ripenthe grapes in open culture, however, even infavorable seasons. This was due, he said, to"the late spring and early autumn frosts,which we are liable to in this deep valley ofConcord." "

Bull had moved to an interesting townduring an interesting period of Americanhistory. Concord was hardly a typical ruralvillage. There, where "the shot heard ’roundthe world" was fired in 1775, the AmericanRevolutionary War had begun. Decades latera social movement, American Transcenden-talism, took root and flourished in Concordaround the writer and philosopher RalphWaldo Emerson. The land on which EphraimBull had settled made him next-door neighborto the Bronson Alcotts and later to the writerNathaniel Hawthorne, with whom he wassoon on friendly terms. During the years ofstruggle before he discovered the famousgrape, Bull was assisted and encouraged bythese and other neighbors and townsmen,many of whom were members of the Emer-son-Thoreau-Alcott Transcendentalistgroup. In strategic ways, many of which willnever be known in full detail, Bull workedalongside his Transcendentalist friends whenantislavery agitation reached its peak inConcord just before the Civil War.

Hawthorne’s son, Julian, recalled Bull inhis book, Hawthorne and His Circle. "An-other neighbor of ours," he wrote,

hardly less known to fame [than the Transcenden-talists], though in a widely different line of useful-ness, makes a very distinct picture in my mind;this was Ephraim Wales Bull, the inventor of theConcord Grape. He was as eccentric as his name;but he was a genuine and substantial man, and myfather took a great liking to him, which wasreciprocated. He was short and powerful, withlong arms, and a big head covered with bushy hairand a jungle beard, from which looked out a pairof eyes singularly bnlliant and penetrating. Hehad brains to thmk with, as well as strong andskilful hands to work with.... He often came over

9

and sat with my father in the summer house onthe hill, and there talked about politics, sociology(though under some other name, probably), mor-als, and human nature, with an occasional lectureon grape culture.

In 1841 Bull bought the Eben Dow farm,which adjoined his property, setting outmany trees, shrubs, and vines. The farm’s soilwas sandy, and a south-facing slope suggestedto Bull great possibilities for grape growing.Determined to develop an earlier-ripeninggrape that would be hardy in Massachusetts,he obtained from every available quartervines having local reputations for excellence.(He knew about Jean Baptiste Van Mons’success in raising pears from seeds and con-cluded that the same process could be appliedto grapes.) Again he was disappointed butpersevered-eventually turning to wild vineshe found growing nearby.He had been watching carefully an early-

ripening native of the northern fox grape,Vitis labrusca, growing in a distant part of hisgarden, noticing, when it fruited at the end ofAugust 1843, that it possessed at least some ofthe essential qualities he sought. The grapewas of good quality, and the idea immediatelyoccurred to him that another generationwould be a still greater improvement. Heremoved and planted it near his ’Catawba’vine, by which it was probably pollinated.Bull (he informs us) planted the resultinggrapes from the wild vine "whole, into theground, skin and all, at a depth of two inches,and covered the row with boards.

"I nursed these seedlings six years," heinforms us further, "and of the large numberobtained only one that proved worth keeping.On the tenth of September 1849, I was en-abled to pick a bunch of grapes, and when Ishowed them to a neighbor who tasted them,he exclaimed, "Why this is better than Isa-bella’ !" "

"I looked about to see what I could findamong our wildings," Bull would reminiscelater. "The next thing was to find the best andearliest grape for seed, and this I found in an

Ephraim Wales Bull in 1861. From Transactions ofthe Massachusetts Horticultural Society for theYear 1908.

accidental seedling at the foot of the hill. Thecrop was abundant, and of very good qualityfor a wild grape. I sowed the seed in theautumn of 1843. Among them the Concordwas the only one worth saving."The exact source of the accidental seedling

is obscure. Bull had bought his house inConcord in 1836. That year, he told LibertyHyde Bailey decades later, boys brought upfrom the Concord River some wild grapes andscattered them about the place. A seedlingappeared in a corner of the garden, evidentlythe offspring of these truant grapes.The stray seedling grew at the base of what

is now called Revolutionary Ridge, an inter-esting landform so named for the key role ithad played in the battle between the Ameri-cans and the British on April 19, 1775. Ex-tending a mile or so eastward from the center

10

of Concord, this sandy, gravelly ridge is akame delta that was deposited some ten totwenty thousand years ago in Glacial LakeConcord by meltwater rushing from the re-treating continental ice sheet. British troops,advancing from Lexington to Concord NorthBridge along the road that parallels the Ridge,passed Bull’s cottage en route to the bridge,and passed it again during their ignominiousretreat to Lexington and Boston. The Concor-dians, knowing their native terrain far betterthan did the alien British, who kept mainly tothe public highway, travelled across lots, onthe far (north and eastern) side of the Ridge,rushing from the Bridge to Meriam’s Corner,a fork in the road located only three hundredyards east of Bull’s cottage, at the eastern tipof Revolutionary Ridge. There the Americansambushed the British troops. In one of hisromance fragments, the posthumously pub-lished "Septimius Felton," Nathaniel Haw-thorne makes Revolutionary Ridge the sceneof a duel between Felton and a British soldier.

’Concord’ Makes Its DebutIn 1849, Bull paid a visit to the editorialoffices of the Boston Cultivator, telling itseditor, Samuel W. Cole, that he had a new andpromising seedling black grape that hewished to exchange for one of ’Diana’, whichthe Cultivator had offered for sale to its read-ers. Cole, who owned a nursery in Chelsea,had his foreman set the cutting out. It soonfruited, but little was made of it. Bull hadstipulated that it was not to be propagated forsale.

In the spring of 1853, Bull took the limitedstock propagated at Cole’s nursery, havingdecided that the best way to publicize the newcultivar would be to exhibit it at Horticul-tural Hall in Boston, during that fall’s meet-ing of the Massachusetts Horticultural Soci-ety. Accordingly, ’Concord’ was exhibited forthe first time on September 3, 1853, threeyears after it had produced its first fruit.

It is said that, through some mixup, the’Concord’ originally was exhibited among the

vegetables and was nearly overlooked by thejudges. In the perhaps embellished account ofa journalist, when the show opened and Bull’snew grape had not arrived,

two members of the Society went out to Concordand said, "Where are those grapes you promised tosend inr" "

Quite taken aback, Bull stammered, "I did sendthem in, by a neighbor. I was too sick to make thetrip myself, but I sent them just as I said I would."Very much puzzled, the committee went back

to the horticultural show. They rummagedaround and found the grapes hidden in a pile ofsquashes and turnips and other vegetables. Onelook and they knew they had something. Theylooked at the big round, juicy fruit that had rip-ened fully two weeks before any other grape andthen snitched a couple to eat. They smacked theirlips and said, "I’ll bet he girdled the vines-webetter make sure there’s no trickery here." "

So back to Concord they hastened, notebooksin hand, and gave poor Mr. Bull quite a going over.But he showed them the vines and some otherclusters-far bigger and better than those he hadsent to the show.Once convinced, the committee announced to

the world that, at last, a grape had been developedthat would grow in New England-bigger andbetter than any grown before.

The next issue of Hovey’s Magazine ofHorticulture reported that, "Mr. Bull’s new,early and delicious native variety, was exhib-ited before the Massachusetts HorticulturalSociety, on Saturday the third of September,fully ripe, being more than two weeks beforethe Diana was mature. It has not only provedby far the earliest grape we have, but also oneof the most delicious, having in place of themusky flavor of Isabella, the rich aroma of theCatawba, with which, probably its parent wassomewhat fertilized. Specimens were exhib-ited before the committee who say it fullymaintains the high character heretoforegiven it." "

"We are gratified to announce," Hovey’scontinued, "that Mr. Bull has decided to offerit for sale in April next, and has placed theentire stock in the hands of Messrs. Hovey &Co. for disposal.... It will be called theCONCORD grape, having been raised in thetown of that name, very near the spot so

. 11 1

memorable in the annals of our history, andknown as the Concord battle ground."When Hovey & Company introduced it in

the spring of 1854, it attracted considerableattention and was placed on the grape list ofthe American Pomological Society as one ofthe "new varieties which promise well." Itattracted still more attention in 1855. Thenext few years found ’Concord’ in the cata-logs of every nursery in the country, and itspread rapidly throughout most of the easternand midwestem states. Within the brief pe-riod of a year, ’Concord’ was growing in theMiddle West. One source, George Hus-mannn, states that in the winter of 1855 hesecured buds of ’Concord’ at Hermann, Mis-souri, from James G. Soulard of Galena, Illi-nois-half way across the continent. In 1858 8’Concord’ was placed on the regular list ofrecommended varieties by the AmericanPomological Society, where it remains.

Bull himself took a hand in promoting’Concord’. In August 1854, for example, he

corresponded with a Dr. J. C. Bennett of GreatFalls, Iowa, who he hoped would market’Concord’ in Iowa. "The Charter Oak and theConcord are entirely different in all respects,"Bull wrote.

The Charter Oak is very large in berry thoughsmall in bunch, coarse, foxy, and wild. The Con-cord is as handsome in the bunch as a blackhamburgh [the variety ’Black Hamburg’] and aslarge, delicate, full of juice, andhas a rich aroma-and as unlike a wild grape as possible. It is hardyin wood and foliage and berry, which is not thecase either with the Catawber [’Catawba’] or Isa-bella with me-both being infected by rot thisvery season, while the Concord is wholly freefrom any of these things.

By 1860, vineyards of ’Concord’ had beenplanted in Chautauqua County, New York. In1865 it was awarded the Greeley prize andcalled, prophetically, "the grape for the mil-lions." During this period horticultural socie-ties would maintain frequent contact withone another about new fruit varieties andcultural practices; by 1867 the Ohio Horticul-

The original "Concord" grape vine, still growing af ternearl y a century and a half. Photograph by the author.

12’ 1

tural Society was writing about the extensiveplantings of the "noble Concord" in Ohio andMissouri. Within fifteen years of its introduc-tion, thousands of acres of vineyards had beenplanted to ’Concord’ all over the country. Bythe mid-1870s more ’Concord’ had beenplanted in the Northeast than all other varie-ties put together. It had become the outstand-ing grape for both fresh and processed use.Fruit was shipped from the grapc belts of theLake Erie region to most of the major cities ofthe United States.

"The Greeley Affair"In 1866, journalist Horace ("Go West, youngman! Go West!") Greeley, editor of the NewYork Tribune, offered a prize of one hundreddollars "for the best grape for general cultiva-tion." ’Concord’ won. When the winner wasannounced before the Farmers’ Club of theAmerican Institute of New York City inOctobcr of that year, there was unanimousapplause from the audience. Many membersof the public later would express strong oppo-sition, however, among them Horace Grceleyhimself! A Dr. E. Ware Sylvester describedthe controversy at a Farmers’ Club meeting inMarch 1869 (Horace Greeley was in atten-dance), sparking a lively exchange:

An effort has been in progress to discover amongour native grapes, one which in healthfulness,hardiness and productiveness, should be adaptedto the wants of the million. To this end the prizeof $100 was, years ago, offered by Horace Greeley,and other prizes have since been awarded. You arewell aware that the Greeley prize was given to theConcord. This brought out a torrent of abusemainly from those interested in other vines, andeven Dr. Greeley, with his usual kindly feelings,thought it best to apply a Tribune soothingplasterto the wounded head of Iona island. [The cultivar’Iona’ was developed by Dr. C. W. Grant of IonaIsland, New York, which is situated in theHudson River about forty miles north of NewYork City.] To the base insinuations which weremade in the public prints, the members of theGreeley committee made no reply, and makenone now; they were willing that time and expe-rience the great regulators of agricultural mat-ters, should justify, as they were sure to do, theaward of the committee.

Dr. Sylvester proceeded to cite a largenumber of authorities, statements of farmers,nurserymen, vineyardists, and vintners in allparts of the country, showing that ’Concord’was more successful and gave more satisfac-tion than any other grape. Horace Greeleythen spoke:

As thc prizc I offcrcd has bccn directly alluded toby Dr. Sylvester, I may say that with the award ofthat committee I had nothing at all to do. Whenthey came to their decision I paid over the $100.But the end I had in view was not attained by thatinvestigation. I intended to stimulate the produc-tion of new and better vines, and hoped somegrape would be brought out having the hardinessand adaptability to soils and climates of theConcord, good bearing qualities, and, what theConcord wants, high and delicate flavor. But theaward was to the Concord, and I could never seewhat that man ]not Bull, but William H. Gold-smith of Newark, New Jersey, who recently hadexhibited the ’Concord’ at a fruit show of theAmerican Institute of the City of New York],whoever he was, did to deserve his $100. TheConcord was widely cultivated, and all my moneydid was to advertise a grape already known; thusimprovement was not stimulated, but ratherchecked. I am a little discouraged by the result,and do not propose to offer another bank note fora plate of common grapes. To my taste the Con-cord has no quality superior to the wild woodgrape of my boyhood. [Greeley grew up in NewHampshire.] I admit that it is hardy and prolific;but after all, is it much of a frui t? I hope others willtake up this matter, and at length brin out a grapehardy, productive, adaptive and highly flavored.P. T. Quinn responded to Greeley’s re-

marks :

As a member of that committee, a word of expla-nation may be in order. There were two commit-tees. The first decided on the Iona, and Dr. Grantclaimed the award as the originator of the Iona.But there was a protest, a delay, a change in thepersonnelle of the comrruttee, and the feelingwith those who made the final award was that agrape like the lona, known only to a few amateurs,did not come up to the requirements of Mr.Greeley, and should not receive the money.

Greeley responded that

What I complain of is the eagerness of the com-mittee. I did not care if they waited five years, andthus gave grape culturists a chance to enter newvarieties. How do we know but Caywood’s grape,

13

for instance, the Walter, is as hardy and wellsuited to different soils as the Concord? If theprize were now open the Walter might take it foraught I know.

Dr. Sylvester countered that

Two years or more have elapsed since that award,and has any grape risen up that could contest thepalm with the Concord? This last fall, did notConcord receive the silver cup at Cincinnati forbeing the best wine grape, and the best tablegrape?

A Mr. Fuller assured Greeley that hismoney had not been wasted:

While I agree with Mr. Greeley as to the qualitiesof the Concord, yet I must say that he never putout $100 that has done more good to the farmersof this country. It arrested attention everywhere,

and people began to buy Concord vines who neverbought before. Ithas been the means of planting avine in 10,000, yes, 100,000 yards and gardens. Ofcourse we are not to rest in the Concord; but it isso much better than no grape, besides it affordsthe best sort of a stepping-stone to somethingsuperior.

Despite his harsh remarks, Greeley is saidto have relented, calling the ’Concord’ "agrape for the millions."

"

Life after ’Concord’Bull’s success with ’Concord’ did not end hisexperimenting. On the contrary, it led him togrow twenty-two thousand seedlings over aperiod of thirty-seven years, of which he se-lected twenty-one for introduction. A whitegrape, which he believed to be the most beau-tiful he could produce, he named ’Esther’ inhonor of his mother, for example; another,later production he named ’Cottage’, out oflove for his home, the little house whichsurvives to this day as "The Grapevine Cot-tage" ; yet another, ’Rockwood’, he namedafter his lifelong friend, Judge Ebenezer Rock-wood Hoar. ’Iona’ and ’August Rose’ wereamong his later introductions. Many seed-lings he left unnamed. At one time he had onehundred twenty-five vines that he thought

were worth saving; but, growing more criti-cal, he discarded most of them.

Marshall P. Wilder, a noted nineteenthcentury horticulturist, stated that, "Had Mr.Bull done nothing else for the benefit ofmankind, than originate the Concord grape,his name would be held in grateful remem-brance, while the fruit of the vine shall coolthe parched tongue, or the juice make glad theheart of man." Judge Hoar asserted that "hadBull conferred such a public benefit as origi-nating the Concord grape in the Old World,the government would have conferred itsrecognition upon him, whereas in his owncountry what he had given years of patientstudy and toil to attain, was accepted as amere matter of course." "

Ephraim Wales Bull received scant pecuni-ary reward for his work after selling stock toHovey & Company. He had sold ’Concord’vines directly at five dollars apiece during thefirst year, receiving a total of $3,200 in netincome, but almost nothing thereafter be-cause the commercial nurseries were propa-gating and selling it to the public in vastquantities and paying no royalties to Bull.He did garner many honors nonetheless: hewas invited to lecture at Harvard on grape

A corner of Ephraim Wales Bull’s house, showingBull’s workshed. Courtesy of the Concord FreePublic Library.

14 ’

Monument to the ’Concord’ grape and EphraimWales Bull erected in front of the Grapevine Cot-tage and the original ’Concord’ grapevine by thetown of Concord.

growing, for example; he was elected a

member of the Massachusetts House ofRepresentatives from Concord and waschairman of the committee on agriculture; helater held the same position in the Massa-chusetts Senate; and he was appointed to theMassachusetts State Board of Agriculture.The Massachusetts Horticultural Society

awarded him three medals for the productionof the ’Concord’ grape and the best seedlinggrapes, including, in December 1873, a goldmedal "for the production of the best hardyseedling grape, the Concord, which hasproved, after a thorough trial, so universallyadapted to general cultivation throughout theUnited States, and the most reliable grape forvineyard cultivation in Massachusetts."Later, he became an honorary member of theSociety.

Bull deserved to benefit handsomely fromhis dedicated and painstaking work in devel-oping’Concord’, but nearly all profits from itwent to the commercial nurseries. Had hislater cultivars been properly introduced theymight have brought him wealth, but because’Concord’ had failed to be profitable, he hatedcommercial grape culture and, refusing to put tthem on the market properly, grew disap-pointed and embittered.

Thus, Bull had to be content with lesstangible rewards: much respect and affectionat home and a modest fame abroad. He sawhis’Concord’spread over the continent, leav-ing great wealth in its wake, while he, itsoriginator, grew more and more impover-ished. From a simple, frank, neighborly manhe became a suspicious recluse, spending hisdays tending plants in a small greenhousebehind his cottage. This became the chief sol-ace of his lonely later life.

Ephraim Wales Bull died on September 26,1895. The epitaph on his grave is an aptdescription of his life: "HE sowED; OTHERSREAPED." "

The True Place of ’Concord’Today, a century and a half after it was devel-oped, ’Concord’ remains the preeminentgrape of the eastern United States. It is welladapted to conditions in that part of the coun-try, whereas the European varieties are not.According to a recent survey, more than sev-enty percent of the grapes produced in thenortheastern, north central, and northwest-ern states are of this cultivar. As a progenitorof many other cultivars’Concord’ has an evengreater claim to fame. Among the morefamiliar cultivars of ’Concord’ parentage are’Worden’, ’Martha’, ’Cottage’, ’Niagara’, ’Dia-mond’, ’Moore’s Early’, ’Highland’, ’Cole-rain’, ’Brighton’, and ’Black Eagle’. A score ofothers are either directly or indirectly linkedto the family tree of ’Concord’.

Other claims have been made for the’Concord’, some of them patently false orexaggerated-although no doubt made in

15 5

good faith-some of them true. Local folk-lore, for example, claims that ’Concord’ andvarieties derived from it "saved the vineyardsof Europe":

Cuttings of ’Concord’ went to Europe directlyfrom Ephraim Wales Bull’s own vineyard in thelate 1870s or early 1880s, when the phylloxerawas devastating the vineyards of France. An agentof the Emperor Napoleon came to America toinvestigate American grapes. The agent visitedBull in Concord and was presented with a bunchof ’Concord’ cuttings.

The phylloxera is an insect, Phylloxeraviti folia? Fitch, that is indigenous to the east-ern and central United States. Imported intoEurope between 1858 and 1863 on Americanvines taken there for grafting purposes, it hassince reached almost every vine-growingcountry in the world. The first definite recordthat the phylloxera had reached Europe wasmade in 1863, in England; soon thereafter itwas identified in France, through whose vine-yards it spread rapidly. Within twenty-fiveyears it had destroyed nearly one-third ofFrance’s vineyards-in all, more than two andone-half million acres. By 1885 the phyllox-era had extended to most other grape-produc-ing countries of Europe and had reachedAlgeria, Australia, and southern Africa. It wasfirst discovered in California in 1880, butthere is evidence it had reached that statemore than twenty years earlier, having beenintroduced along with American vines fromeast of the Rocky Mountains.The truth is that ’Concord’-like Vitis 7a-

brusca in general-is only slightly resistantto the phylloxera. Other American speciesand cultivars derived from them are notablyresistant to the phylloxera, however; it is

these that provided stocks for susceptiblevines in Europe and elsewhere, not ’Concord’or its descendants. In any event, the folkloreis in error on at least one other score: "theEmperor Napoleon" died decades before hisagent is alleged to have visited Bull, and thereis no evidence that the French government ofthe time dispatched an agent or agents toobtain ’Concord’ from Ephraim Wales Bull.Representatives of the French government,led by Pierre Viala, did visit other Americans sduring those bleak years for French viticul-ture, however, even visiting William GilsonFarlow of Harvard University, who was acryptogamic botanist, but they would havehad little or no reason to visit Bull.

Nevertheless, ’Concord’ holds a venerableplace in American viticulture. After nearlyone hundred fifty years, it is still propagatedand planted from coast to coast, and its end innowhere near. Until ’Concord’ appeared,grape growing in eastern North America hadbeen difficult at best. Bull, by developing’Concord’, proved that native species couldbe employed in viticulture, and that viticul-ture could be made profitable in eastern

North America. ’Concord’ was only one steptoward the improvement of the grape, but itwas a crucial step. Bull’s success promptedmany further efforts to adapt viticulture tothe trying demands of the New World.

NoteBecause this article is an early version of part of a larger,ongoing project centered on the history of the ’Concord’grape, some of the interpretations and conclusions mustremain tentative.

Edmund A. Schofield is editor of Arnoldia.

Laura Dwight’s Magnolias

judith Leet

Determined to halt the decline of her beloved Back Bay neighborhood, civicactivist Laura Dwight launched a community-wide drive to plant hundreds ofsaucer magnolias along Boston’s elegant Commonwealth Avenue during theearly 1960s

Laura Dwight’s idea was to make Boston’sBack Bay, particularly Commonwealth Ave-nue, look as beautiful in spring as Washing-ton’s Tidal Basin-a great public welcome tothe new season. She foresaw the effect ofhaving the whole avenue bloom at once witha row of the most floriferous of trees, thesaucer magnolia-its showy flowers a richpink at the base and a creamy white at thepetal tips. And the trees were to be demo-cratically planted in the front yard ofeveryone’s nineteenth century Victorianbrownstone.

In the 1960s, Miss Dwight, a resident of theBack Bay who was then in her sixties, con-ceived of such a scheme for beautifying Com-monwealth Avenue and had the energy andpersuasiveness to carry it out. One contempo-rary who knew Dwight in gardening andhorticultural circles describes her as a veryappealing person: "It was like being pushedby a fairy or an elf; you couldn’t say no to her.I’m sure that’s why there are so many magno-lias on Commonwealth Avenue." A youngerfriend remembers her as "forceful, even

pushy-but pushy in the right direction." "

From her apartment on CommonwealthAvenue, Laura Dwight observed the once-

Portrait of Laura Dwight by Bradford Bachrach.Courtesy of Anne H. Jennings.

elegant Back Bay section of Boston deteriorat-ing all around her, and she became aroused,even irate at the apathy and detachment oflocal residents. Hoping to help reverse thisdownward trend, she devoted her consider-able energies to neighborhood-improvementprojects and became an early member andlater an officer of the Neighborhood Associa-tion of the Back Bay (NABB), a group workingto restore stability to the area.An activist by nature, she first involved

herself in small-scale beautification proj-ects-organizing house tours and gardentours, and front- and back-yard contests toaward prizes to those who had created themost appealing city gardens (often judged byofficials from the Massachusetts Horticul-tural Society). Such events encouraged resi-dents to clean up, plant, and care for theiroften overlooked yards. Although she at thispoint had no garden of her own, she spon-sored most of these events and signed upother sponsors, inviting them to a formal tea,often catered, at her comfortable apartment,filled with paintings, antiques, and memen-toes of her forebears.With the hearty approval of the NABB,

Laura Dwight carried out her first large-scalestreet-planting project in the fall of 1963. Shepersonally rang doorbells and convincedowners-some of them friends, others totalstrangers-that it was a good idea to plant oneor several magnolia trees in their front yards

18 j A

and to participate in a collective, street-longdisplay. She offered to provide free labor toplant the trees on a designated weekend, thematerial to enrich the soil, and a young tree,which would be delivered to the door. Theresident only had to agree to the idea inprinciple and to pay a nominal sum for theyoung tree.

Although some absentee landlords couldnot be located, a majority of those approachedagreed to participate. The residents at thattime were far from a homogeneous group-students, young married couples, transientsin rooming houses, administrators of juniorcolleges, and small-business people. But theidea had a logic and appeal of its own, andLaura Dwight motivated many to partici-pate. One supporter of the planting, for ex-ample, was Emil "Sax" Rohmer, involved inreal estate in the Back Bay, who donated twomagnolias to be planted at 3 CommonwealthAvenue, a building rented by the Frenchconsulate and owned by Oliver S. Ames.Esther Ames, Oliver’s wife, recalls planting amagnolia at 20 Gloucester Street andremembers that everyone in the neighbor-hood had heard about the street planting,either through the NABB or by word ofmouth.Much discussion took place in meetings

over the merits of Magnolia Xsoulangianaversus those of Magnolia stellata for theBoston climate; some argued against theearly magnolias altogether, nominatingother species that would be less susceptible toan early-spring frost (the white magnoliapetals quickly turning a dismal brown); somefavored later-blooming native dogwoods(Cornus florida); others debated which spe-cies would be better for sunny and which forshady locations. A compromise was reached,but Laura Dwight’s idea of the uniform plant-ing of the colorful, large-petaled saucer mag-nolia (Magnolia Xsoulangiana) prevailed forthe sunny (north) side of Commonwealth.

Eyewitnesses recall two successive yearsof planting between 1963 and 1965: the first

year saw the saucer magnolias installed onthe sunny side of the street along with a fewMagnolia stellata, the second year, dogwoods(Cornus florida) planted on the shady side.And, in retrospect, many would argue thatthe basic decision was correct: MagnoliaXsoulangiana is a neater, more compact treethan the dogwoods, which have a looser,lighter habit and often a less exuberant dis-play.When asked about the project in 1981,

Laura’s sister, Frances Dwight, then in hereighties, wrote: "Laura had read somewherethat Boston was about as far north as themagnolias could be expected to pull throughthe winter." Laura Dwight had also admiredthe magnolias already well established andblooming profusely in front of a few Back Baytownhouses, such as the Magnolia denudataat 6 Commonwealth, the residence of Mrs.Montgomery Sears (now the Boston Centerfor Adult Education).

There was, in fact, even before LauraDwight’s campaign something of a traditionof planting trees in the Back Bay. A long-termresident recalls that the original owners, inearly summer, would place white dust coversover the furniture and depart for their countryhomes. Therefore, they deliberately plantedin the small front yards of their city houses atree that would come into flower while theywere still at home to benefit from it.

Witnesses of the street plantings in the1960s give Laura Dwight full credit as themoving force behind the project: she was theone who made arrangements with nurseriesto truck in plants; she arranged for MIT stu-dents living in a fraternity house on Com-monwealth Avenue to donate manpower; shemade sure that seedling trees were given aproper start with loam, peat moss, mulch,watering (since the Back Bay was gravel-filledland, this improvement of the soil was pru-dent to ensure long-term success).An attractive price was set: eight dollars

bought a smallish tree for those who werewilling to wait for results (and even a young

19

The magnolias planted on Commonwealth Avenue as a result of Laura Dwight’s campaign were by nomeans the first to be planted there. This Magnolia denudata, which stood on the Sarah G. Sears estate, wasphotographed in 1933 by John C. Marr. From the Archives of the Arnold Arboretum.

20 J

saucer magnolia produces a few choiceblooms); those who wanted quicker resultsbought a larger tree at twenty dollars. Accord-ing to Frances Dwight, "residents’ gardenerswere brought from as far away as Beverly andDuxbury to help the student workers. Laurafound it very time-consuming, a great deal ofdetail with owners and nurserymen was in-volved." "

The late Mrs. Edwin Webster, a venerableresident of Back Bay, with a townhouse on thecorner of Commonwealth and Dartmouth,who always kept a colorful display of freshlyblooming flowers in her conservatory forpassersby to enjoy, also agreed to participatein the collective street planting. Her garden-ers, imported from her estate in ChestnutHill, planted three sizeable specimens ofMagnolia xsoulangiana that now take theirplace with the others planted by Laura

Dwight-all now forming a long row of thriv-ing, mature trees on Commonwealth Ave-nue.

Although many people have the impres-sion that "hundreds" of trees make up thedisplay, a recent survey shows that there areroughly as few as five and as many as fifteenmagnolias on the sunny side of each longblock of Commonwealth Avenue. In thriftyBoston fashion, the planting uses rather lim-ited resources to make an effective, evendazzling, display. And twenty-five years afterthe planting, the late-April appearance of thepure-white and rich-pink blooms is one of thememorable spring sights in Boston-espe-cially recommended for a leisurely walk on abalmy spring evening.

The Dwight FamilyAlthough many committee members as-

sumed she was a native Bostonian becauseshe participated so actively in many commu-nity projects, Laura Dwight was neither bornnor raised in Boston and lived in the Back Bayonly during her later years. Her roots didextend back nine generations in Massachu-setts, however, to John Dwight, who settled

in Dedham in 1634. (Twenty-eight of JohnDwight’s descendants had attended Yale by1860, and one of these, Timothy Dwight,became president of Yale in 1795.)

Laura Dwight was born in Detroit, Michi-gan, in 1899, one of two daughters of PercyDwight and Grace Buel Dwight. ColonelPercy Dwight was at one time president ofWilson Body Company, makers of wagon andcarriage bodies, a prosperous companyfounded by his father, who owned consider-able real estate in Detroit and Jackson, Michi-gan. (The two eldest Fisher brothers, wholater founded the Fisher Body Company andbecame principal stockholders in GeneralMotors, worked as young men for PercyDwight.) The family summered in Williams-town, Massachusetts, on a large estate calledHillside House (now torn down), with wellgroomed gardens, memorable roses, ridingstables, and dogs-including a decoratedGerman shepherd who had served his countryas a message dispatcher in World War I.The two daughters, Laura and Frances,

were educated by a German governess (bothsisters could recite German poetry-Schiller,Goethe, Heine-all their lives) and traveledextensively in Europe, a then common educa-tional path for daughters of prominent fami-lies. Neither sister married, and they werereferred to, in the polite phrase of the period,as "maiden ladies." Both of independentmeans, Laura devoted herself as a volunteerto Republican politics and women’s clubs;Frances was an accomplished horsewoman,amateur painter, and supporter of animalwelfare, particularly interested in savingwhales and seals.

Accustomed to many servants, two or

three in help, the Dwight sisters never

learned the practical survival skills of cook-ing or homemaking. Visitors to their Bostonapartment noted that neither sister was ableto make their meals, and that even making asimple sandwich posed a challenge. A muchyounger friend recalled that the Dwights’ teaswere legendary, especially when the sisters

21

were advancing in years. "Usually when youare invited to tea, especially in a proper Bos-ton home, you expect tea and something in it.At Laura’s, you might or might not get some-thing to eat-and you might not even get thetea." Members of her garden club agree thatLaura was clearly accustomed to someoneelse’s making the tea for her. The many Bos-ton ladies whom she mobilized respected herability to get results-while shaking theirheads in fond disbelief at her minimal skills atentertaining.

Encouraged by the enthusiasm generatedby the street plantings, and planning to domore such projects, Laura Dwight organizedand became first president of the Back BayGarden Club in 1967. The fledgling club wassoon asked to exhibit at the prestigious an-nual flower show of the Massachusetts Horti-cultural Society-to face the stiff competi-tion of long-established clubs. The new groupdeveloped plans for a small urban garden,incorporating a real, albeit tiny, Japanese carinto the exhibit, displayed behind a trellisedcarport, with many apricot tulips, grape hya-

Laura Dwight photographed in the Back Bayduring a neighborhood backyard-garden contest.

cinths, a flowering dogwood, and brickworkto enhance the setting. After some very activedisagreements among members about how tocarry out the plans-some threatened to re-sign on the spot-Laura Dwight diplomati-cally calmed everyone. To the members’unfeigned surprise, the exhibit was judged askillful solution to the design problem, wasphotographed for the Boston Globe, and wona blue ribbon.Some of her motivation for neighborhood

improvement might have come from per-sonal experience. After tripping on the bro-ken bricks of a Boston sidewalk and breakingher leg, she sued the City of Boston for dam-ages. "She was a gutsy lady to fight CityHall," her cousin Douglas Campbell re-

marked, "but she won the $4,000 she suedfor." "

Her sense of community involved her, as afounding member, in the Friends of the PublicGarden-to aid in the rescue of the once wellmanicured Boston park that had fallen intoweedy neglect. And her early interest in theenvironment-at a time when very fewpeople had even heard of "ecology"-led herto found the "Order of Preservation of CleanAir," or, as members called it, "Citizens forClean Air," one of her less successful ven-tures. When the group decided to disband, asurplus of $300 in the treasury caused someamused consternation among the members:no one knew how to dispose of the surplus ina way that would contribute to cleaning theair. One of the members and a close friend,Irene Pitz, remembers Laura Dwight fondly:"Laura was always interested in ’goodworks."’Among these good works, she was Program

Chairman for the Women’s City Club, ar-ranging for guest speakers; a director of theGibson House, a Victorian museum on Bea-con Street; and a member of the ColonialDames and of the Junior League. Like all otherBoston ladies, Laura Dwight devotedly at-tended the Boston Symphony Orchestra’sFriday afternoon concerts.

22

In addition to their distinguished Dwightlineage, Laura and Frances Dwight were alsoninth in descent from one John Mason, bornin England in 1601, who settled in Dorch-ester, Massachusetts, in the early seven-teenth century. The two sisters were the lastsurviving members of their immediate fam-ily. Toward the end of their lives, each sisterexpressed in private, to the same family advi-sor, her worry about dying and leaving theother sister to cope alone. The two elderlysisters died within five days of each other, in1983.

The Species SelectedLaura Dwight and her committee selectedMagnolia Xsoulangiana for their street plant-ing, the first magnolia hybrid and one thatbecame immediately popular after its devel-opment in the 1820s, the result of a crossbetween two long-cultivated Asian species.Experts believe that the oldest magnolia fos-sils are on the order of one hundred millionyears old, making Magnolia one of the oldestgenera of flowering plants. Since these fossilsare very similar to species still in existence,the plant is thought to have undergone onlyrelatively minor evolutionary change overthe millennia; magnolias exhibit one of thesimplest types of flowering structures, withsepals and petals that are similar, overlappingin whorls of three; with stamens arranged inspirals; and with single, unfused pistils.

Over the ages, magnolias were mainlypollinated by beetles (Nitidulid~ spp.),which also underwent little adaptation overinconceivably large spans of time. Together,the magnolia and its beetle pollinators havesurvived the ages. The beetle is thought topenetrate the closed bud, crawling betweenthe tight petals and entering the flower cham-ber to pollinate the receptive stigma-thestamens shedding their pollen after theflower bud opens and the stigmas have beenfertilized. This sequential ripening of themale and female parts of a flower preventsself-fertilization from taking place.

Producing the largest flowers of any woodyplants in the Temperate Zone (Magnoliamacrophylla~, magnolias have undoubtedlybeen admired by human beings since prehis-tory. Evidence suggests that the Chinesecultivated flowering magnolias at least asearly as A.D. 600-or fourteen hundred yearsago; by the fourteenth century, Chinese art-ists were decorating porcelain ware and otherart objects with accurate and aesthetic ren-derings of the magnolia.The Asian magnolias have the attribute of

blooming in earliest spring on barebranches-before any leaves cover or com-pete with the blooms. Known to be among themost skillful of gardeners, the Chinese, andlater the Japanese, learned how to graft,propagate, and force magnolias, selecting theaesthetically most desirable plants for templeand palace gardens. The Asian species intro-duced into cultivation were selected andimproved over the centuries, while the plantsremaining in the wild became increasinglyscarce and limited in their range.

By contrast, the American magnolias wereuncultivated trees surviving without humanassistance in the wilderness. The flowers ofsome species, such as Magnolia tripetala,appear more disheveled and less elegantlyformed than their more pampered and highlyselected Asian relatives. And even more sig-nificantly, the American species bloomlater-after the leaves have sprouted-and sothe flowers are less conspicuous than thoseof the precocious Asian magnolias, whichbloom on bare branches.

Europeans, lacking any native species ofmagnolia (all were wiped out by the last iceage), were delighted with their first magno-lias, introduced from the New World (Magno-lia virginiana in 1688, and later Magnoliagrandiflora) but quickly lost interest in theAmerican species after the first Asian magno-lias were imported in the 1790s (Magnolialiliiflora and Magnolia denudata). Thirtyyears after these Asian introductions, a cav-alry officer returning from the Napoleonic

s 23

wars conceived the idea of developing hybridsfrom them, trying to achieve the best quali-ties of each parent.

After Waterloo in 1815, Etienne Soulange-Bodin concluded that fighting wars was aworthless task, that both he and his oppo-nents would have done better to have culti-vated their own gardens rather than to havedestroyed those of others. He vowed to devotehis remaining energies to horticulture, and inthe 1820s crossed two of the Asian magnolias,the white, tree-like Magnolia denudata, withthe purple, shrubbier, later-flowering Magno-lia liliiflora, to achieve an extravagantlybeautiful hybrid, the Magnolia Xsoulangia-na, an immediate success and now one of themost popular magnolias planted in theUnited States. The great French botanicalartist, Pierre-Joseph Redoute, speedilypainted a single closed bloom for his Choixdes plus belles fleurs (1827-1833). ).

The Siting on Commonwealth AvenueBefore Commonwealth Avenue was firstplanned as a major city avenue in the 1850s,the land west of the Public Garden (fromwhat is now Arlington Street to Massachu-setts Avenue and beyond to Kenmore Square)was a mudflat, filled and drained by each saltyocean tide moving up the Charles River. Inthe 1820s the Boston and Roxbury Corpora-tion attempted to supply power to variousproposed commercial mills by constructing adam across the Back Bay a mile and a halflong, built along what is now Beacon Streetand running parallel to the Charles River. Butthe Back Bay, when completely drained, pro-duced unpleasant natural odors on themudflats that were exacerbated by the odorsfrom city sewerage also funneled into thearea. Many of the proposed mills were builtalong the Merrimack rather than beside theCharles.As complaints about health and sanitation

grew-as well as the need for more residentialproperty close to the city-the city fathersagreed, in a merger of state, city, and private

interests, to begin the task of filling in theBack Bay, a major engineering project of theperiod. Since no funds had been allotted forpayments for the work, the wily fathersagreed to pay the construction engineers,Goss and Munson, with some of the valuablehouselots they would produce with their fill.Utilizing the recently invented steam shoveland railroad, engineers excavated gravel froma site in nearby Needham and brought it ninemiles by rail to the Back Bay. In the initialphase starting in 1859, land was filled onaverage at a rate of almost two large houselotsa day; four thirty-five-car trains made twenty-five trips a day. Although filling went onthrough the late 1860s and 1870s, the finalphase was not completed until 1882.

Planners had laid out the area in what was,compared to jumbled colonial Boston, anorderly geometric grid, with five streets torun parallel to the Charles River and smallercross streets to bear names in alphabeticalsequence (Arlington, Berkeley, Clarendon,Dartmouth, and so on). The centerpiece of thescheme, Commonwealth Avenue, was to betwo hundred feet wide, with a center mall, orpark, one hundred feet in width, for strolling,and each house was to be set back twenty feetfrom the sidewalk, allowing for small frontyards.’ Arthur Gilman, architect of the Ar-lington Street Church, is credited with theoverall planning of the grid of the Back Bay,modeled on a smaller scale after the Parisiantaste for grand boulevards; George Snell andlandscape designers Copeland and Clevelandprobably contributed to the plans for Com-monwealth Avenue.

In the early years of Commonwealth Ave-nue, private townhouses were built at ratherrandom intervals; historical photographsreveal clusters of brownstones separated atirregular intervals by vacant lots. In one

photograph, taken around 1875, Common-wealth Avenue remains incomplete betweenClarendon and Dartmouth streets: severallots toward Dartmouth and one in mid-blockawait houses. And the generally bleak

24

Commonwealth Avenue between Exeter and Dartmouth streets during the 1880s. Photograph courtesy ofthe Bostonian Society.

appearance of the street is primarily due tothe absence of trees and shrubs. Over severaldecades all the vacant lots-through to Mas-sachusetts Avenue-were slowly filled in-more attractively by private owners and lessso by developers. During the 1880s, FrederickLaw Olmsted laid plans for diverting anddraining the Muddy River, a scheme thatallowed the filling in of CommonwealthAvenue to continue toward Kenmore Squareand Brookline Village. By the 1880s, Dart-mouth and Exeter streets’ empty lots were

completely filled in by adjoining brown-stones, each varied but sharing many com-mon architectural details. Gradually, theseprivate residences emerged as an Americaninterpretation of French-inspired (Second

Empire) townhouses-but overall a relativelyhomogeneous architectural composition. ToWalter Muir Whitehill’s eye, "the Back Bay isstill the handsomest and most consistentexample of American architecture of thesecond half of the nineteenth century nowexisting in the United States." "

Those Bostonians who first bought lotsand built imposing five-story townhouseswere from among the most distinguished oflocal families-and lived in a now-lost styleof many servants, much leisure, and a close-knit social community. As more of the BackBay was filled in, these citizens surroundedthemselves with the monuments to their wayof life: Symphony Hall, Horticultural Hall,the Museum of Fine Arts, Harvard Medical

25

School, the Museum of Natural History, andnumerous churches, private clubs, andschools.

But beginning in the Depression, and cer-tainly by the end of World War Two, the BackBay had lost its fashionable cachet; most ofthe original families had sold the brown-stones and moved out of the city-to proper-ties with more land and fresh air. Many smallcolleges acquired the former private resi-dences for dormitories and classrooms; theBack Bay streets were overrun with students.The now too large, elaborately paneledhouses, already broken up into apartments,were further divided into rooms for tran-sients. The once tidy Public Garden was nolonger kept up but was marred by brokenbenches, trash, unkempt flower beds. It wasduring the 1960s, a low point in the life of thearea, that public-spirited Bostonians pulledtogether to resuscitate the Back Bay with anarray of new, private organizations whosepurpose was to improve and beautify the city.Among them, on the front lines, serving onmany of the boards as a volunteer, was LauraDwight. The magnolias on CommonwealthAvenue were just one of her many projects-but one that remains a living memorial to herand one that will continue to bring refresh-ment and pleasure to Bostonians for manysprings to come.

Endnote1 It was this small, front-yard space that allowed LauraDwight’s planting project to be successful. Peter DelTredici of the Arnold Arboretum ascribes the survivalof the magnolias to the fact that they were not planted

directly on the street but were enclosed in their pro-tected fenced-in gardens. Magnolias, once they havebeen established for a year or two, are tough and hardyand require little care, not even prumng, except for theremoving of dead branches-qualities that make themappealing to the busy city dweller, who often knowslittle about pruning.

AcknowledgmentsEsther Heins began researching this article in 1981,when Frances Dwight was still living at 250 BeaconStreet and Laura Dwight was in Sherrill House, a nursinghome in Boston, after having suffered a severe stroke.She also spoke to Mrs. Charles Howard, whose latehusband was president of the Neighborhood Associationof the Back Bay when the street plantings took place.

I am most grateful to and would like to thank thosewho willingly spent time stirnng their memories overevents that occurred over twenty-five years ago: IrenePitz, Mrs. R. A. Sawyer, Esther and Oliver Ames, Eliza-beth Lay, Ann Twaddle, Sally Mead, Douglas Campbell,Liz Ann Chapin, Patsy Boyce Sidlowsky, Anne Jennings,Laura Dwight Lewis, Donald Dwight, Henry Flynt,Lyman Parsons, Daniel Needham, Polly Wakefield, andthe Reverend Schuyler Jenkins.

I would be pleased to hear from anyone who recallsadditional information about the plantings or aboutLaura Dwight.

SourcesFrances Dwight. Private letter to Esther Heins, July 5,

1981.

Neil Treseder. Magnohas. London: Faber and Faber,1978. 243 pages.

Walter Muir Whitehill. Boston: A Topographical His-tory. Second edition. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press, 1968. 299 pages.

Susan Wilson. Commonwealth Mall. The Boston Globe,May 28 1988.

Judith Leet is an editor and writer who lives in Chest-nutHill, Massachusetts.

The Arnold Arboretum: An Historic Park

Partnership

Sheila Connor

Just over a century ago-through sheer force of willpower-Charles SpragueSargent clinched a unique partnership that for the next 895 years secures theArnold Arboretum to all the people of Boston

How often is a stroll through a beautiful citypark also a tour of a university research facil-ity ? Not often, but if one is strolling throughthe Arnold Arboretum, it is. Designed for useby scientists and laity for the study and enjoy-ment of botany and horticulture and createdwith private funds, the Arnold Arboretumbroke with tradition. For, although the latenineteenth century was a harvest time formuseums, no university botanic garden or ar-boretum had yet been planned with the pub-lic in mind.

Following tradition, too, was the design ofpublic pleasure grounds: the prevailing "pic-turesque theory" stressed naturalistic design,avoiding the use of specimen trees or plant-ings. No tree was selected to display thedetails of its bark, leaves, flowers, or fruit.The botanist, however, needed to focus onjust these specifics for study and comparison.The challenge of meeting, in a single setting,the divergent needs and expectations of bota-nists and the general public alike requiredboth an exceptional designer and "creativefinancing. "

Charles Sprague Sargent, a well connectedBoston Brahmin and the Arboretum’s firstdirector, was just the man to find both. Heconvinced Frederick Law Olmsted, Amer-ica’s leading landscape architect, to create adesign that would be naturalistic and that yetwould arrange plants according to a specifictaxonomic scheme. Then, in order to serve

the dual purpose he believed the Arboretumwould have, Sargent had to persuade the Cityof Boston and Harvard College to undertake ajoint financial venture. His motives were notentirely altruistic: he needed additionalmoney to build and maintain the Arboretum.The idea of shared financing occurred to

Sargent as early as 1874, when the city beganto hold hearings on a public park system.Although this was four years before Olmstedagreed to work on either the Arboretum or thepark system, Sargent outlined his ideas: "Ithas occurred to me that an arrangement couldbe made by which the ground could be handedover to the City of Boston," he wrote, "on thecondition that the City spend a certain sum ofmoney laying out the grounds and agree toleave the plantings in my hands...." Evi-dently, Olmsted liked the idea, for he adoptedand championed it.

By 1880 he would write to Charles EliotNorton, professor of fine arts at Harvard,about his frustration with the Arboretumproject. "The scheme is that the city shalllease the condemned... land to the college ata nominal rent for a thousand years and thecollege shall establish and maintain the arbo-retum.... This is the whole of the scheme asI would have it. I am sure that it is a capitalbargain for both parties.... The sole difficultyis that nobody (feeling free to act) is alive tothe opportunity. I have been shaking Dalton[chairman of the Park Commission] and

27

A view of Bussey Brook in the Arnold Arboretum, taken m 1949 by 1’rofessor Karl Sax, who was theArboretum’s Director at the time. Photograph from the Archives of the Arnold Arboretum.

Sargent and have tried to stir up Mr. Pulsiferat the Herald...." Perhaps Sargent and Olm-sted recognized a political advantage in itsbeing Olmsted’s idea, for Sargent’s annualreport for 1881 credits Olmsted with the plan.

The negotiations lasted four years. TheArboretum’s nurseries were bursting at theseams. Sargent could not begin to implementOlmsted’s design without commitment fromthe city. The proposition finally came to avote by the City Council on October 13,1882,after lengthy debate, but it failed to pass,receiving only 36 of the required 59 votes.

Proponents of the Arboretum on the Councilquickly moved to set up an Arboretum Com-mittee, and Sargent and Olmsted stepped uptheir efforts to rally support. A public-rela-tions drive was launched that had the "Arbo-retum Question" debated in the city’s news-papers. November’s headlines read:"VOICES OF THE PEOPLE IN ITS FAVOR-THROWING AWAY A BARGAIN," "THEARBORETUM’S VALUE TO BOSTON,""AN EDUCATIONAL PARK AT A BAR-GAIN." Sargent pulled out all stops with thecirculation of a petition, to which 1,305 of the

28

most powerful people added their signatures.If Olmsted had failed to shake up someone atthe Herald, the petition certainly succeeded.A story in its issue of December 1 read, inpart:

The petition to the city council infavor of the Arnold Arboretum is

probably the most influential ever

received by that body. It includesalmost all of the large taxpayers ofBoston.... Nearly all of the prominentcitizens are there, including ex-may-ors and ex-governors.... The petitionwould be a prize to a collector of auto-graphs.

The campaign worked. On December 27,1882, terms similar to those Sargent hadproposed eight years earlier were agreed upon.It took another year to work out the details,but on December 20, 1883, a thousand-yearlease was signed, and an unprecedented agree-ment between the City of Boston and HarvardCollege began. As the earliest of Boston’s"Park Partners," the Arboretum has had along and celebrated history, and both the Cityof Boston and Harvard recognize the wisdomof this early arrangement, which is now in its106th year.Under the terms of the agreement, the

Arboretum became part of the City of Bos-ton’s park system. The city was to be respon-sible for the construction and ongoing main-tenance of the driveways and boundary fencesthroughout the Arboretum. Harvard Univer-

sity was to collect the plants, design theArboretum, and maintain the collections andprograms.The Arboretum has been consistently well

maintained since its beginning, and it standsout as the centerpiece of the famed EmeraldNecklace. Its original master plan has beenmaintained to this day, although there issubstantial restoration work to be done onthe Arboretum’s roads, walkways, drinkingfountains, and benches. Happily, the Parksand Recreation Department is beginning along-term program of capital repairs that oneday will return the Arboretum to its formerpristine state. Funds from the Olmsted Resto-ration Project will also contribute substan-tially to this effort when they become avail-able.The Arnold Arboretum’s fame as a botani-

cal garden has spread worldwide, attractingscientists and students from around the globeto study its vast collections. At the sametime, hundreds of thousands of people enjoythe Arboretum as a scenic and restful escapefrom the ever-increasing congestion of Bos-ton. It is a rare jewel created through theinspired vision of people who believed in thevalue of urban open space, and who under-stand the ever more valuable role of botany inmodern life.

Sheila Connor is Horticultural Research Archivistat theArnold Arboretum in Jamaica Plain.

Franklin Park, Boston’s "Central" Park1

Richard Heath

The embodiment of Frederick Law Olmsted’s agrarian ideal, Franklin Park vieswith the Arnold Arboretum as the centerpiece of the Boston park system

Since the 1890s, Franklin Park has been Bos-ton’s central park, the hub of an enormoussystem of parks stretching from the Back Bayto the newly annexed towns of Dorchester,Roxbury, and Jamaica Plain. Frederick LawOlmsted, advising the Boston Park Commis-sioners, recognized that Boston’s growthwould require large open spaces in which citi-zens could relax and engage in recreation. Inhis Notes on the Plan of Franklin Park ( 1886/, ),Olmsted described Franklin Park as having asquare mile of relaxing scenery that wouldease the harried city dweller.

Because it was intended to be an amplecountry park, it was placed, not in the middleof the city, but southwest of City Hall, ap-proximately four miles from Boston Com-mon, in what was then an undeveloped part ofthe city. Indeed, all of the sites considered forthe Park lay four to five miles from the cen-tral-business, government, and residentialcore of Boston, which had long been built up.Placing the new park outside of the centercity would perfect Olmsted’s theory that the"agrarian ideal" should be brought to the city.The new park was to be-or appear to be-

as little built-up as possible, with many con-venient footpaths meandering through it. (OfOlmsted’s parks, only the Arnold Arboretumand Mont Royal Park, in Montreal, havefewer structures than Franklin Park.) A cir-cuit drive for carriages would lead into the

Excerpted and adapted from the first chapter of Frank-lin Park: A Century’s Appraisal. Franklin Park Coali-tion Bulletin 1985~.

parkway, which would connect the otherparks in the Olmsted system and, by ameandering parkway, lead to the inner city.

A bucolic viewacross Scarborough Pond in Frank-lin Park. This and the following two scenes ofFranklin Park by Richard Howard are usedthrough the courtesy of the Boston Foundationand the Boston GreenSpace Alliance.

30 .

Thus, even while driving to the park, onewould never have to leave parkland.The 500 acres of Franklin Park (originally

there were 527 acres) were purchased be-tween 1881 and 1883, and construction beganearly in the summer of 1885. Streetcar lineswere just beginning to move out to the edge ofthe park, and subdivisions were begun in ad-jacent blocks even as the park was being con-structed. The principal reason for annexingwhole towns, such as Dorchester, Roxbury,and West Roxbury, had been to provide livingspace for the center city.

Franklin Park’s boundaries were drawn soas to lie along main thoroughfares, near exist-

A Boston Park Ranger teaches the basics offishing to a youngster in Franklin Park. Thepark’s square mile of natural landscape bringsOlmsted’s agrarian ideal to city children andadults alike.

ing transportation lines; its entrances, care-fully planned to open the park to as manypeople as possible, as conveniently as pos-sible, were built to coincide with transporta-tion. Two thoroughfares today are majorroutes into the city, and the transportationlines are important trunk lines for the metro-politan Boston public-transit system.

Franklin Park was designed for many uses,with five distinct landscaping features: a 100-acre woodland, a 200-acre meadow, a 7-acreartificial pond, a formal entranceway, and a30-acre playing field, all interconnected bywalks and drives, with three overlooks. Al-though primarily designed for passive relaxa-tion-in keeping with the times-it had acarefully landscaped playing field in recogni-tion that active sports were becoming moreimportant in Americans’ leisure life. Theplaying field was segregated from the passiveparks by landscaping techniques so that thetwo groups of people-those engaged in

sports and those engaged in less vigorousactivities-would not interfere with one

another. To shut out the city completely, athick screen of trees, some on earthen berms,framed the entire square-mile park.

Structures were limited to one wood andthree stone shelters, three stone bridges, astone arch that carried foot traffic under Cir-cuit Drive, and several flights of stone-slabsteps. This left the park completely open tothe imagination of the visitors. There were norestrictions on the spaces within the park ex-cept for the playing field and the acre or twoset aside for lawn tennis in Ellicott Dale(which today is a baseball diamond). In noother park had Olmsted been able to create atruly country effect. Fortunately, FranklinPark remains to this day uncluttered, espe-cially the lovely broad meadow.

Learning from Central Park-where fromalmost the first day people had begun puttingup statues-Olmsted planned a space for justthis type of commemorative sculpture in theGreeting, the formal entranceway. The Mallin Central Park and the Concert Grove inBrooklyn’s Prospect Park were Olmsted’s

31

Catching leaves in Franklm Park.

earliest responses to this impulse, but Frank-lin Park had far more space for statuary, con-certs, and large group activities than either ofthem, and that was exactly the original pur-pose of the Greeting. A long, broad berm tothe south was thickly planted with oaks andbeeches to separate the Greeting from the restof the more passive parkland. Even whileFranklin Park was under construction, publicpressure had caused the landscape architectsto revise their design by adding a pond, whichthey placed at the southwestern corner of thePark.

Franklin Park was the last urban park thatFrederick Law Olmsted designed (he retiredin 1895, when the park was nearly finished).It completes the theories of landscape designfirst put into practice in Central Park in 1858and in some ways perfects them, particularlyin the careful use of the site for the enjoymentof thousands of people, at the same timeproviding solitude for two or three.

Richard Heath is the former director of the FrankUnPark Coalition.

"Ful1 Foliage and Fine Growth" : An Overview ofStreet-Tree Planting in Boston

Phyllis Andersen

With the benefit of the experience it has gained over the past century and ahalf, Boston is well poised now to exploit the aesthetic and community-unifying qualities of street-tree plantings

Boston is a green city. The great Olmsted parksystem, its parkways, and its neighborhoodparks and squares are the legacy of enlight-ened nineteenth century planners and cityofficials. Despite inappropriate intrusions,changing physical conditions, different pat-terns of use, damage, and neglect, the integ-rity of the system, if not its details, remainsreasonably intact. Both the Commonwealthof Massachusetts and the City of Boston haverecognized the value of this unique system ofopen space and have created programs tofinance restoration of the parks, to reestablishthem as a major component of the specialquality of life in Boston. But a vital link in thegreen-space network-the planting of treesalong the city’s streets-has not withstoodthe complex forces of growth and change. Thecontinuous avenue plantings of earlier daysare now fragmented, and the strong visualimpact of tree-lined streets has been lost inmany parts of the city. What remains of ear-lier plantings are individual specimens ofgreat horticultural and historic interest, butthese are disconnected from one another andare often isolated from the community as awhole. As we reclaim park spaces it is impor-tant also to recognize the value of street-treeplantings for their environmental benefits,for their aesthetic and humanizing appeal,

and for their unique ability to define and linkneighborhoods across the city.Tree-lined streets scaled to human activity

persist as a standard for urban life. While thisimage may derive from small-town ideals, itnow serves as a protective device against theoverwhelming scale and continuous changeof modern urban life. The streets of Boston’searly Shawmut Peninsula were not lined withtrees. The narrow street pattern was based ontopographic limitations and on the Englishrural village model known to the first resi-dents.The street planting as we know it today

originated during the great land-filling andbuilding period of the mid- to late nineteenthcentury. The major impetus for that period ofplanting came from the grid, that traditionalurban-planning device. The laying out ofstreets at right angles to one another createdlong, uninterrupted vistas and gave designersthe opportunity to soften and enrich thosevistas with continuous, regularly spaced treeplantings.

Commonwealth Avenue and the Back BayThe full flowering of the grid format is seenbest in Arthur Gilman’s plan for Boston’sBack Bay and its axial boulevard, Common-wealth Avenue. Based on the new boulevard

33

schemes resulting from Haussmann’s rede-sign of Paris in the mid-1800s, Common-wealth Avenue is now a street defined both byits formal tree planting and by its controlledbuilding fa~ades. To the credit of its earlysupporters and, perhaps, to the bemusementof its current protectors, CommonwealthAvenue has become a paradigm of elegant,sophisticated urban life.

In 1880 Charles Dalton, Chairman of theBoard of Park Commissioners, asked Freder-ick Law Olmsted and Charles SpragueSargent to develop a planting plan forGilman’s boulevard. Their plan, based on theneed for a dignified vista and for responsibleplanting standards, recommended a doublerow of a single species. City officials over-ruled them, however, basing their decision onthe need for short-term effect, and the Com-monwealth Avenue Mall was planted with arow of four trees and a mixed planting ofAmerican, English, and European elms. Thecrowded conditions predicted by Olmstedand Sargent quickly prevailed, but unfore-seen and more devastating was Dutch elmdisease, which has progressively killed mostof the original planting.To break the monoculture that exacerbated

this problem, a dedicated private group hasreplanted Commonwealth Avenue with avariety of species. Elm varieties thought to bedisease resistant were used first; when theseproved unreliable, zelkovas, maples, sweetgums, and green ashes were introduced. Theresulting mixed planting may be more hortic-ulturally responsible, but it is not as aestheti-cally satisfying, failing as it does to providethe dignified vista so valued by Sargent andOlmsted. After years of being viewed as aneighborhood street, the CommonwealthAvenue Mall has become a focal point forvisitors to the city. There is now a clear needfor the city to develop a visual policy to guidefuture planting on the Mall. In the last fewyears there has been an enormous resurgence

Commonwealth Avenue between Exeter andDartmouth streets during the 1880s. Photographcourtesy of the Bostonian Society.

of interest in boulevard restoration and de-

sign that has, in turn, stimulated interest informal tree-planting techniques. Common-wealth Avenue is looked to as a model forboth urban designers and developers whoseek to impart a sophisticated, expansiveimage to their projects.

Despite the problems of disease and over-crowding, the one hundred-foot-wide plant-ing strip of the Commonwealth Avenue Mallhas sustained tree growth for over a century.Other street plantings in the Back Bay rele-gated to tree pits have not fared so well. LowerBeacon Street, for example, had a major plant-ing of little-leaf lindens early this century.Very few specimens remain. On the otherhand, Beacon Street, as it enters Brookline,still benefits from the road layout designed byOlmsted, which includes a deep plantingstrip that still supports mature shade trees.Many of the London plane trees planted someyears ago on Boylston Street have been de-stroyed or seriously damaged. Current plans

34 ~ t

to transform this important commercialstreet into a Champs Elysees type of boule-vard offer the possibility for a very significanttree-planting project for the city. The widesidewalks offer a unique opportunity to planta double row of trees in some locations, toinstall continuous tree pits in others.The layout of the South End followed that

of the Back Bay, and planners for the city usedthe grid here as well, albeit more modestly.Differing in a number of ways from the layoutof Back Bay, that for the South End introducedthe English device of laying out streets

around a residential square, or park, and ofeliminating street-side planting so as not toobscure views of the square from inside thehouses. These small parks are still viable andcan best be seen at Union Park and Rutland

Square. They hold to the English tradition ofthe informal grouping of horticulturallyinteresting trees and shrubs.Several years ago Columbus Avenue, de-

signed as one of the major axial streets of theSouth End, underwent a major streetscape-improvement program by the Boston Rede-velopment Authority that included a majorplanting of red oaks to add dignity and scale tothis mixed commercial and residential street.Formal street planting moved into Boston

neighborhoods first along commercialstreets, then adjacent to institutions, andeventually to the smaller residential streets.Of perhaps some solace to municipal officialstoday, the care of the existing population hasalways been a frustrating and little-appreci-ated process.

Past Frustrations and SuccessesIn 1887 7 there were about 30,000 street trees inBoston, but their condition evoked the dis-may of William Doogue, Superintendent ofthe Common and Public Grounds and newlyappointed guardian of the street trees.

Doogue commented that summer workcrews sent out in 1887 to work on the streettrees did little to improve and a great deal to

harm them, cutting off the trees’ roots anddamaging their "nutritive apparatus." In

those days trees were also damaged by under-ground coal-gas leaks and, most especially, bythe gnawing habits of horses, who showedlittle respect for young plants. Doogue wenton to note that at least one-sixth of the treepopulation was either dead or dying becauseof the neglect, and that time, money, andcareful training would be required to replacethem in "full foliage and fine growth." "

The American elm was deemed by many inthe nineteenth and early twentieth century tobe the perfect city tree because of its uniquearching habit and tolerance of urban condi-tions. It was heavily planted in Boston andmost other major cities, and we are still suf-fering the loss of that magnificent tree. Otherspecies were planted as well and were quitesuccessful. Asa Gray, writing in 1881 on thenative vegetation of the Boston peninsula,commented that a number of species im-ported from Europe had quickly adapted toconditions on Boston’s streets. Gray makesspecial note of the Norway maple, the little-leaf linden, and the horsechestnut.Tracing the types of professionals respon-

sible for planting street trees reveals the shift-ing roles of professionals in urban planning.The great avenues of Europe were laid out andsupervised by architects and engineers-Baron Haussmann, Jean Charles Alphand,John Nash. They participated in very specificways in the placement of trees and the selec-tion of species. The highest value in thisprocess was the artistic arrangement of theplantings. In Boston, after architects and

engineers had laid out streets and prescribedplanting areas, municipal employees with avariety of backgrounds and skills would becalled upon to maintain plantings. At theturn of the century a very significant state laworganized shade-tree care on a municipallevel. In 1899, the Massachusetts legislaturepassed an "act to codify and amend the lawsrelative to the preservation of trees." It man-

35

dated the appointment of a tree warden forevery city and town in the Commonwealth.The first law of its kind in the country, itindicated the high value that the Common-wealth of Massachusetts placed on its shadetrees. Today, the complexity of planting andmaintaining trees requires a team: a land-scape architect, an arborist-horticulturist, asoil specialist, and, perhaps, an engineer.

Planting for the FutureAs we look to the future, several issues needto be fully and thoughtfully addressed as weseek ~ to restore, enhance, and rethink ourstreet plantings. The most visible issues toresidents, aside from maintenance, are spe-cies selection and planting method. Somespecies, such as Norway maple and little-leaflinden, have been overplanted in Boston. As aresult, their faults and limitations have beenmagnified. As Ernest Wilson, Keeper of theArnold Arboretum, said of trees for streetplanting, "they must be veritable angelsamong trees." Like cornices and windowmullions, trees become fashionable, and theiruse is dictated more by out-of-context tastethan by an integration of design and horticul-tural requirements.The honey locust, so admired by architects

for its light, transparent foliage and by ar-borists for its resistance to urban stress, hashad tremendous popularity over the past fif-teen years. In addition to its extensive use asa street tree, it has become the ubiquitousurban-plaza tree. A number of South Endstreets have benefited from the planting ofthe honey locust, which creates a wonderfulquality of dappled sunlight and does not ob-scure the details of the Victorian townhouses.The Callery pear, a favorite of arborists andutility-line companies because of its small,compact size, is being appropriately plantedon many narrow streets of the city, includingthose of Beacon Hill. In other locations itcannot rival the mature effect of oaks,maples, or lindens. The green ash, another

Tremont Street in the mid-1870s. Top: Lookingeastward near Massachusetts Avenue, from topof the Chickering Building. Bottom: Lookingwestward from Dwight Street toward Montgom-ery Street and Montgomery Square. Photographscourtesy of the Massachusetts Historical Society.

3G : 1

current favorite, is tough and dependable butessentially undistinguished as a specimentree and looks best when planted in closegroups. Other, more exotic species are doingwell and should be used more often. Themature ginkgos on Tonawanda Street in

Dorchester, native to China and remnants ofa much larger planting, are horticulturallyvery significant and should have muchneeded preservation work. Young ginkgoplantings on Appleton Street in the South Endand on Bowker Street in Government Centerare very successful. The katsura, a very beau-tiful tree and also native to China, could alsobe used more widely in Boston. Investigationsmust also be made into enlarging the numberof small, upright growing species used inBoston. The North End, Charlestown, andBeacon Hill all have very narrow streetswhere tree growth is severely restricted.

Street trees in Boston, as in every othermajor city, are traditionally planted in treepits cut into the sidewalk. Continuing thistradition is important, but too many tree-pitplantings are failing to rely on this methodexclusively. Restricted planting area, poorsoil and drainage, lack of water, and excessivedamage from cars and trucks have been re-peatedly enumerated as the causes of poorsurvival rates. New methods of public treeplanting must be used. Continuous plantingstrips-long, streetside planting areas wheretree roots have room to spread in larger areasof soil are one solution. Off-street grove plant-ing is another option. Many areas of this cityare too narrow for planting. They create pe-destrian hazards and impossible survivalconditions for the trees. Tree planting on verynarrow streets can only be reasonably viewedas temporary planting and probably should bedone with private funds.

There is a whole body of state and munici-pal laws concerning the ownership and ste-wardship of public trees. Legally, the City ofBoston and its designated agency, the Depart-ment of Parks and Recreation, has jurisdic-tion over street trees on public property. TheBoston Parks Department has made a firmcommitment to improve both the street-treepopulation of the city and the professionalmanagement of that population. But no majorcity in this country relies exclusively on cityfunding and city labor to plant and maintainpublic trees. Many private nonprofit and vol-unteer groups devoted to public street-treeplanting and care have been organized anddeveloped over the past twenty years. Friendsof the Urban Forest in San Francisco and theNew York City Street Tree Consortium havedone significant work in those cities as coop-erative partners with city government to fundand maintain new plantings and, most impor-tantly, to highlight the value of trees to thecity.Trees are often seen as an end product of

gentrification. Yet many cities have shownthat community feeling and action can beinitiated around tree planting as the begin-ning of a neighborhood-improvement proc-ess. Trees in Boston have a long tradition, but,as we have seen, tradition alone does notsustain trees. Trees must be valued, and theirneeds and idiosyncrasies must be understood.The maintenance and replenishment of outstreet trees must be accepted as a continuousprocess.

Phyllis Andersen, a landscape design consultant, isexecutive directorof the Shade TreeAdvisory Commit-tee for the City of Boston.

"So Near the Metropolis"-Lynn Woods, a SylvanGem in an Urban Setting

Elizabeth Hope Cushing

Having slowly and inexorably declined for the better part of a century, the Cityof Lynn’s 2,300-acre Lynn Woods Reservation now seems due for a dramaticreversal of fortunes

Lynn Woods has served as an important source for municipal water and as a com-munity recreation area for more than a century. But the woodland and water reser-vation of more than 2,000 acres has significance well beyond its value for the Cityof Lynn, Massachusetts. The story of the creation of this forest park and its reser-voirs is intimately tied to the emergence of national trends in natural area conserva-tion, regional landscape planning, recreation and American attitudes towards thewilderness. While the Woods have been neglected or abused for many years, thequalities that inspired the late nineteenth century citizens of Lynn to create thisprogressive municipal park still exist and merit careful nurture for future genera-tions.

-From Historic Landscape Report, Lynn Woods, Lynn, Massachusetts.Prepared for the Olmsted Historic Landscape Preservation Program,Department of Environmental Management, Commonwealth of Massa-chusetts. Boston: American and New England Studies Program, BostonUniversity, 1986.

38

In 1985 the Massachusetts Legislature appro-priated thirteen million dollars toward therestoration of twelve parks in Massachusettsthat Frederick Law Olmsted designed. In

doing so, the Legislature set in motion an am-bitious and farsighted course of action in-tended, in part, to set a precedent for otherstates with Olmsted-designed parks, as wellas to create a structure-the Olmsted His-toric Landscape Preservation Program (a partof the Massachusetts Department of Environ-mental Management)-that would facilitatefurther restoration of Olmstedian and otherimportant open spaces in Massachusetts.Among the cities chosen to receive funds,Lynn, Massachusetts, was awarded over twomillion dollars to restore two areas: HighRock, a three-acre park in the middle of thecity, and the Lynn Woods Reservation, a tractof land at the outskirts of the metropoliscovering approximately twenty-threehundred acres of undulating woodland andcontaining four bodies of water used as reser-voirs by the City of Lynn.

Enormous historical significance is invari-ably attached to the early settlement of suchMassachusetts towns as Hingham andIpswich, Cambridge and Boston. Yet manytowns, founded at very nearly the same timeas they, have meandered into the twentiethcentury all but unknown beyond their ownboundaries. Such a town is Lynn, Massachu-setts. Situated some eleven miles northeast ofthe State House in Boston, Lynn nestles in acurve of the North Shore. Originally itstretched six miles along the shore and fivemiles inland, into a rich, undulating wood-land known as the Lynn Woods.The written history of the Lynn Woods

dates back to records of the Pawtucket Indi-ans’ using the area as a hunting ground andthe settling of the Lynn area by Europeans in1629. The forest lands were held in commonat that time for the use of the entire commu-nity for the gathering of timber and fuel.Fortunately for posterity an early resident ofLynn, William Wood, returned to Englandand published a book in 1634 entitled New

Englands Prospect. In it he describes thewaters in the forest streams of Lynn as "fardifferent from the waters of England, beingnot so sharp but of a fatter substance, and amore jettie color, it is thought there can be nobetter water in the world."1 Wood went on todescribe in detail the kinds of wood that weregarnered from the forest and the uses to whi chthe wood was put, resorting even to verse:

Trees both in hi!!s anrlplaines, in plenty de,?he long !iv iI Oal~e, anrl mournefu!lCyprr:s tree,Sl~.ie towring pines, anclCheftnuts coaterlrough,The laftiacg Cerlar, witfi the ’Walnut tough:The rozin rlropping’fiire for mafts in ufe,The doatmen feel~e for Oares light, neategrozune

fprewse,?de drittlx r~fh, tF,e ever tremdling Slfpes,‘pFe droa~I fprea~I’Elme, wfiofe concave har6ours

wafpes,The water fpungie ~flergoorlfor nought,Sma!!‘El.~lerne dy th’ In~Lian ~jletchers fouglit,The l~nottie Maple, pa!!irlBirtch, 9-lawthornes,‘Ihe 9forne dounrL tree that to be cloven fcornes;‘Which from the ten~fer Nine oft tal~es his fpoufe,~lNlw twin~fs imdracing armes about his doughes.‘Within this Inrlian Orcharrlfruites 6e fome,The ru~lrlie Cherrie, anr! the jettie Plumde,Snal~e murthering 9laze!!, with fweet

Saxaphrage,~lNhofe fpurnes in deere a!layes hot fevers rage.The DiarsShumach, with more trees there 6e,’That are dothgoorl to ufe, anrf rare to fee.

One of the earliest structures in LynnWoods was a stone bridge built over one of thestreams. The bridge became known as PennyBridge and the stream as Penny Brook-foreach man who used this convenient access tothe Woods for fuel gathering was charged onepenny until the bridge was paid for.

Wolves and Pirates Prowl Lynn WoodsIn 1686 the white inhabitants of Lynn offi-cially purchased the land they had settled onand the surrounding woodlands from theNative Americans for seventy-five dollars.

39

Agitation for the division of all commonlands began in 1693, but it was not until 1706that the Town Meeting voted to divide themamong the landholders of the town.

Certain universal menaces drew the

townspeople together in the Woods nonethe-less : wolf pits, which exist to this day, al-though the authenticity of their use has beencalled into question, were supposedly dug inthe early seventeenth century to confront thedanger presented to livestock. As late as 1735 5there are town records of two days in August

being set aside for a general killing of wolvesin Lynn Woods.

Probably the most significant remnantfrom the seventeenth-century period of theWoods involves their link with pirate lore andpirate treasure. The tale was often told of aship anchoring near Lynn Harbor. Four pi-rates rowed ashore and left silver in exchangefor handcuffs and leg irons made for them atthe nearby Saugus Iron Works (Saugus waspart of Lynn at that time). They then disap-peared, only to return, purportedly depositing

An earlymap of Lynn, Massachusetts. Saugus was set of f from Lynn in I815. Naumkeagis nowcalled Salem,and Winnisimet is Chelsea.

40

a treasure of great magnitude within a naturalcave in a rocky portion of Lynn Woods. Whenthey once again appeared, three of them werecaptured, tried, and hanged. The fourth, aman named Thomas Veal, escaped and hid inthe natural cave where the treasure was bur-ied. There he dwelt, periodically mendingshoes for the people of the town in order tobuy supplies, but chiefly secluding himself athis hideout. Several different versions of thepirate’s life have been told, but in one respectthey all concur. In the year 1658 there was anearthquake that shook Lynn severely. Tho-

Penny Brook in Lynn Woods, so named because it tcost the early English settlers a penny to use astone bridge that was built over the brook as amore convenient means of access to the Woods’supply of timber. The one-penny tolls financedconstruction of the bridge.

mas Veal was in his treasure cave at the time.The rock above splintered and fell in uponhim, entombing Veal forever with his ill-

gotten hoard. From that time onward the spothas been called Dungeon Rock. News of theburied treasure continued to echo throughthe years, creating a never-ending interest inthe site.The Woods continued to be used through-

out the eighteenth and early nineteenth cen-tury as it had always been-for fuel. A grow-ing number of people, however, came to ap-preciate the forest for its sylvan beauty. Chief

Wolf pits in the Ox Pasture of Lynn Woods, re-minders of New England’s primeval wilderness.These were baited, stone-lined traps designed tocatch wolves, which in colonial times were acommon threat to people and livestock alike. Oneage-old tale tells of an Indian woman who fell intoone of these traps and found herself face to facewith an incarcerated wolf. According to the tale,the two spent the night in terror, cowering in theirrespective corners, until help arrived the nextmorning.

41

among these enthusiasts was a self-educatedbotanist by the name of Cyrus M. Tracy. ALynn resident from his early youth, Tracyroamed the wooded areas of Essex Countyand recorded specimens of botanical and geo-logical interest that he observed in his travels.In 1850 he formed the Exploring Circle withfour other Lynn residents, a group dedicatedto the exploration and recording of the plants,animals, and geological phenomena of thearea. They made frequent field trips to theWoods to gather information, and each mem-ber was required to present papers and reports

monthly to the Circle. Part of their charterincluded the measurement, exploration, andrecording of areas of Lynn Woods previouslylittle known to local residents.

The Spiritualists Take Up the SearchIn 1851 another chapter in the history of theWoods opened as well. Lynn had become agathering place for Spiritualists, an increas-ing force in the mid-nineteenth century. Aman named Hiram Marble from Charlton,Massachusetts, felt himself called to theLynn Woods to follow up on the legend of

At the end of a circuitous cartpath leading from the town of Lynn to Dungeon R ock (in background HiramMarble and his son Edwin built a "prim little cottage... cozily situated on a sort of shelf. " They soon madea garden and transformed the cart path into a carriage road.

42 , J

Dungeon Rock and its buried treasure. Hepurchased the Rock and five acres surround-ing it, and fell to the task which was toconsume all of his resources and the rest of hislife: finding Thomas Veal’s hoard. There islittle doubt that it was his deep belief inSpiritualism that motivated him, for therewas no reward and little gratification for thisparticular life’s work. Marble consulted fre-quently with mediums, who would makecontact with the spirits. The spirits, in turn,would guide him where to go next. For thefirst few months he lived alone at the site,digging straight into the hillside. Six monthslater fear of collapse made him discontinuethat route and begin in a more circuitousmanner. The bits of stone to be seen on thehillside to this day date from the blasting ofthat period.

Marble brought his family to join him, inparticular Edwin Marble, his son, whoworked all of his life as well to find thetreasure. Together they built a house for theMarble family to dwell in. In the summer of1855 they laid out a carriage way from theRock to the town of Lynn. This road, accord-ing to the reminiscences of Charles O. Stick-ney, who visited the site in his youth, was a"rude, newly made road, now down a suddenand almost breakneck descent, now aroundthe base of a hill, the sharp curve so narrowand sidelong as to threaten an upset, withpartial openings affording glimpses of wildravines and lovely dells."Z Stickney was in ahorse and wagon, but today the road to thesite remains steep and winding. Stickney andhis friend saw a "prim little cottage ... cozilysituated on a sort of shelf,"3 with HiramMarble himself on the roof building a chim-ney. The Marbles opened the tunnel theywere excavating to tourists in order to raisemoney for the project. A later visitor observedthat above the grated door to the tunnel wasa sign which read, "Ye who enter here leavetwenty five cents behind."° Edwin Marblehimself took Stickney and his friend around,first inviting them into the house to view themuseum, which incorporated the variousproducts of the excavation, including a dirk,

the hilt of a sword, and an ancient pair ofscissors. Two pencil sketches of the pirate’scave, one with Veal’s bones in full view, hadbeen drawn by an invisible artist during aSpiritualist sitting at the house.The Marbles worked on. In 1856 a woman

medium, Nanette Snow Emerson, spent sixweeks writing a book called The History ofDungeon Rock in order to raise funds forMarble’s work. An intricate and fanciful ver-sion of the pirate’s tale is woven. In describingthe area around Dungeon Rock the mediumgives an idea of the ancient, wild beauty of thespot. She also indicates Hiram Marble’s in-tention for the site after he had recovered thetreasure: "All this is to be revived again; thewoodland to be laid out in groves, and parksand forest...."5 In light of the fact that thiswas literally the naissance of the era of publicparks in America, within two years of thecompetition for Central Park in New YorkCity, this seems a generous and enlightenedview for the space.On November 10, Hiram Marble died, and

Edwin Marble took over full responsibility forthe excavation, which he continued until hisown death in 1880. Hiram was buried inCharlton with his family, but Edwin chose toremain on the southwestern slope of theRock. Because of the burial laws a mound ofearth had to be placed above him. A largeboulder serves as his headstone and frag-ments of rock, blown out by Edwin and hisfather, encircle his grave. After digging andblasting one hundred and seventy-four circui-tous feet into the solid rock, neither mansucceeded in his mission, and eventually theRock was left abandoned by the Marble fam-ily. Another well known Lynn resident, thesinger John Hutchinson, wrote of theMarbles’ endeavor:

Hiram Marble told me he would either prove thetruth of Spiritualism or dig its grave. So for manydecades those earnest, honest men, whom theworld may call mistaken, drilled and dug andtunnelled.... There [the tunnel] remains, aneloquent evidence of what men will do to provetheir faith.b 6

43

The Exploring Circle Digs InDuring the period of the Marble residency theWoods were visited by the curious but also bynature enthusiasts. The Exploring Circlespent a great deal of time charting ar. ~i inves-tigating the area. In 1858 Cyrus Tracy pub-lished a book entitled Studies of the EssexFlora. In it he describes several spots in thelarge county of Essex, but he dwells lovinglyupon the area of the Lynn Woods. He consid-ered them botanically undiscovered: "Thosewho love pleasant and finely toned sceneryhave often found much satisfaction in thisvicinity, and the culler of choice old historiesand romantic legends has long esteemed it aproductive field," but the botanist seemed tohave overlooked it, being unable to believe"that a district so near the metropolis mightcontain some things worth looking for."’Here Tracy hits upon one of the unique andvaluable features of the Lynn Woods, both

then and now. "So near the metropolis" is atheme that the reader must bear in mind, forit is one of the essential reasons that theWoods are so important to this day.The Exploring Circle recorded the various

botanical wonders they came across in theirtravels and kept watch for the biggest threatto the forest: fire. The people of Lynn fromearly days learned to dread the uncontrollableconflagrations which raced through the

Woods, destroying acres of timber.The Circle was interested in geology as

well as botany. In 1858 a "Committee onBowlders and Erratic Rocks" was formed. Be-cause of ancient glacial paths Lynn Woods arestrewn with gigantic boulders. Once again,thorough descriptions were given of unusualformations, frequently accompanied byRuskinesque drawings of them. By the timeof the Circle’s peregrinations of the early1860s, the original town of Lynn had been

"Ruskinesque" sketch of a glacial erratic, a "rocking stone," in Lynn Woods. The Explormg Circle wasinterested in geology as well as botany, and in 1858 formed a "Committee on Bowlders and Erratic Rocks.

"

This drawing was made by Stephen Decatur Pool in 1854.

44

Sketch of the "Big Cedar," which once grew onCedar Hill in Lynn Woods. The sketch, which ispreserved in the records of the Exploring Circle,was probably made by Stephen Decatur Pool in1855.

divided into three communities: Lynn,Lynnfield, and Saugus. The vast woodlandwhere they roamed remained primarily inLynn, with sections in both of the othercommunities.

In 1869 Lynn suffered a trauma that had re-verberating effects upon the community. Aferocious fire consumed a section of the fac-tory district of the town. Officials felt it wastime that Lynn faced the necessity of provid-ing a better water supply, for the fire depart-ment had been hopelessly inadequate in theface of the disaster. Their first purchase of awater supply was in 1870-an abandonedmill pond in Lynn Woods known as Breed’sPond. A Public Water Board was formed.

Water and the Floodgates of DevelopmentThe development of the water sources ofLynn is of primary importance to the fate ofthe Lynn Woods for two reasons. By 1872 theWater Board was assuming the role of supply-ing all of Lynn’s water. This meant that therewas a rapidly growing need for water sourcesand water-storage facilities. The Lynn Woodshad the pure streams so glowingly acclaimed

by William Wood in 1634. It was a naturalspot for damming and establishing storagebasins, and the Water Board looked to fourbrooks in the Woods, Hawkes, Penny, Birch,and Beaver, to meet the demand. They wishedto create four artificial ponds, or storage ba-sins, for fire and for a general water supply.With this step the Public Water Board had tomake roads in order to reach, establish, andmaintain the new water sources. By 1873 adrive fifty feet wide and one and one-halfmiles long had been created around theBreed’s Pond Reservoir. For the first timesince white men had established the ancientcart paths, an inner section of the Woods hadmade more easily accessible to people.The effect on the Lynn Woods was obvious.

Suddenly land that had always been treated astoo rocky and barren to be used was open todevelopment. The alarm was raised for peoplewho wished to preserve the sylvan setting soclose to a growing town. A later park reportstates, "The Water Board’s ponds and girdlingroads punctured the Woods and exposed themto undesirable occupation."8

It is not surprising that Cyrus Tracy wasthe first person to recognize the threat to thisunspoiled environment. The 1891 Lynn ParkCommission report states:

His call, his inner inspiration was to teach thepeople of Lynn that they had in the Woods "anasylum of inexhaustible pleasures." ... He ledparties of enthusiastic naturalists to scenes ofbeauty and grandeur hitherto unseen, save by hiseyes. He dedicated hilltops and glens with mysticrites 9

And that is exactly what he did. He estab-lished "Camp Days" in the forest and pub-lished notices in the local papers encouragingthe citizens of Lynn to join the ExploringCircle in naming and dedicating various sitesin the Woods with elaborate ritual, speeches,poems, and songs. Tracy himself would leadtours for the sake of "rambling, studying thesplendid views, botanizing and the like," asan 1881 Lynn Transcript article describes it.Throughout the 1870s he endeavored to en-

45

gender interest in the preservation of theWoods. In 1880 the Lynn Transcript had edi-torialized : "Foremost among the publicwants in our city is the need of public parks,where the denizens of the hot and dusty citymay get a sight of the green grass."lo

By 1881 Tracy felt the threat to the Woodsso intensely that he guided the ExploringCircle to the decision to insure the preserva-tion of the Lynn Woods for posterity. After agreat deal of consultation with the city gov-ernment, on December 6, 1881, the "Inden-ture Adopted for the Purpose of Constitutingthe Free Public Forest of Lynn" was adopted.Tracy describes in the Records of the Trusteesof the Free Public Forest the method used toestablish the Indenture. He insisted that thecurrent mayor sign the Trustees into accep-tance as an official body connected with thetown government. He felt, correctly, thatwithout official status the Trustees of theFree Public Forest would never have been es-tablished as a permanent institution:

By [the mayor’s] compliance, the measure was in-vested with the character of great public benevo-lence, and thus admissible, under the statutes, tobecome a perpetuity. And thus was secured themost important point of all; for if any plan for thepreservation of a forest cannot be in its natureperpetual, it is at once liable to every kind of

change and derangement, and simply remains afailure." ‘

Tracy considered the Lynn Forest the"ancient legitimate inheritance of the peopleof Lynn," a reference to its many years ascommon land, and he set about gatheringland for the enterprise with unbounded zeal.

The Tide Begins To TurnThe nationwide park movement by this timewas an established fact of American life. NewYork landscape architect Frederick LawOlmsted was the reigning champion of urbanopen spaces-for the sake of aesthetic consid-erations to be sure, but also because he keenlyobserved that with the growth of cities, andthe consolidated living arrangements which

ensued, it would be psychologically neces-sary to ensure open spaces for the workingpeople who could not otherwise escape fromthe dust and noise of the city. "Breathingroom" became a ubiquitous cry, and by the1870s the enlightened elements of societyand politics were gathering forces to create apermanent park system for Boston. Afternumerous struggles the Park Act of 1875 waspassed by the Boston City Council. That June,the voters of Boston gave the plan their ap-proval. The first person the newly formedPark Commission called to advise them wasFrederick Law Olmsted. Thus began a longassociation between Boston and the famouslandscape architect and with his firm. In 1882the Massachusetts Legislature passed a billknown as the Park Act which allowed mu-nicipalities of the Commonwealth to con-demn and purchase lands within theirboundaries for the purpose of establishingpublic parks. This act was to be used by manycities and towns of Massachusetts as the basisfor their park program.

By 1882 the Trustees of the Free PublicForest were setting up their program in ear-nest. It is clear that they considered them-selves to be pioneers in the effort to preserveforest lands in the tradition espoused byElizur Wright, a Massachusetts man in thevanguard of forest preservation. Wright actu-ally participated in one of the Camp Dayrituals in the Lynn Woods. The Trusteespublished the Indenture in the newspaper andsolicited donations of land and money. "TheTrustees will come to you and urge you to actas benefactors to that which is, after all, onlyyour own interest."12

Subscriptions slowly began to come in asthe Trustees embarked upon their programfor the betterment of the forest. During the1880s they improved the roads and paths leftfrom the days of fuel gathering and livestockholding. They made efforts to clear out under-brush and thicket, both for fire control and forbetter access to the forest. Signs, seats, andshelters were provided, but vandalism rearedits ugly head, raising the need for a forest

46 1

patrol. By donation and purchase the Trusteesacquired acreage in small bits.

By 1887 a prominent and wealthy citizen ofthe town, Philip A. Chase, had become in-volved in the forest’s preservation. It was afortunate day for the Lynn Woods when hedid, for he was a tireless and enthusiasticsupporter all his life. When the thirteen acresof the incomparably beautiful Penny BrookGlen, with its brook, rare and wonderful wild-flowers, and seventeenth-century bridge,were about to fall into the hands of lumber-men it was Chase who rallied support to saveit and raised the necessary money to buy itand the surrounding land. Next, he aided inpurchasing Dungeon Rock and the area

around it from the Marble heirs.In 1888 the City Council of Lynn author-

ized the construction of a new reservoir, to beachieved by the damming of Hawkes andPenny Brooks. The new basin, a large one, wasto be established in the center of the Woods,in an area known as Blood Swamp. The con-struction began at once and with it came amore serious threat to the sanctity of theWoods. The swamp was set much deeper intothe Woods than Breed’s Pond. A park reportstated, "The construction of the water basinin Blood Swamp, and the road around it, madeLynn Woods more accessible and liable tohuman occupation. The gifts of land and

money ceased."’3In November of 1888 the voters of Lynn

were asked to exercise their franchise on thequestion of the 1882 Park Act. The resultingtally was in the affirmative, a resounding voteof confidence in the work already being doneby the Trustees and a confirmation of com-mitment to the idea of public parks. This wasthe impetus needed for the park movement inLynn. The Lynn Transcript of June 1889 ar-gued strongly for the protection that only apublic park could offer to the Woods:

The Park Act passed by the Legislature a few yearsago,-and accepted by our city-was the begin-ning of a movement which if completed willsecure results that are incalculable for the public

good. The public parks are the breathing places ofour great cities,-near and inexpensive retreats,where the tired worker can find rest and recrea-tion.... We have within our forest domain a

territory ... capable of bringing benefits to futuregenerations that can not be measured in money.For who can measure that social and moral educa-tion of communities, which is the outcome of aline of influences where nature and art unite in ap-pealing to every sense of beauty, and where themoral instincts are quickened by the presence ofevery uplifting emotion, and by the absence ofevery debasing or sordid suggestion." 4

Mr. Chase Makes His MoveOnce again Philip A. Chase moved forward toa leadership role. He invited the Mayor andthe City Council, the Water Board, park pre-servationists, and prominent citizens to theWoods, ostensibly to see the site of the newstorage basin but actually to inspire enthusi-asm for making Lynn Woods a public park.Among the speakers of the day was the WaterBoard chairman, who enunciated a themethat was to thread throughout the history ofthe Woods : the Lynn Woods’ "beauty consistsin its naturalness; leave it as nature has madeit and we shall have a rustic resort, so uniquein its character that Lynn will acquire a repu-tation from its Forest Park as it now has fromits unrivaled shore and magnificentbeaches."’S The mayor of the city was enthu-siastic as well: "It is impossible to estimatethe benefits to posterity that will accrue fromthis great enterprise.... [I]t behooves us tomake further provision for the prosecution ofthis work by an annual appropriation for im-provements." 16 And make further provisionsthey did, for in July of 1889 city bonds worththirty thousand dollars were issued to facili-tate the implementation of the Park Act.The Board of Park Commissioners was ap-

pointed in October of that year, with Chaseserving as chairman. The first two acts of theCommission were to hire a surveyor and toestablish a "Citizens Fund" for the Reserva-tion. This fund eventually swelled to overtwenty thousand dollars, thanks to the solici-tation and enthusiasm of Philip Chase.

47

Chase, who later served as a commissioneron the Metropolitan Park Commission, hadwritten earlier to Frederick Law Olmsted toseek his advice about how the Park Commis-sion should best superintend the Lynn Forest.Olmsted visited the Woods in August, andwrote a few days later to Malden journalistand park advocate Sylvester Baxter. The twomen were clearly working on methods topromote interest in the park movement andseeking ways to further their cause. Thisletter, with its promotional advice for Baxter,may well have been the inspiration forBaxter’s 1891 Lynn’s Public Forest: A Hand-book Guide to the Great Woods Park in theCity of Lynn.

In the letter the essence of Olmsted’s phi-losophy for the park is distilled, and Olmstedallows himself a certain candor reserved forpersonal observation. He thought the forest"a continuation of the Middlesex Fells" and"a roving ground not for Lynn and the north-ern suburbs only but for the people of Bos-ton"-important concepts to bear in mindconsidering how hard Charles Eliot later at-tempted to incorporate the park into themetropolitan system he created. Of primaryimportance to Olmsted was the question ofmaintaining the Woods in their present natu-ral state:

It should be to Boston something like Fontaine-bleau to Paris and Richmond & Windsor to Lon-don. The townspeople of Lynn do not appreciateit, I judge. Probably want a park or public garden.It is, what is so much better, a real forest.

In November of the same year PhilipChase, in his capacity as chairman of theLynn Park Commission, received Olmsted’sformal recommendation for the forest. Olm-sted first gave a brief definition of the princi-pal elements of a park and stated:

The most striking circumstance of your propertyis that although near by populous and flourishingcommunities, much of it is in a state of undis-turbed nature and as a whole it is in a singularly

wild, rugged and rude condition.... The reason ithas been allowed to remain of such a character isfound in the outcropping ledges and boulders andgravel with which its surface is strewn.

Olmsted’s RecommendationsThose very qualities that had saved the sitefrom development, however, made it impos-sible for Olmsted to envision a "park-like"character for Lynn Woods. He felt that "deco-rative features commonly seen in parkswould appear fussy and impertinent, everywhere jarring upon the natural scenery."Olmsted’s fear was that the impossibility ofcreating a traditional, formal park might pre-vent people from understanding Lynn Woods’value as a place for public recreation. Hestressed that most communities did not havesuch a situation offered to them, for the wildparcels of land were usually taken up withindustrial development or domestic architec-ture that were incompatible with wild areas.The advantage of the setting of the Woods wasthat, being slightly outside the city, it couldmaintain its sylvan qualities, containingmany points from which the city could noteven be seen, "supplying a place of refreshing,and restful relief from scenery associatedwith the more wearing part of the life of thetowns-people." "

Olmsted felt that a relatively inexpensiveprogram of management could be arranged."What is mainly required is that a method ofimprovement shall be pursued steadily, sys-tematically, continuously, for a series ofyears." Three main areas stood out for theprocess: to gradually thin the forest, allowingthe most promising trees to grow properly; tointroduce new vegetation at particularpoints, both to cover barren areas and toreplace unhealthy plants growing in moistareas with plants better suited to such sites;and, lastly, to "enlarge, strengthen and em-phasize a local character" by planting vegeta-tion that increased that character and remov-ing vegetation that detracted from it.The Park Commission set to work at once

to accumulate land and to put into effect the

48 ~ 1

wise counsel of Olmsted. By 1890 they hadacquired nine hundred and ninety-six acresand by 1891 the total acreage was up to six-teen hundred. This rapid expansion of thepublic holdings in part resulted from the factthat the Park Commission often pooled itsresources with those of the Water Board as thereservoirs required large areas of undevelopedland as watershed protection.

as providing protection for the visitors. Horsesheds were built at Dungeon Rock (one of thegreat favorites of tourists), carriage turn-

abouts were provided at important vistas, andwells were dug at various intervals.The Park Commissioners took their re-

sponsibility to the Woods seriously, and themembers were able to take a long view of theprocess of preservation. The foresight and

Whatever this city can do for the preservation of the forests,it is bound to do, not for the enjoyment of the living only, butfor the generations that succeed us. Fifty years hence thepopulation within a radius of ten miles of Boston, if the pres-ent rate of increase of large towns continues, will number notless than 3,000,000. These forest spaces for air and exercise,which can be provided today at such a trifling cost, will be ofinestimable value to the large population which will seekrelaxation and rest in Lynn Woods.

‘

-Park Commissioners, Lynn,Massachusetts, 1890

Roads and paths were cleared or built,thinning, lopping, and clearing of trees was anon-going process, partly to establish the in-credible vistas for which the Reservation wasfamous. The views from high Lynn Woodshills extend for miles and drew visitors frommiles around. Eventually towers for firespotting were added to three of the hillswhich increased visitor interest in the spot.Public transportation in the form of trollieswere brought from the center of Lynn toensure access to the park for everyone.

Special features of interest such as Dun-geon Rock, the wolf pits, Penny Bridge, andthe bodies of water had to be protected as well

wisdom of the following statement from the1890 report of the Park Commission reflectsa deep commitment to the park and to thecommunity:

Whatever this city can do for the preservation ofthe forests, it is bound to do, not for the enjoyment tof the living only, but for the generations thatsucceed us. Fifty years hence the populationwithin a radius of ten miles of Boston, if the

present rate of increase of large towns continues,will number not less than 3,000,000. These forestplaces for air and exercise which can be providedtoday at such a trifling cost, will be of inestimablevalue to the large population which will seekrelaxation and rest in the Lynn Woods." I

49

A topographic map of the Lynn Woods Reservation, compiled for the Lynn Park Commissioners in 1892 andrevised in 1910. The original map accompanied the Commissioners’ report for 1892, which was the firstreport to contain a list of the Woods’ animals and plants.

50

Philip Chase sawing wood at Bassett Camp, Lynn Woods. Bassett Camp was a small cabin built by WilliamBassett. The cabin contained a stove, dishes, and other niceties for both day excursions and overnight staysin the Woods.

’

Because of their obvious and unusual far-sightedness, the Commissioners saw them-selves as playing an important role in theforest-preservation movement:

The preservation of forests is becoming a questionof vital interest to the whole country. The de-struction of timber m the mountainous regionsthat make the watershed of our great rivers, hasaroused the public mind to consider the conse-quences. In our small field we may show a publicspirit, and bestow a care upon the forest aroundus, that may be a healthful example."

The Lynn Woods Today-And TomorrowAnd so the great forest tract of Lynn Woodswas established. I wish I could report that theinitial support received by the Park Commis-

sion had continued unabated. Alas, as in thecase of most public spaces, support dimin-ished as the years went by, despite heavy useby the public and valiant efforts on the part ofthe Park Commission and Park Departmentto maintain the forest through the years.Eventually, this valuable tract of public openspace reached the state of degradation it hascome to today. It is fortunate that the Olm-sted Historic Landscape Preservation Pro-gram chose Lynn Woods among its projects.All of the elements that made this Reserva-tion such a treasure in the past still exist.The restoration project is a fine beginning,

but maintenance and-more importantly-aresurgence of interest from the public will berequired to reinvigorate the site and bring it

51 1

back to the position of prominence it de-serves. As the Boston area becomes more andmore populated, the words of the 1890 ParkCommissioners’ report will become evenmore prophetic. It is time that the Reserva-tion again be a place of "inestimable value tothe large population which will seek relaxa-tion and rest in Lynn Woods."

"

If You VisitIt is important to realize that the presentcondition of the Lynn Woods Reservationbears little resemblance to that of its heydayin the nineteenth and early twentieth centu-ries. Budget cuts and a general lack of interesthave created the inevitable problems of over-grown vegetation, trash, and neglect. Vandal-ism and neglect are among the many issuesthat the City of Lynn and the Department ofEnvironmental Management are working toeliminate so that the work of restoring thepark to its original beauty, and the process ofbuilding an enthusiastic and committedconstituency can begin. Even in its presentcondition the Lynn Woods Reservation is anunusually lovely place in which to walk (carsare not allowed because the roads are badlywashed out in several places), but, as with anylarge tract of unsupervised land, it is wise tovisit with a friend or small group.

Endnotes

1 Alonzo Lewis and James R. Newhall, History of Lynn:1629-1864. Lynn: George C. Herbert, 1890, page 70.

2 Charles O. Stickney, "’Pirates Home’ in Lynn Woods:

A Maine Man Gets Reminiscent." Daily EveningItem, 22 July 1905, page 5.

3 Ibid.4 Kip Whitson, editor, Massachusetts 100 YearsAgo. Al-buquerque : Sun Books, 1976, page 12.

5 Ennesee [Nanette Snow Emerson], The History ofDungeon Rock. Boston: Bela Marsh, 1856, page 67.

6 John Wallace Hutchinson, The Story of the Hutchin-sons. Volume 2, Boston: Lee and Shepard, 1896, page273.

7 Cyrus Mason Tracy, Studies of the Essex Flora. Lynn:Stevenson & Nichols, 1858, pages 5 and 6.

8 Third Annual Report of the Park Commissioners ofthe City of Lynn, 1891. Lynn: Whitten & Cass, 1892,page 16.

9 Ibid.10 Lynn Transcript, 22 June 1880, page 2.11 "Records of the Trustees of the Free Publi c Fo rest," 12January 1882, page 7. The "Records" are located at theLynn Historical Society.

12 "The Forest Movement," Lynn Transcript, 21 Janu-ary 1882, page 2.

13 First Annual Report of the Park Commissioners ofthe City of Lynn 1889. Lynn: Whmuer & Cass, 1890,page 6.

14 "Our Public Park," Lynn Transcnpt, 7 June 1889," "

page 2

15 "The Lynn Free Park," Lynn Transcript, 28 June 1889,page 2.

16 Asa T. Newhall, "Mayor’s Address." City Docu-ments for the City of Lynn 1889. Lynn: Whitten &

Cass, 1890, page 8.17 Second Annual Report of the Park Commissioners ofthe City of Lynn 1890. Lynn: Whitten & Cass, 1891,page 7.

Elizabeth Hope Cushing is a graduate student in BostonUniversity’s American and New England Studies Pro-gram. She is coauthor of Historic Landscape Report,Lynn Woods, Lynn, Massachusetts (1986).

CORRECTIONThe second sentence of the third paragraph of Mark Primack’s article, "Twenty Years After: The Revivalof Boston’s Parks and Open Spaces," in the Summer 1988 issue of Amoldia (Volume 48, Number 3,page 10, text lines 25 and 26), should read: "Now, a century later, some sixty-eight percent of Boston’shousing units are rented; most have no backyards. Twenty percent of the city’s population lives in publicor subsidized housing." "

The Introduction of Black Locust (Robiniapseudoacacia L.) to Massachusetts

David C. Michener

Though it is a firmly entrenched member of the Commonwealth’s flora, theblack locust is not native to Massachusetts

Our common black locust (Robinia pseudoa-cacia L.) is not native to Massachusetts but isan escaped and naturalized tree native to thecentral and southern Appalachian Moun-tains. Nonetheless, many people believe thatit was present in the original forests of thestate. When was black locust introduced toMassachusetts? How did it become such acommon tree in a region far to the north of itsoriginal range? The answers to these decep-tively simple questions are shrouded in mythand obscured by the inaccuracies and incom-pleteness of the historical record. Indeed, theubiquity of black locust in such areas as CapeCod reflects significant aspects of our region’shistory. My questions thus shift for theiranswers to the cultural forces that led to theblack locust’s introduction to Massachusettsand its subsequent spread throughout ourarea. I hope here to clarify the historical rec-ord and to correct several commonly heldmisconceptions about the species’ introduc-tion and spread.

Robinia pseudoacacia is one of the fewarboreal species of the Pea Family (Fabaceae)found in Massachusetts. Here it grows to be atree of medium height, usually less than fiftyfeet (15 m) tall; I have seen trees over eightyfeet (25 m) high in its native range in the GreatSmoky Mountains of North Carolina andTennessee. Its leaves are compound, usuallyconsisting of seven to nineteen leaflets. Itsflowers, borne in June in the Boston area, are

heavily fragrant. The woody pods mature bylate summer and remove any doubt a nonbo-tanist might have that this species is indeed amember of the Pea Family.The black locust is noted not only for its

vigorous growth-young trees can reach

twenty feet in just a few years-but also for itsaggressive suckering. Early travelers andnaturalists found this vegetative fecundityastounding. Jean Hector Saint-Jean de CreveCoeur’s account of his travels in North Amer-ica ( 1786) typifies the impression made bysuckering black locusts: "An acacia

[Robinia], that was planted twenty feet fromthe parsonage house... sent a root across thecellar of the house, which penetrated the sideof a well J feet beyond, and to the depth of 15 5feet below the surface of the ground, insinuat-ing itself among the stones of the well.... [I]tthen ... threw up a small tree." Lest hiscontemporary readers should find this incred-ible, Saint-Jean de Creve Coeur provided hisown observation from a small church alongthe Hudson River in New York:

On the 17th of June, 1769, attended the serviceat this church, and being obliged to remain for ashort time in the neighborhood, it so occurredthat two Sundays afterwards I again repaired tothis place of worship; and I never was more aston-ished, than when, on opening the door, I perceiveda young acacia [Robinia], which, in this short in-terval, had forced its way through the floor andhad grown to the height of four feet. This tree wasthe sucker from a root ... 49 feet long.

53

Modern black locusts are no less vigorous;the asphalt sidewalk in front of my Arbore-tum residence is plagued by Robinia suckersfrom a tree situated a good thirty feet away.

Resistance to DecayOf great importance to colonists to the southof Massachusetts was the soon-discoveredresistance of Robinia pseudoacacia wood todecay. The naturalist Mark Catesby ( 1767/, aswell as Saint-Jean de Creve Coeur (1786),comments on the high esteem in which thewood was held by Americans farmers for thisreason. Robinia wood was prized for fence-posts and construction timber in contactwith the ground. It was also noticed thatRobinia plants would colonize poor, dry soils,thus giving farmers marketable timber fromotherwise marginal land. [This is due in partto the nitrogen-fixing ability of symbioticbacteria in the root nodules of Robinia, asymbiosis common in the Pea family.] Thevalue of Robinia wood in the early 1800s wasdemonstrated by Michaux, who noted(quoted in Withers, 1842) that "[Robinia is]allowed to remain standing in the newlycleared lands, because the inhabitants cannever have enough of the wood...."

Agricultural use turned out to be only onefacet in the development of a market forRobinia wood. Withers’ friend Joseph Harri-son, in a letter of 1782 (printed in Withers,1842), recalled from firsthand experience thetrials of Robinia in American shipbuilding"about 1733." Robinia wood was used fortrenails /pegs used to fasten planks to a ship’sframe), instead of iron, with great success."When unloaded she [the ship] was hauledashore upon the bank in order to be searchedboth outside and inside, when, on the strict-est examination, it was found the locust tree-nails, that had been substituted instead ofiron bolts, seemed, to all appearance, to haveeffectually answered the purpose intended...." This development did not, according toHarrison, spread quickly in shipbuilding. "I

frequently recommended it [Robinia trenails]... but all to no purpose, till about 20 years ago[the 1760s] when I was settled in trade atRhode Island, I persuaded some ship-buildersto try the experiment: but, notwithstandingall my endeavours, the use of locust tree-nailsstill continued to be little practiced or

known, till it happened to be adopted by abuilder of some eminence at New York, andof late years has been introduced into generaluse there, and in some parts of New England:but, as yet, the use of the locust-tree in ship-building is confined to the article of tree-nailson account of its scarcity...." The major use

Robiniapseudoacaciain wmter. This tree (growing gin Czechoslovakia) was sixty-three feet tall; itstrunk was nearly fifteen feet in circumference.Photograph (dating from 1905) from the Archivesof the Arnold Arboretum.

54 1

of Robinia trenails in shipbuilding produceda significant market. By 1819, Philadelphiaalone annually exported over one hundredthousand Robinia trenails for ship construc-tion.

Several clues have about the introductionand naturalization of Robinia pseudoacaciain New England have come to light: durablewood useful in shipbuilding and agriculture,rapid growth of young trees even on poorsoils, and clonal growth of groves from initialplantings. Include the the aesthetic attrac-tion of fragrant blooms and one has themakings of a tree popular in a rural, maritime eeconomy.

The first myth (and an entrenched one atthat) concerns the initial source of Robiniapseudoacacia. Linnaeus, the great Swedishbotanist, named the genus Robinia in honorof Jean Robin ( 1550-1629/, a major botanist atthe Jardin des Plantes in Paris. Robin is usu-ally credited with introducing seeds ofRobinia to France from Canada in 1600 or1601. A Canadian seed source at this timewould certainly imply that Robinia couldwell have been native in New England, too.However, Charles Sprague Sargent (1892)reiterated the claim that it was the son of JeanRobin, the botanist Vespasian Robin(1579-1662), who introduced the plant toParis in 1636, and this without a definitesource. In this case, which I take to be correct(remember that Linnaeus was writing over acentury after the latter date), the error inciting a Canadian source for the originalFrench introduction has little bearing on ourquest.

Early American records can be divided intotwo groups: those that note a peculiar newtree that can be identified as Robinia andthose that make no note of a tree with anycombination of its distinguishing character-istics (floral fragrance, woody pods, durablelumber, rapid growth, and clonal habit). Wil-liam Strachey (quoted in Sargent, 1892) sawduring his journey into Virginia in 1610 "akynd of low tree, which beares a cod like to

the peas, but nothing so big," and he observedthat the Indians used it to make bows.Strachey’s observation has been taken to beone of the earliest records of black locust(Sargent, 1892), but it could also refer to theredbud, Cercis canadensis L. While Robiniawas found at the time of the establishment ofthe southern colonies, what of Massachu-setts ? Here we come to the second myth.

Apparent Source of the ErrorA statement in the seventh edition of PhilipMiller’s authoritative Gardeners Dictionary(1756-1759) appears to be the original incor-rect citation of the "fact" that Robinia woodwas used in the first buildings of Boston, a"fact" that quickly found its way into theEuropean botanical literature. (See, for ex-ample, the citation of Jose Quer, 1762, inAustrich, 1987.) The statement in theGardener’s Dictionary is:

This Sort grows to a very large Size in America,where the Wood is much valued for its Duration;mo f t of the Hou f es which were built in Bo f ton inNew England, upon the firft Settling of the

Englifh, was with this Timber, which continuesvery found at this Time.

As this in the only reference I have found to anoriginal presence of Robinia in Massachu-setts at the time of settlement (other than thepossibility that it could have been here if thespecies had been introduced from Canadaaround 1601), the veracity of this "fact"(written over a century after the settlement ofBoston) must be evaluated critically. I havefound no evidence to support the statementbut have found numerous cases that castsevere doubt upon it.

Massachusetts is fortunate that its earlysettlers were literate and left written records,including notes of new plants. John Josselyn’sNewEngland’s Rarities Discovered in Birds,Beasts, Fishes, Serpents, and Plants of thatCountry (1672) has sections on "Plants as areproper to the Country" and "Of such plants asare proper to the country, and have no name."

"

55

Here, for many pages, are featured such nov-elties as pitcher-plants under the name of"Hollow Leaved Lavender," Indian beans,squashes, sumach, hemlock trees, pitch trees(here meaning Abies), larch trees, "cran

berry," pyrola, a "hellibore" with the note"the whole plant scents as strong as a fox"(skunk cabbage to us), plus a weirdly fancifulsketch that seems to have more to do withEzekiel’s vision of wheels-in-wheels thananything truly terrestrial. Nothing like aRobinia is mentioned, figured, or described.Josselyn also authored his Voyages, or ac-counts of his sea voyages to and adventures inNew England. Published in 1675, it has onlyone possible reference to an unknown treethat might be a Robinia: "The Line-tree withlong nuts, the other kind I could never find."William Wood’s propagandistic New-

England’s Prospect ( 1634) also lacks any ref-erence to a tree with the characteristics of aRobinia.The botanical explorers and writers of the

late 1700s and early to mid-1800s leave littleroom to believe that Robinia pseudoacaciawas ever native to Massachusetts. The Rev.Manasseh Cutler’s Account (1785) describedthe species as native to "southern states-only cultivated here." Fran~ois Michaux(cited in Withers, 1842) categorically statesthat the tree did not grow naturally in anystate east of the Delaware River, trees in thoseareas having been planted. Daniel Browne(1832) reiterated Michaux’s statement andnoted that the wood was not much used inconstruction except to support the sills-further evidence that Miller’s source wasincorrect. Torrey’s Flora of the State of NewYork (1843) described the tree as "not indige-nous in any part of the State .... [A]lmostnaturalized in many places." Finally, GeorgeB. Emerson’s Report on the Trees and ShrubsGrowing Naturally in the Forests of Massa-chusetts / 1846/ concisely claimed that"[Robinia] is not known to be, nor is it gener-ally considered, a native of the State or of NewEngland; and it is doubtful whether it grew

naturally in the northern part of the MiddleStates.... It does not grow spontaneouslynear the sea-coast, even in the SouthernStates." "

Escape and NaturalizationNote the gap in time from the earliest colo-nial records of New England, in which blacklocust is not mentioned, to the botanicalwritings of the late 1700s and early to mid-1800s, in which Robinia pseudoacacia is de-scribed as naturalized. A major developmentin the Robinia story occurred in this period.First was the destruction of the original for-ests in Massachusetts (and the other colonies)as the colonists changed the forested territoryto settled farm and pasturelands. New Eng-land is probably more forested at present (the1980s) than at any time since the arrival of thecolonists, thus it is easy for us to forget thatmuch of the arable land of the state waspractically clearcut. In addition, grazing wasa component of agricultural settlement andmuch additional land, including parts of CapeCod and the islands, was further stressed bythis factor. Second, various attempts weremade to reforest some of the abused land andexotic species were certainly tried. Evidenceof more recent trials can be seen in the earlyecological literature, as where an old privatereforestation at Woods Hole was evaluated(Chrysler, 1905/. The condition of this prop-erty in 1850-essentially deforested-wasundoubtedly a widespread condition and wasanything but new.The reforestation of New England oc-

curred primarily through the natural forces offorest succession on abandoned farms andpastures. Black locust probably became lo-cally common by escaping from cultivationonce it had been planted. Saint-Jean de CreveCoeur’s account ( 1786) of the rapid spread ofRobinia pseudoacacia in the colonies focuseson all the critical points of human interest forgrowing the tree: the fragrance of its flowers,the durability of its wood, and the rapiditywith which it grew vegetatively, even on poor

5G .

Specimen of Robinia pseudoacacia in the Royal Botanical Gardens, Kew, planted in 1762 by PrincessAugusta of Wales. Photograph by and courtesy of Istvkn Rbcz.

soils. Saint-Jean de Creve Coeur recounts thedevelopment of nurseries for the productionof robinias, and the establishment of robiniason Long Island, New York, on a major scale.He does not overlook New England:

It has been already observed, that the Americansplant the acacia [Robinia], with the view of melio-rating such poor and defective soils, as they in-tend to put under crop, for a series of years; and, asthe woods annually diminish in the inhabitedparts of the country, it is no uncommon thing tosee the old forests replaced by plantations ofacacias. It is in Long Island, New Jersey, Provi-

dence, and in the vicinity of Boston, that I haveparticularly noticed the good effects of these plan-tations. In several places there were formerlymoveable sands [that] by means of inclosures ofacacias, and by planting a great number of trees indifferent ways, these moveable sands have beenfixed.

He also notes the tendency of Americans touse black locusts as shade trees near wateringspots, and to hold firm eroding river banks.

Black locust must have been introduced toMassachusetts by the mid-1700s (Catesby,1767, recorded it as "very numerous in most

57

of our northern colonies"), the introductionhaving been driven by the overlapping forcesof strong demand for the wood in both agricul-tural and marine markets, by the then-ongo-ing destruction of the original forests, and bythe consequent need for a fast-growing treecapable of tolerating marginal agriculturalland. Robinia pseudoacacia fit all theseneeds. Since the species is semi-weedy, onceit was established within a region it was onlya matter of time before naturalized popula-tions became permanent and the speciesspread as a part of the secondary woodlandson disturbed and abandoned sites.The Robinia craze in the United States

witnessed by Saint-Jean de Creve Coeur wasultimately thwarted by the presence of anative insect borer. The borers stunt individ-ual trees, and greatly reduce the commercialquality of the wood. Sargent (1892) consid-ered only the borers to prevent Robiniapseudoacacia from being one of the most im-portant timber trees in North America. Asignificant Robinia craze swept Europe in theearly 1800s, aided in good part to the horticul-tural phenomenon in the person of one Mr.William Cobbett. Between 1817 and 1819 hemanaged a farm on Long Island, New York.He became enthralled with "especially theFlowering Locust, or Acacia, which, in myopinion, surpasses all other trees, and some ofwhich, in this Island, are of very great heightand beauty" (Cobbett, 1828). Upon his returnto Europe, he established a nursery and issupposed to have sold more than one millionRobinia seeds and trees; that leads to anotherchapter in horticultural history.

There is an irony here. One Robinia crazefed another, and both ended with Robiniapseudoacacia permanently naturalized farbeyond its homeland in the central and south-ern Appalachian Mountains. Robinia’s natu-ralization has been so convincing that I havebeen assured-incorrectly-that the exten-sive groves of Robinia on Cape Cod mostcertainly are not artifacts of European settle-ment.

References

Austrich, Ricardo R. 1987. El Real Jardin Bot£nico deMadrid and the glorious history of botany inSpain. Arnoldia, Volume 4 7, Number 3, pages2 to 24. (Quer is quoted on page 7.)

Browne, Daniel J. 1832. The Sylva Americana. Boston:W. Hyde and Company. 296 pages.

Catesby, Mark. 1767. Hortus Europx Americanus. Lon-don : J. Millan. 41 pages.

Chrysler, Mintin A. 1905. Reforestation at Woods Hole,Massachusetts.-A study in succession. Rho-dora, Volume 7, Number 75, pages 121 to 129.

Cobbett, William. 1828. A Year’s Residence in theUnited States of America. Third edition.London: B. Bensley. 370 pages.

Cutler, Rev. Manasseh. 1785. An account of some of thevegetable productions, naturally growing inthis part of America, botanically arranged.Memoirs of the American Academy of Artsand Sciences, Volume 1, pages 396 to 493.

Emerson, George B. 1846. A Report on the Trees andShrubs Growing Naturally in the Forests ofMassachusetts. Boston: Dutton & Went-

worth. 547 pages.Josselyn, John. 1672. New-England’s Ramties Discov-

ered. London: G. Widdowes. 169 pages. (Re-printed in 1865 by W. Veazie, Boston.) (

Miller, Philip. 1756-1759. The Gardeners Dictzonary.Seventh edition. London: The author. Unpagi-nated.

Saint-Jean de Creve Coeur, Jean Hector. 1786. Memoiresur la culture & les usages du faux Acacia dansles ~,tats-Unis de 1’Amerique septentrionale.Memoires d Agziculture (Pans], pages 122 to143. (Bound separate in the Arnold Arbore-tum/Gray Herbarium library. Also translatedin Withers, 1842 [below].)

Sargent, Charles Sprague. 1892. The Silva of NorthAmerica. Volume 3, Anacardiacex-Leguminosx. Boston and New York: Houghton,Mifflin and Company. 141 pages (Robinia,pages 37 to 42).

Withers, William. 1842. The Acacia Tree. London: Long-man. 411 pages.

A compendium of all articles about Robimapseudoacacia that were known to Wtthers.Included are extracts from many articlestranslated mto English

Wood, William. 1634. New Englands Prospect. London:Thomas Cotes. 131 pages. (Reprinted in 1865by John Wilson & Son, Boston.)

David C. Michener directs the Arnold Arboretum’s

Living Collections Verification Project.

BOOKS

Encyclopa?dia of Ferns: An Introduction toFerns, Their Structure, Biology, EconomicImportance, Cultivation and Propagation,by David L. Jones. Portland, Oregon: TimberPress, 1987. xvii + 433 pages. 250 colorplates, 150 black and white photographs, andnumerous line drawings. Introduction by A.Clove Jermy. $50.00 hardbound. (Exclusivedistributor: ISBS Inc.)

MIRIAM Z. EZUST -

When a new fern book comes to my attentionI am always eager to read it and learn moreabout my favorite plants. David L. Jones’Encyclopa?dia of Ferns had more than justi-fied my initial enthusiasm. In addition to

being a prized reference work for amateur andprofessional fern-growers, this book will alsobe of considerable interest to anyone who

grows indoor, greenhouse, or outdoor plantsand is looking for something different, exotic,and interesting to grow. Jones’ book is sobroad in scope and yet so rich in detail that itcan be appreciated instantly for the beauty ofits illustrations and drawings and it also canbe studied carefully as an instruction manualfor the successful growing of these fascinat-ing plants. The book is divided into sevenparts, each in several chapter. The seventhpart consist of appendices.

Jones presents his material with depth,logic, and common sense. His readers willquickly become familiar with the manyforms, shapes, colors, sizes, and other decora-tive features of hundreds of species of fernsand fern allies.

The first two chapters, "Introduction toFerns and Fern Allies" and "The Economic

Importance of Ferns, while not the strongestchapters in the book, give a good overview ofthe subjects to be covered later. In Chapters 3through 6 Jones presents his botanical basics:the structure, reproduction, life cycle, andclassification of ferns and fern allies

(Psilotum, Lycopodium, Selaginella, Isoetes,Equisetum, and others). The text of thesechapters is very clear, and terminology isexplained as it is used. There is also an excel-lent glossary. Unfortunately there are no fig-ure numbers to accompany the author’s linedrawings so that a great deal of page-flippingis required to match illustrations with text.Moreover, captions do not indicate sizes ofthe illustrated subjects so, to a naive reader, aleaflet could appear as large as a sporangium.The thirty-two gorgeous color photographsby E. R. Rotherham illustrating some of themany variations of soral patterns on fertileleaves (pages 17 to 20) are consistently mis-labeled "economic importance" and belongmore properly on page 32 in the chapter onstructure.

These three criticisms are the only com-plaints I have, and as minor flaws they are cer-tainly overpowered by the strength of the restof the work.

Jones discusses and carefully illustratesnot one, but thirteen representative classes offerns and allied plants in his chapters onstructure, reproduction and life cycles. Thesechapters will be of inestimable help to thefern grower in deciding which spores will belikely to germinate readily and which wouldbe especially difficult or impossible for thehome grower to start. Part One ends with abrief but highly informative chapter on culti-vars (of special interest to growers) and a chart

59

of terminology usually associated with thesebotanical oddities.

Part Two, the "Cultural Requirements ofFerns," and Part Three, "Pest, Diseases andother Ailments of Ferns," are essential tohave on hand whenever disaster strikes. The

descriptions of problems and their effects onferns are vivid and detailed and will enableeven a novice grower to make rapid diagno-ses, employ effective remedies, and reducethe likelihood of future difficulties.

Part Four is the part that every amateur and

professional fem grower will want to readmost carefully. It deals with propagation andhybridization of ferns, and includes the sim-plest vegetative propagation techniques,complete directions with illustrations for themore sophisticated home techniques, and anexcellent article on tissue culture. In Chapter17, "Propagation from Spores," Jones listsfourteen steps to follow to ensure good resultsin spore germination. There are sound rea-sons given for each step. Even if you havenever before attempted to raise ferns fromspore, and even if you have accepted the myththat it is too difficult, I am sure that you, too,will have success following the excellent in-structions in this chapter. It is also worth

mentioning the Jones provides a list of fernsocieties and study groups from whom it ispossible to obtain spores. Indeed, you mightbecome too successful and wind up withdozens of diminutive gametophytes demand-ing to be nurtured.

Part Five gives many suggestions about thegeneral needs for your window-sill-sitters orgreenhouse inhabitants, and how to showthem off to their best advantage, whetherthey spread, climb, or cascade. Moreover,eleven of the twelve appendices list materialpertinent to this sections. Eight will be ofparticular interest to gardeners in New Eng-land : there are more than one hundred spe-cies listed which are cold-hardy, and quite afew, though not native to that area, can with-stand frost and snow.

Jones has placed the most beautiful and fas-cinating portion of his book last. In Part Six,"Ferns to Grow," a worldwide selection ofmore than seven hundred species of ferns,fern allies, and cultivars are discussed. Briefbut comprehensive information about eachone is provided. Their grouping is not strictlyby genus, but by the consideration of theircultural requirements, making it more con-venient for growers to use. The use here ofline drawings, black and white photographsand color plates give the reader a real sense ofthe habits and most distinguishing visualcharacteristics of most of the ferns under dis-cussion.

All in all, this a a delightful and practicalbook for any horticulturist to own and enjoy.It may also serve as a valuable bridge betweenthe more popular (but less technical) fernbooks and the more sophisticated and special-ized fern literature.

Miriam (Mimi) Ezust assists in the curation of ferns inthe Harvard University Herbaria and avidly growsferns in and around her home.

The Garden and Farm Books of Thomas Jef-ferson, edited by Robert C. Baron. Golden,Colorado: Fulcrum, Inc., 1987. 528 pages.

MARION D. CAHAN

The greatest service which can be rendered anycountry is to add a useful plant to its culture.

-Thomas Jefferson

The major portion of this book contains aprinted copy of Thomas Jefferson’s "GardenBook" and his "Farm Book." In addition,there is a section of selected letters to friendsand family members in this country andabroad on the subjects of gardening and farm-ing. These poetically written letters providegreat insight into the inner life of ThomasJefferson-his character, his warmth and

60.

enthusiasm, and above all his obsession andfascination with gardening. Thomas Jeffersonwas by nature a gardener. The following ex-cerpt provides the reader with a personalaspect of the writer:

I never before knew the full value of trees. Myhouse is entirely embosomed in high plain trees,with good grass below and under them I break-

fast, dine, write, read and receive my company.What would I not give that the trees plantednearest round the house at Monticello were fullgrown.

-Letter to Anne Cary Randolph (his granddaughter), November 6, 1807

Jefferson’s "Garden Book," written over aperiod of almost sixty years (from 1766 to1824), is a detailed account of every aspect ofwhat he planted-the dates, the develop-ment, the transplanting, the observations oftemperature and weather conditions, the fail-ures and successes.What with his keen observation of nature,

Jefferson constantly experimented with newvarieties of plants while exchanging ideas,seeds, and cuttings with gardeners in Amer-ica and all over the world. He succeeded inmaking Monticello a truly botanical garden.The "Farm Book" was written from 1774

until a few weeks before his death in 1826. Init Jefferson recorded not only detailed infor-mation on all farm operations-the tools,machinery, planting, animals, and build-ings-but also extensive information aboutthe slaves (he had more than two hundred)--their names, locations, life spans, and whatmaterial possessions, primarily clothing andbed supplies, that Jefferson afforded them.The reader becomes drawn into the daily lifeof Monticello. Jefferson’s systematic atten-tion to accuracy and detail is fascinating andsometimes amusing.As an eminent agriculturist, Jefferson be-

lieved that agriculture was a science of primeimportance and strongly recommended thatagriculture be included in the curriculum ofevery college and university.A significant inclusion in this book is an

essay by the renowned historian Henry Steele

Commager, entitled "Thomas Jefferson andthe Character of America." Professor Com-mager presents an absorbing account of his-torical events in Jefferson’s time, simultane-ously weaving facts about Jefferson’s activi-ties, accomplishments, ideas, and ideals. Asan ardent proponent of "Enlightenment"throughout his life, Jefferson’s social, politi-cal, and moral concepts of Man are broughtforth and interlaced into the entire essay.

Jefferson’s attitude toward slavery pro-vides information about his character. Heexpended much energy and thought to theeradication of slavery, even though he him-self was a large slaveholder. His success waslimited to ameliorating slavery, not ending it,but his influence was far reaching and signifi-cant.

Much of Jefferson’s writing took the formof a crusade against ignorance. He workedendlessly to establish and improve the lawsfor educating the common people. While inhis seventies he wrote, "Enlighten the peoplegenerally, and tyranny and oppression of bodyand mind will vanish like spirits at the dawnof day." "

Commager’s essay provides a penetratingbackground to Jefferson not only as a politicalfigure but as a unique human being. TheGarden Book and Farm Book sections of thisvolume would be incomplete without thisrich information that emphasizes and ex-pands Jefferson’s human side.The excellent quality of the paper used is

enhanced by the beautiful color photographsof Monticello and the truly arresting blackand white portrait of Thomas Jefferson byRembrandt Peale.

This book would not interest the casualreader but rather the historian, the horticul-turist, the farmer, and-with the aid of theincluded horticultural bibliography-garden-ers who would create their personal Mon-ticellos.

Mamon D. Cahan serves as volunteer editorial assistant t

for Arnoldia.

Index to Volume 48 (1988)

(Numbers is parentheses refer to issues, those in boldface to illustrations of the entries.)

"A Guide to the Firs (Abiesspp.) of the ArnoldArboretum," byRichard Warren andEthan W. Johnson, (1/:2~8

Aberdeen (Scotland), (2): 18Abieslgenus) (1) 1-48;barjc of ( 1 f : 4 6, 12;

branchlets o~ (1): 4, 6,12; buds of, ( 1 4 6, 12;conebracts of, (1~: 6;cones of, ( 1 ): 5, 6, 11,12; distinguishingcharacters of, ( 1 /: 5foliage e of ( 1 ): 4; habitof, ( 1~: 4; leaves of, ( 1 /:4, 12; resin canals of,1 : 4, 6; similar genera,,1j~ 5; stomata of, 1): 6

-alba, I1/: 16, 18, 19 38;branchlet hairs of, ~1 ): 9;branchlets of, (1/: 6;buds of, ( 1 /: 6; conebracts of (1/: 11; resincanals oE, ( 1 11

var. acudfolia, (1):19

-amabilis ( 1 16 17 18,38; branchlets of, (1f: 6;conebractsof (1/:11;resin canals of, ( 1): 11;stomata of, ( 1 /: 6

’Spreading Star’, ( 1 /:17

-balsamea, (1/: 16, 18,28 34, 46. bark of, ( 1 ):8; ~ranchfets of ( 1 6;cone bracts of (1/: 11;resin canals of, ( 1 /: 11

-Xborisii-regis, (1): 19,21, 30; branchlets of,(1): /: 6; cone bracts of, ( 1 /:11; resin canals of, ( 1 ):11; stomata of, ( 1 6 6

-Xbornmuelleriana, ( 1):15, 20, 21; branchletsof ( 1 /: 6; cone bracts of,( 1 (: 11; resin canals ofI l I: 11; stomata of, ( 1 6 6

-brachyphylla, ( 1 31-bracteata, ( 1 /: 5, 30-cephalonica, (1/: 19, 20,

21 40 branchlets of,(1)~ 6. buds of jl):6;

resin canals o~, ( 1 /: 11;resin canals 0 , (1): 11;stomata of, ( 1 ): 6, 10

var. apollinis, (1): 21

var. gr~ca, (1): 21-chensiensis, (1): 5, 25,

27-chinensisvar. fabri, (1/:

25var. geor ii, ( 1 25var. smi t~ii, ( 1 25-cilicica, (1): 22 30;

branchlets of, ~1): 6;buds of, ( 1 /: 6; conebracts of ( 1 /: 11; resincanals ol!, (1 : 11;stomata ot, I1 /: 6

-concolor, ( 1/: 4, 7, 15,18, 23, 30, 31, 35, 43,front cover; bract conesof, ( 1/: 10; branchlethairs of ( 1 ): 9; branch-lets of, ~1): 6, 8; conebracts of, (1): 11; leafattachments of, (1): 7;resin canals of, I1 10,11; stomata of, 1 6 6

’Candicans’, (1): 7,23

’Conica’, (1): 23’Violacea’, ( 1/: 23-var. lowiana, (1/: 24,

29--delavayi, (1): 5, 46~urangensis, ( 11: 5-equi-trojani, ( 1 /: 3-ernestii, ( 1 5 5-fargesii ( 1 /: 25; branch-lets of, ~1/: 6; cone

bracts of ( 1 /: 11; resincanals o!! ( 1 ): 11

var. faxoniana, ( 1 /:25

var. sutchuensis,(1): 25

-firma ( 1 /: 26 31, 32;branchlets ol!, (1/: 6;cone bracts of, ( 1 /: 11;leaves of ( 1 9; resincanals o~, (1 : 11;stomata ot, I1 /: 6

-fraseri, ( 1 /: 18, 28;branchlets of, ( 1 /: 6;cone bracts of ( 1 /: 11;resin canals o~, (1): 11;stomata of ( 1 ): 6

-grandis, ( 1 : 2, 24, 29,30; branch~ets of, ( 1 6;cone bracts of, ( 1 11;leaves o~ /1/: 9; resincanals o , 1: 11

-guatemalensis, ( 1 3, 5-hickeli, ( 1 ): 5

-holophylla, (11: 19, 30,32; inside back cover;bark of ( 1 ): 6 8;branchlets of, (1): 6;buds of, (lJ: 6; conebracts of /1): 11; resincanals o~ (1 : 11stomata ot 1 : 6

-homolepis~ 1 f : 7, 23,26 27, 31 ~bark of, ( 1 ):

6; ~ranchfets of, (1): 6,8; cone bracts of, ( 1 /: 11;resin canals of, ( 1 /: 11

forma tomomi, (1):31

var. umbellata(Abies Xumbellata),cones of, (1/: 5

-Xinsignis, ( 1 40-kawakamii, ( 1 5 S-koreana, ( 1 4 33, 47;branchlets of, ~1/: 6;

cone bracts of, (1/: 11;leaves of 1 /: 9; resmcanals o f 1 10, 11

’Aurea’, / 1 /: 33’Prostrate Beauty’,

(1):33-lasiocarpa, (1): 4, 18, 34,

43, back cover.branchlets of, ~1 6;cone bracts of, (1): 11;leaves of (1/: 9; resincanals oE, (1 : 11;stomata ot, ~ 1 6, 10

var. arizonica

’Compacta’ ( 1 J: 34-magnifica, ~1): 4,35 36

42, 43; branchlets o~,/ 1 6; cone bracts of, (I): ):11; resin canals of, (1): /:11; stomata of, ( 1 6 6

’Nana’, / 1 /: 36var. shastensis, (1):

36,43-mariesii, ( 1 5 5-Xmarocana, /1/:40-me~cana, (1 : 5-nebrodensis, (1): 5-nephrolepis, ( 1 ): 33, 37,

44, 45, 46; branchletsof ( 1 6; cone bracts of,

~1(: 11; resin canals of,ll: 11forma chlorocarpa,

(1):37; cones of, (1): 5-nobilis, ( 1 ): 42-nordmanniana, (1):4,

16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 38,

39; branchlets of, /1/: 6;buds of, / 1 ): 6; conebracts of ( 1 /: 11; resincanals ot~, ( 1 11

’Pendula’, (1):38-numidica, (1[: 5 5-pardei, ( 1 5 5-pindrow, ( 1 /: 5pinsapo, / 1 ): 4 21, 35,

39, 43; inside trontcover; ( 1 6; cone bractsof 1 : 11; resin canalso~) l (: 11; stomata of,(1~:6 6

’Glauca’, (1/:39;leaves of, ( 1 ): 9

forma glauca, ( 1 ):14

-procera, ( 1 4, 17, 35,36, 37 41, 43; branch-lets of, ( 1 6; conebracts of, / 1 11; leavesof ( 1 ): 9; resin canals of,( 1 ~: 11; stomata of, ( 1 6 6

’Glauca’, (1): 42’Glauca Prostrata’,

(1): 42-recurvata, (1): 25, 27,

43; branchlets of, ( 1/. 6;cone bracts of, ( 1 11;leaves of (1 9; resincanals o~, I 11: 11;stomata of, 1 6 6

-religiosa, ( 1 5 5-sachallnensis, ( 1): 3337, 44 45, 46. bark o~,/1/: 6; ~ranchfets of, (1):6; cone bracts of, / 1 /: 11;resin canals of, (1/: 11

var. mayriana, (1):44

var. nemorensis, (1):44

-sibirica, (1/: 3, 37, 44,45, 46; branchlets of,(1/: 6; cone bracts of, (1/:11; resin canals of, ( 1 /:11; stomata of, ( 1 6 6

var. nephrolepis, (1):37

-squamata, (1): 5-Xumbellata, (1):31;

cones of, ( 1): 5-veitchii, ( 1 16, 17, 18,

33, 46; bark of ( 1 6;branchlets of, ~1/: 6;cone bracts of ( 1 ): 11;foliage, ( 1 ): 1; habit, ( 1 ):1; leaf attachments of,

62 .

/1): 7; resin canals of,’1’: 11 1var. olivacea, (1): ( :

46; cones of / 1): 5var. sac~alinensis,

/1):44-vejari, / 1 5 5-Xvilmorinii, (1):40Academia Sinica, (2) : 4Achasma yunnanensis, (2):

7Adams, Sally Aldrich,

"Interview: ChineseBotany and the Odysseyof Dr. Shiu-ying Hu," "

/2): 30~1 1Addis, J. M., (2) : 37 7Alaska, ( 1 ): 34Alberta, /1): 18 8All-China Federation of

Scientific Societies, (2):22

Alphand, Jean Charles

Adol phe, (4): 34Alsophila spinulosa, (2): 6Altingia excelsa, (2): 4Amelanchier s p., (3): 47Ames, Esther ~4): 18~liver S., ~4/: 18-collection (Massachu-

setts), (1):30Amethyst Lakes region

(Canada), (1/: back coverAmomum villosum, /2): 4Amoora calcicola, (2): 7Amoy IChinaJ, (2): 26Anagajlis arvensis, (3): 23,

24Anatolia, /1): 3 3Anchangiopteris henryi,

/2): 6Andersen, Phyllis, "’Full

Foliage and FineGrowth’: An Overviewof Street-Tree Plantingin Boston " (4): 32~7 7

Anderson, E~gar, "Islandsof Tension" (reprinted),(3): 28-31 1

Anemone fihsecta, (2): 6Anogeissus acuminata var.

lanceolata, (2): 7Anonacex, (2): 3Anthocephalus chinensis,

(2) :4 4Antiaris (genus), (2): 3-toxicaria, /2): 7Aphanamixis (genus), (2): 3Appalachian Mountains,~1): 27; (4): 56Appleton Street (Boston),~4/: 36Aquilaria sinensis, (2/: 7, 8,

front coverArboretum Committee, (4):

26Argemone mexicana, (2/: 7Arls--ma austroyunnanen-

SIS, (2/: 7"Arlington," (3/: 35Arlington Street (Boston),

(3/: 47; (4): 23Arlington Street Church

Boston), (3): 16,38, 39;~4/: 23Armoracea la pa thi folia,

(3I: 24Arnold, James, (2) : 9-Arboretum, (2): 20, 31,

35,37; (41: 26-28, 27,29,35 5

Artocarpus (genus), (2): 3-lakocha ~2J:7 7ash,green, ~4):33 35,36-Manchurian, ~3): 29Asia Minor, ( 1 J: 20Back Bay (Boston), (3): 38;

(4): 17-25, 29, 32-33, 34Back Bay Garden Club

(Boston/, (4J: 21bamboo, (2) : 27Barnard, Rev. Charles, (3):

34Baxter, Sylvester (4): 47Lynn’s Pu~lic

Forest: A HandbookGuide to the Great tWoods Park in the Cityof Lynn, mentioned, (4/:47

Beacon Hill (Boston), (3): (:34; (4) : 35, 36

Beacon Street (Boston), (41:33

Beaver Brook(Lynn,Massachusetts), (4): 44

Beijing (China), (2/: 9r 14,21, 31, 33, 37, insideback cover

Bei ing Botanical Garden,2):35Bel Isle Marsh (Boston), (,

’3): 12Belle Isle Marsh Reserva-tion (Boston) (3): 11 1

Berkeley Street (Boston),(4/: 23

Berlin (Germany), (2) : 18 8"Big Cedar" (Lynn, Massa-

chusetts) (4/:44Birch Brook iLynn, Massa-

chusetts), (4I. 44Birkenhead Park (England),

(3/: 34, 35Bixa orellana, (2/: 3Black Sea, (1): 20blackberry, cut-leaf, (3): 24Blood Swamp (LynnMassachusettsl, ~4): 46Boissier, Pierre, (1 : 39Bombaxinsignis, (2/: 7"Books" (column), (2): 39;

(4) : 58-60Boris, King, ( 1 19 9Bornmuller, Joseph, (1): 20Borthwickia trifoliata, (2/:

6

Boston, (3) : 2-3; (4) : 54;map ot, (3): 33

Boston and RoxburyCorporation, (4): 23

Boston Basin, (3): 18Boston Center for Adult

Education, (4): 18Boston City Council, (3):

34,35, 43, 44; BudgetCommittee, (3):44

Boston Common, (3) : 2-332, 36; (4): 29; renewafof, (3): 13

Boston Globe, (2): 12; (4/:21

Boston Harbor, (3): 2-3Boston Harbor islands, (3): ( :

2-3, 20 ; map of, (3): 19,21

"Boston Harbor IslandsState Park" (reprinted),(3) :21-22

Boston Harbor IslandsState Park, (3 : 20-21;master plan, (3) : 16 6

Boston Herald, (4): 27 28Boston Park Rangers, ~3): (:

42Boston Public Garden, (3) : J:

32-47Boston Symphony

Orchestra, (4) : 21"Boston’s Parks and Open

Spaces: I," (3): 2-47"Boston’s Parks and Open

Spaces: II," (4): 17-51 1Botanical Garden of Xishu-

angbanna (China), (2): 5Bowker Street (Boston), (4):

36Boxer War, (2) : 17 7Boylston

Street (Boston),

(3): 46; (41: 33Breck, Joseph, (3): 34Breed’s Pond ~Lynn,

Massachusetts), (4): 44,46

Breed’s Pond Reservoir

/L~nn, Massachusetts),’4.44Bretschneider, Emil, (2) : 9Britain, (I): 16, 29Brook Farm (Boston), 14,

16Brookline (Massachusetts),

(4): 33Brookline Village (Massa-

chusetts), (4~ 24Browallia (genus), (3): 44Buchanania yunnanensis,

(2): 7Bull, Ephraim Wales, (4):

inside front cover, 5-16,9

Bumpkin Island (BostonHarbor) (3): 21, 22, 23

Bunge, Aleksandr von, (2):33

Burma, (2):3 3Bussey Brook (Arnold

Arboretum), (4): 27Bussey Institution for

Research in AppliedBiology, (2): 11, 13, 14

Cahan, Marion D., bookreview by, (2): 39; (4):59-60

Calamus flagellum, (2): 4-nambariensis, (2): 4

palusttis (2): 4Calf Island (BostonHarbor), (3): 19, 23, 25

California, (1): 17, 23, 41California, University of,

(2): 17, 19at Berkeley, (2):

14; College of Agricul-ture, (2): 16

Callicarpa yunnanensis,

I2): 7Calo hyllumpolyanthum,(2.7 7Cam~ridge (Massachu-setts/, (1):33

Camellia sinensis var.assamica, (2): 4, 7

-taheishangensis, (2): 6Cam anumc~a parviflora,(2~ 6Campbell, Douglas, (4): 21camphor tree, (2): 27Canada, ( 1 ): 18; (4): 54Cananga odorata, (2):3 3Canton (Chmal, /2/: 30, 31;liberation of, f 2’: 21Canton Christian College,

(2): 13 30Cape Cod (Massachusetts),

(3): 18; (4): 52, 55, 56Capparis ~ohaiensis, (2): 6Carallia lancexfolia, (2): 7Caryota urens, (2): 5 7Cascade Mountains (Cali-

fornia), (1) : 41Case, Marion, (2): 10, 16Case Estates (Massachu-

setts), (1/: 44; (2): 10Cassia siamea, (2): 3Castanea americana, (3):

118Castanopsis s p., (2): 27Castle Island (Boston

Harbor), (31: 19, 31Catesby, Mark, (4): 53Catskill Mountains, /2): 10cedar, salt, (3): 23Cedrus (genus): ( 1 ): 14-li bani, ( 1 22Celtis wightii, (2) : 7Cenocentrum tonkinense,

(2): 6Central Artery (Boston),

(3): 17Central Park (New York),

(3): 34; (4): 30, 31Cephalostigma hookeri,

63

(2): 6Cephalotaxus oliveri (2): 6Cercis capadensis, (4~: 54Champs Elysees (Paris), (4):

34Charles River, (3): 2-3, 18;

(4l:23Charles Street (Boston), (3): J:

33, 34, 36, 42, 46Charlestown (Massachu-

setts), (4): 36Charlton (Massachusetts),

(4) : 41, 42Chase, Philip A., (4): 46, 50Chater, ProfpClifford S.,

(3 ): 42Che u Do (island), (1): 33Chelsea (Massachusetts),

(4) : 39Chen Huanyong, (2):9-25,

12, 21; death of, (2): 23Chen Shuzhen, (2 : 19Chengtu (Chma), ~2): 30chestnut, (2): 27-Amencan, (3): 18 8Chieh Tai Ssu Temple

(China), (2): inside backcover

Chieh-Hsiu, (2): 34 4Chien, S. S., (2): 11 IChina, ( 1 25,30; develop-

ment of botany in, (2) :18

China Foundation, (2): 17,18, 19, 20

China Merchants Steam-ship NavigationCompany, (2) : 13

Chinese Academy ofSciences, (2) : 4, 21, 22

Chinese Economic Trees,(2) : 15

Chinese Students’ Alli-

ance, (2): 10, 11 1Chinese Students’

Monthly, (2/: 10, 11 1Ching, R. C., (2): 13Choanji, Kon o-san

(Korea): (1~ inside backcover

Choix des plus bellesfleurs, by Pierre-JosephRedout~, (4~: 23Chukrassia tabularia var.velutina, (2): 4

"Chun" [Chen Huanyong],(2): inside front cover

Chun, W. Y., 2): 23(endnote 1-Woon-Young (2):9-25-Woon-Yung, ~2): 23

(endnote 1 ) (Chung, H. H., (2): 11 1Chxtocar uscastanocar-

pus, (2~ 7Cinnamomum austroyun-

nanensis, 2:6 6-camphor, 2 : 27

-mollifolium, (2): 4 6cinquefoil, three-toothed,

(3) : 23Cissampelos araira var.hirsuta (2~ 4"Citizens ~or Clean Air"

(Boston), (4): 21Citrus grandis, (2): 4, 7City Council (Boston), (4):

27,45City Council (Lynn, Mas-

sachusetts), ~4): 46Clarendon Street (Boston),

(4): 23Cobbett, William, (4): 56 6Cochlospermum vitifo-

lium, (2): 7coffee tree, Kentucky, (3): ( :

38Coixlacryma-jobi, (2):4 4Colona sinica, (2): 7Colorado, ( 1 23Columbia University, (2):

22Columbus Avenue

(Boston), (4): 34Combretum olivxforme,

(2): 7"Committee on Bowlders

and Erratic Rocks," (4): ( :43

Commonwealth Avenue

(Boston), (3): 42, 48;hont cover; (4): 17-25,24, 32~3, 33

Commonwealth AvenueMall (Boston), (4) : 33

Composita:, (2):31 1Coniferae, leaf attachmentsof, (1): 7 7

Coniothalamus chinensis,(2): 6

Connecticut, (1): 18Connelly, Patrick J., (3): 28Connor, Sheila, "The

Arnold Arboretum: AnHistoric Park Partner-ship," (4): 26-28

Contributions from theBiological Laboratoryof the Science Societyof China (periodical), i,(2) : 15

Cook, Dr. Robert E., (4): 2,3

Copeland and Cleveland~firm), (4): 23Copenhagen (Denmark),~2): 18 8Copley Square (Boston), (3): ( :

13-14; restoration of,’3/: 13corv ~t:ree, Amur, (31: 29cork tree, Amur, (3): 29

Cornell Plantations (NewYork): (4) : 3

Cornell University (2): 11 1Cornus florida, (4~ 18 8Cotoneaster (genus), (2): 34

Creve Coeur, Jean HectorSaint-Jean de, (4): 52,53,55,56

Crinum asiaticum, (2): 3Crosby, Irving B., "The

Making of BostonHarbor," (3): 24Crypteronia paniculata,

(2): 7Cucumis hystrix, (2): 7Cunninghamia lanceolata,

(2): 26Cupressus spp., (2): 34Cushing, Elizabeth Hope,

"’So Near the Metropo-lis’-Lynn Woods, aSylvan Gem in anUrban Setting," (4):37-51 1

Cutler, Rev. Manasseh,"Account," mentioned,(4): 55

Cyathocalyx yunnanensis,(2): 6

Cycas pectinata (2): 2, 4, 6-siamensis, (2~: 6Cyclobalanopsis rex (2): 7 7Dai minority (China), (2) :

2,5 5Dalbergia fusca, (2) : 7var. enneandra, (2):

4

Dalton, Charles, (4): 33Dartmouth Street (Boston),

(4): 23,33Dashujiao Reserve (China),

(2): 5Deer Island (Boston

Harbor), (3):31 1Del Tredici, Peter,

photograph by, (3): frontcover

Delano, Frederic Adrian,(2): 8

-Warren, (2): 8Delaware River, /4/: 55Deng Xiao Ping,’2’: 28Dennstxdtia punctilobula,

(3): 24Desmos yunnanensis (2): 6 6Dicranopsis linearis, f 2): 26Dilleniacex, (21: 3 3Diospyros atrotricha, (2): 7Dipterocarpace~, (2): 3 3Distilopsis yunnanensis,

(2) : 7dock, seabeach, (3): 23Doogue, William, (3) : 36 ;

(4):34

Dorchester IMassachu-setts), (4 : 22, 29,30,36Dorchester Shores

(Boston), (3): 14Douglas, David, ( 1 : 41 1Douglass, Robert, ~3): 27Downing, Andrew Jackson,(3/: 34"Dr. Robert E. Cook Is

New Director of theArnold Arboretum," (4):2~

Dukakis, GovernorMichael S., quoted, (3):21

Dungeon Rock (Lynn, Mas-sachusetts), ~4~ 40, 41,42,46,48

Dutch elm disease, (4): 33duzhong, (2(: 22Dwight, Colonel Percy, (4):

20-Frances, (4): 18,20,22-Grace Buel, (4): 20-John, (4): 20-Laura, (3): 1, 42; (4) :

17-25,16,21-Timothy, (4): 20Dysoxylum (genus), (2): 3-binecexfolium, /2): 4Eastern Deciduous Forest,

(3): 18 23, 25 26Edinburgh (Scotland), (2):

18Eliot, Charles, (4): 47elm, American, (3)’ 38; (4):

33,34-Dutch (3):38-Englistl, (3): 38; (4): 33elms, European, (4): 33Elsholtzia blanda, (2): 4"Emerald Necklace"

(Boston), (3): 1, 20; (4):28; restoration of, (3):13

Emerson, George Barrel,Report on the Trees andShrubs GrowingNaturally in the Forestsof Massachusetts,mentioned, (4): 55

-Nanette Snow("Ennessee"), TheHistory of DungeonRock, mentioned, (4):42

Encyclop~dia of Ferns: AnIntroduction to Ferns,Their Structure,Biology, EconomicImportance, Cultiva-tion, and Propagation,by David L. Jones,reviewed, (4): 58-59

Environmental Manage-ment, Department ofMassachusetts), (3): 21;4) :38,51

Erythroxylum kunthia-num, (2): 7

Esplanade (Boston), (3): 2-3Essex County (Massachu-

setts), (4): 41Eucommia genus), (2): 22Exeter Street(Boston),(4):

33Exploring Circle (Lynn,

64

Massachusetts), (4): 41,43-44,45

Ezust, Miriam Z., bookreview by, (4): 58-59

Fabacex, (4). 52Fan Memorial Institute of

Biology, (2): 21Fan Memorial Institute of

Botany (Beijing), (2): 17Farges, Père Paul Guil-laume, ( 1 ): 25Faxon, Charles Edward,

drawing by, ( 1/: 2Fay, Joseph Story, /3I: 27fern, hay-scented, 3 : 24-royal, (3/: 24-sensitive, (3): 24Ficus genus), (2): 3fir, balsam, (1): 18-Bulgarian, ( 1 19-Caucasian, ( 1 ): 38-Chinese, (2 :

26-Cilician, (1 : 22-cork-bark ,1 ): 34 4-Douglas, ~1): 4-European silver, (1): 16-Farges’s, ( 1 /: 25-Fraser, ( 1 28-grand, (1): 2, 29~reek (1):21-hedge~og, ( 1 ): 39-Khmghan, ( 1 ): 37-Korean, (1): 33-lovely, (1): 17-Min, ( 1 : 43-momi, ~ 1 26-needle, (1/:30, inside

back cover-Nikko, (1):31-noble, ( 1 ): 41-red, ( 1): 17, 36 6-Sachalin, ( 1 ). 44-Siberian, (1).45-silver, ( 1 ): 3-Spanish, (1):39, inside

front cover-Spanish blue ( 1 14-subalpme, ( 1 ~: 34, back

cover

-Turkish, (1/: 20-Veitch’s, (1): 2s 46-white, ( 1 23, mside

front coverfirs, Douglas, the, (1): 5Five Finger Mountains

(China), (2): 13Fleutharrhane macrocarpa,

(2): 7Flora of the State of New

York, by John Torrey,mentioned, (4): 55

Florence (Italy), (2): 18Foochow (China), (2): 26Forest Department (Fujian,China), (2/: 27, 28, 29"Forestry in Fujuan

Province, People’sRepublic of China,

during the CulturalRevolution," byRichard B. Primack, (2) :26-29

Fort Andrews (BostonHarbor), (3): 22

Fort Strong (BostonHarbor), (3): 22Fort Warren (Boston

Harbor), (3): 19Fortune Robert, (2): 33, 34Fox Hill (Boston), (3J: 32,

33Franklin Park (Boston), (31:

36, 43; (4J: 29-31, 29,30 31

"Franklin Park, Boston’s’Central’ Park," byRichard Heath,(4~29-31

Free Pubhc Forest (Lynn,Massachusetts), (4J: 45;trustees of, (4) : 45, 46

Friends of the BostonHarbor Islands, (3): 21

Friends of the PublicGarden (Boston), (3):41-47; (4): 21

Committee onHorticultural Planning,(3): 42-46; MemorialTree Planting Program,(3) : 44

Friends of the Urban Forest(San Francisco), (4): 36

Fujian Forestry College, (2):27,28,29

Fujian province (China),(2) : 26, 29

Fukien province (China),(2): 26

"’Full Foliage and FineGrowth’: An Overviewof Street-Tree Plantingin Boston," by PhyllisAndersen, (4):32-37

Fuzhou (China) (2J: 26Gallop’s Island (Boston

Harbor), /3J: 19, 21, 22,23,29

Galvin, John, (3): 34, 36Gang of Four, (2): 28Garcinia lancilimba, (2): 6Garcinia xishuangban-

naensis, (2J: 6Gardeners Dictionary, by

Philip Miller, men-tioned, (4) : 54

"Gardenesque Style," (3):36

Garuga pierrei 2J: 7George’s Islan~,BostonHarbor), (3) : 19, 21, 22,22,23-25,31

Gibson House (Boston), (4) :21

Gilman, Arthur, (4): 23, 32 2ginkgo, (4): 36

Gleason, Herbert Wendell,photograph by, ( 1 frontcover

Gmelina arborea, 2): 4, 7Goss and Munson firm),(4) :23

Gould, Dr. AugustusAddison, (3~35-36

Government Center(Boston), (4): 36

Governor’s Island (BostonHarbor), (3):31 1

grape, (3): 24= Concord’, (4): 5-16, 9Grape Island (Boston

Harbor), (3): 21, 22, 23,25

Grapevine, ’Concord’, j4): 9Gray Herbarium, (2): 13, 19Gray, Asa, (2): 9; (4): 34-Horace, (3) : 33, 34-William, (3) : 33Great Brewster Island

(Boston Harbor), (3) : 19,21,22,25

Great Britain, ( 1 ): 41 1Great Proletarian Cultural

Revolution (Chma), (2):22-23, 26, 27

Great Smoky Mountains(North Carolina andTennessee), (4): 52

Greece, ( 1 19 9Green Island (Boston

Harbor), (3) : 25Greening of Boston : An

Action Agenda The,excerpts from, (3): 5, 17,21-22

Grewia falcata, (2) : 6Guangdong (China), (2): 13,

18,19Guangdong province(China), ~2): 19Guangxi province (China),

(2): 19Guangxi, University of, (2):

19Guangzhou (China), (2): 14,

17, 20, 23; liberation of,(2) : 21

Guo Bingwen, (2): 14Haas, William J., "Trans-

planting Botany toChina: The Cross-Cultural Experience ofChen Huanyong," (2):9-25

Hainan (China (2): 19Hainan Island (China), (2):

13Harrison, Joseph, (4): 53Harvard College. (4): 26 28 8Harvard Medicaf School,

(4) : 25-26Harvard University, (2): 14,

15, 20; (4): 28Haussmann, Baron

Georges EugBne, (4/: 33,34

Hawkes Brook (Lynn, Mas-sachusetts), ’4): 44, 46

"’He Sowed; OthersReaped’: Ephraim WalesBuh and the Origins ofthe ’Concord’ Grape," "

by Edmund A. Scho-field,(4):4-16s

Heath, Richard, "FranklinPark, Boston’s ’Central’Park," (41: 29~1 1

Heliciopsis lobata var.microcarpa, (2): 6

Heliciopsis terminalis, (2): J :6

Hemlocks, the, ( 1 5 5Henry, Augustine, (2): 13-Benjamin, (2): 17 7-James McClure, (2): 17 7-Rev. Benjamin, (2) : 13Hers, Joseph, (2): 34Hibiscus austroyunnanen-

sis, (2): 7High Rock (Lynn, Massa-

chusetts), (4): 38Hillcrest Gardens (Weston,Massachusetts), (2): 10 0Hillside House (Wtl(iam-stown, Massachusetts),(4): 20

Hodgsonia macrocarpa,

l2): 4Hoffman, William, (2) : 17,18 8

Hog Island (BostonHarbor), (3): 19

Hokkaido (Ja an), (1): 45"Holm Lea" (Brookline,

Massachusetts), (2): 35,36

Holmes, Dr. Francis, (3/: 43Homalium laoticum var.

glabretum, (2): 6Homalomena gigantea, (2):

7-occulta, (2): 4 4Honan province (China),

(2):34Hong Kong, (2): 19, 20, 31-Botanical Garden,

(2): 17 7Hopei province (China), (2):

34horseradish, (3): 24Horsfieldia kin ii, (2): 7-tetratepala,~2): 4, 6Horticultural Hall (Bos-

ton), (4): 25Hosmer, Alfred W., photo-

graph by, (4): insidefront coverHou Debang, (2): 22Hovenia acer a var.

kiuk~angensis, (2): 7Howard, Heman A., photo-

graph by, ( 1 1 1

65

-Richard,photographsby, (3): 12, 15

Hu Xiansu, (2): 14, 15, 16,18,21

Hu, H. H., (2): 14, 15, 31-Shiu-ying, (2):30-31Hua Luogeng, (2): 22Hubei (China), (2): 16Hubei province (China),

(2:13Hull ~Massachusetts), (3J:Hull Massachusetts), (3):20

Hunnewell Pinetum (Mas-sachusetts), (1): 22, 25,36 42, 43

Hupeh ( China), ( 1 25Hu eh province (China),~2!. 34Hutchinson, John, (4): 42Icones Plantarum Sini-

carum, 2): 17, 19Impatiens’genusJ, (3): 44Imperial Chinese Customs

Service, (2I: 13Imperial Gardens (Beijing),

(2):35India, (2):3 3Indo-Himalaya, (2):3 3Institute of Botany

(Beijing), (2/:31International Botanical

Congress, Fifth (Cambr-idgej, (2): 18

"Interview: ChineseBotany and the Odyssey

of Dr. Shiu ymg Hu," 1/

by Sally Aldrich Adams,(2): 30-31

Islands of Boston Harbor,1639-1932, Green Islesof romance, by PatrickJ. Connelly ~men-tioned) (3~ 29

"Islands ot Tension," byEdgarAnderso (re-printed), (3): 28~1

Ixonanthescochinchinen-sis, (2J: 7

Jack, John G., (2J: 10, 12,13, 14, 16

Jamaica Plain (Massachu-setts) (4/:29

Japan, ( 1 ~: 26, 31Japanese archipelago, ( 1 ):

26Jasper National Park

(Canada), (1): back coverJatropha cureas, (2): 4Jiangxi (China), (2): 14Jefferson, Thomas, "Farm

Book," (4): 59-60-"Garden Book," (4):

59-60Johnson, Ethan W., photo-

graphs by, ( 1 backcover, 7-10and Richard Warren,

"A Guide to the Firs

(Abies spp.) of theArnoldArboretum," /1/: (:2-48

Jones, David L. Ency-clopa?dia of Ferns: AnIntroduction to Ferns,Their Structure,Biology, EconomicImportance, Cultiva-tion, and Propagation,reviewed, (4): 58-59

Josselyn, John, NewEngland’s RaritiesDiscovered....,mentioned, (4): 54

Voyages, mentioned,(4): 55

juniperus /genus) (1):3 3Kansu (Chma), (lf : 25Kansu province (China),

(2) :34katsura, (4): 36Kenmore Square (Boston),

(4): 23, 24Kexue (journal), (2): 15Kiangsu province (China),(2~: 31 1King, G. R photograph by,

(4): inside back coverKnema cinerea, (2) : 7Kopsia officinalis, (2): 7Korea, ( 1 ): 30, 33Kowloon (Hong Kong), (2):

19Kuo, P. W., (2): 14Kwangsi, University of, (2) :

19; Institute of Botany,(2) : 19

Kwangtung (China), (2/: 18,19

Kwangtung University, (2) : ( :20

Lagerstr~mia intermedia,(2): 7

Lagoon (Public Garden,Boston), (3): 3G, 37, 37,44,45

Landslides (firm), photo-graph by, (3 : 2-3, 20

Langlee Island BostonHarbor), (3): 25

Lantana (genus), (3): 44Laos, (2): 3Laportea urentissima, (2):

7larch, European, (3): 24Larix(genus/ (1): 3-decidua, ~3/: 24"Laura Dwight’s Magno-

has," by Judith Leet, (4):17-25

Lebanon, ( 1 /:Lee, Henry, /3 y 42Leet, Judith, (3): 1, 33"Laura Dwight’s

Magnolias," (4/: 17-25Leningrad (USSR), (2): 18 8Lenz, Russell H., map by,

(3):33Lespedeza (genus), (2) : 34Levering, Dale F., Jr., "The

Changing Flora of theBoston Harbor Islands,"(3): 18-21, 23, 25

Li Li-weng (quoted), (2) : 33Li Siguang, (2): 22Li Yanhui, (2): 4 4LiangXi, (2): 22Lilium lancifolium, (3): 38 8

-longiflorum, ’3 38 8linden, little-leaf, ~4): 33,35

Lingnan (China), (2): 31 1Lingnan Science Journal,~2): 17, 18Lingnan University, (2): 13,

16,17,18,19,20,30Linnaeus, Carolus, (4): 54Litchi chinensis, (2) : 7 7Llthocarpus yiwuensis, (2): ( :

6Litsea dillenixfolia, (2): 6-magnolifolia, (2): 7ierrei var. szemaois,t2) :7 7Living Treasures: An n

Od yssey throughChina’s ExtraordinaryNature Reserves, byTang Xiyang (reviewed),(2) :39

locust, black, (4): 52-57, 53-honey, (4): 35"Lohengrin" (opera), (3):37London (England), (2): 18 8Long Island (Boston

Harbor), (3): 20, 21, 22,25,29,31 1

Long Island (New York),(4): 56

Loudon, J. C., (3): 36Lovell’s Island (Boston

Harbor), (3): 19, 21, 22Lushan Botanic Garden,

(2) : 35Lynn (Massachusetts), (4):

37-51,39Lynn Harbor (Massachu-

setts), (4): 39Lynn Woods (Massachu-

setts), (4):37-51 1Lynn Woods Reservation

(Massachusetts), mapof, (4): 49

Lynnfield (Massachusetts),(4): 44

Ma Junwu, (2): 19Machilus rufipes, (2): 7MacLean, Alex S., photo-

graphs by, (3): 2-3, 20Magnolia Xsoulangiana, 1~3): front cover;~4): 18,

20,22,23Magnolia delava var.

albivillosa, (2~ 6-denudata, (3). 48; (4):

18,19,22,23-grandiflora, (4): 22-henr i, (2 : 4, 6-liliiflora,141: 22-macroph lja, (4): 22-stellata, ~4/: 18-tripetala, (4/: 22-virginiana, (4): 22magnolia, saucer, (3): front

cover

Maine, (1): 18Malaya, (2): 3Manchuna, (2): 31 1Mangifera sylvatica, (2): 7Manghetia fordiana, (2): 4,

7-microgyna, (2): 6-wangm, (2): 3, 6Mao Tse-tung, (2): 31Mao Yisheng, (2): 22Mao Zedong, (2): 22maple, Norway, (4) : 34, 35Marble, Edwin, (4) : 41, 42-Hiram, (4): 41, 42Marr, John C., photograph

by, (4): 19Marsdenia incisa, (2): 7Mason, John, (4): 22Massachusetts Agricul- I-

tural College, 2): 10Massachusetts Avenue ,_

(Boston), (4): 24 -

Massachusetts Horticul-tural Society, (2): 12; (4):17,21

Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology, (2/: 22

Massachusetts, ( 1 26Mastixia caudatilimba, (2):

7

Ma tenusdiversicymosa,~2): 6-hooken, (2/: 4, 7-inflata, (2/: 6-pachycarpa, (2): 6-pseudoracemosa, (2): 6McClure, Floyd, (2): 17McFarland, J. Horace,

Company, ( 1 1 1Meacham, George T., (3) :

33, 34-Plan, the, (3): 34-35, 36

Menghai Reserve (China),(2): 5

Men (2~: la Reserve (China),(2): 5

Men (2~: lun 5 Reserve (China),(21: 5

Men (2~5 ang Reserve (China),(2): 5Merrill, Elmer Drew, (2):

15-16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 30Mesua ferrea, (2): 3Mesua nagassarium, (2): 7Metropolitan Park

Commission (Massa-chusetts), (4): 47

Mexico, ( 1 23

66

Meyer, Frank N., 2): 37 7Michaux, Andr6, ~4/: 532014Francois, (4): 55Michelia hedyosperma, (2):

4,7 7Michener, David C., "The

Introduction of BlackLocust (Robinia pseu-doacacia L.) to Massa-chusetts," (4) : 52-57 7

Middle Brewster Island(Boston Harbor), (3/: 19

Middlesex Fells (Massa-chusetts), (4): 47

Mien-shan Mountains(China), (2/: 34

Miller, Philip, GardenersDictionary, mentioned,(4’: 54

Mindell, Doug, photo-graphs by (g3/: 16, insideback cover

Miscanthus floridulus, (2) :26

-sinensis, (2): 26Mitrephora wangii, (2) : 7Momordica subangulata,

(2) :4 4Mongoha, (2) :31 1Mont Royal Park (Mon-

tr6al) (4):29Moon Island (Boston

Harbor), (3): 20Moscow, ( 1 /: 45Moswetusset Hummock

(Quincy, Massachu-setts), (3) : 18 8

Muddy River (Boston), (4):24

Museum of Fine Arts(Boston) (4):25

Museum o~NaturalHistory (Boston), (4): 25

Myristica yunnanensis, (2):6

Myristicaceae, (2): 3Mystic River, (3) : 18 8Nanjing (China), (2/: 13, 14,

16,18 8NanjingHi erNormal

School, ~2%: 14Nanking, University of, /2):

14, 15, 16; College ofForestry and Agricul-ture, (2):16

Nanping (China), (2) : 27Nash, John, (4): 34National Arboretum, ( 1 ):

28National Geographic cSociety, (2) : 15, 16National People’s Congress

(China), First (2) : 21-22National Southeastern

University, (2): 14, 15,16,17 7

National Sun YatsenUniversity, (2) : 17, 18,

19, 20, 21 1Naumkeag (Massachu-

setts), (4) : 39Needham (Massachusetts),

(4):23Neighborhood Associationof the Back Bay, (4): 17,18 8

Neolitsea menglaensis, (2): ( :6

Neponset River, (3): 18New En land, ( 1 j: 18, 25,

29; (4~: 54 55, 56New England Botanical

Club, 12): 11New England Conservancy

of Music, (2): 12New-England’s Prospect,

by William Wood,mentioned, (4):38, 55

NewEngland’s RaritiesDiscovered..., by JohnJosselyn, mentioned,/4J: 54

New York, (2): 18New York Botanical

Garden, (2J: 19New York City Street Tree

Consortium, (4): 36New York State School of

Forestry, (2 : 9, 10Newfoundlan~, / 1 18Nicholson, Robert G., .,

photograph by, (2!: 36 6"Pinus bungeana

Zuccarini-A GhostlyPine," (2) : 32-38

"Nine Dragon Pine," (2):inside back cover

Nordmann, Alexander, (1): (:38 8

North Carolina, /1): 28North Easton (Massachu-

setts), (1):30North End (Boston), (41: 36North Korea, /1): 37 7North Shore (Massachu-

setts), (4): 38Norton, Charles Eliot, (4):

26

Nyctocalos shanica, (2): 7Nyssa sinensis var. ob-

longifolia, (2): 7 7-yunnanensis, (2/: 7oak, English, (3/: 24Ochrocarpusyunnanensis,

(2): 6Ohio State University, (2):

17 7Olmsted, Frederick Law,

(3): 20, inside frontcover; (4): 24, 26-28,29-31, 38, 45, 47-48

-"Reforestmg the BostonHarbor Islands: AProposal 1887)"(reprinted), (3J: 26-27

Olmsted Historic Land-

scape PreservationProgram, (4): 28, 38, 50

Olympic Peninsula (Wash-

ington), (1): 17 7Onoclea sensibilis, (3): 24Orchidacea’, (2): 31 1"Order of Preservation of

Clean Air" (Boston), (4):21 1

Oregon, ( 1 17 34 39Origin of Species, ~y

Charles Darwin(mentioned), (2): 19 9

Oryza meyeriana var.granulata, (2): 7

-minuta, (2): 4, 7Osmunda cinnamomea,

(3):24

regalis, (3): 24Ostodes katharin~, (2): 4-kuangiii, (2): 6"Our Disappearing Oppor-

tunities," by EdwardWeeks (reprinted), (3):6-9

Outer Brewster Island(Boston Harbor), (3) : 19

Ox Pasture (Lynn, Massa-chusetts), (4): 40

oyster plant, (3): 24

Pa~et, Paul G., photographby, (3): 45-Robert, (3) : 37 7palm, sago, (2): 5-mne, (2): 5Pan-Pacific Science

Congress, Fourth (Java),(2): 18

Panax zingiberensis, (2): 7Paramichelia baillonii, (2):

4Parashorea chinensis, (2): 6Paris (France) (2): 18 8Park Act of 1875 (Boston),

(4) : 45Park Act of 1882 (Massa-chusetts), (4): 45, 46

Park Commission (Boston),

(4) : 26Park Commission (Lynn,Massachusetts), (4): 44,48

Park Commissioners,Board of (Boston), (4):29,33

Park Commissioners,Board of (Lynn,Massachusetts), (4): 46,48, 49, 50; quoted, (4):48

Parks and Recreation,Department of (Boston),(3): 41, 42; (4): 28, 36Par s Department (Bos-ton) : (3): 1

pear ’Callery’, (4): 35Ped~ock’s Island (BostonHarbor), (3): 18, 19, 21,

22, 23, 25Peking (China),; (2): 30Pellacalyx yunnanensis,

(2): 6Penny Bridge (Lynn,

Massachusetts), (4): 48Penny Brook (Lynn, Massa-

chusetts), (4~ 38, 40, 44,46

Penny Brook Glen (Lynn,Massachusetts), (4): 46

Philadelphia, (4): 54Philippines Bureau of

Science, (2): 16Phcebe namu, (2): 27 7puwensis, (2): 3-4Phyllanthus emblica, (2): 4Phyllostachys pubescens,

/2): 27Picea (genus), (1):3, 4; bark

of (1): 12; branchlets of,( 1 ~: 12; buds of, ( 1 ): 12;cones of, ( 1 12; leavesof, ( 1 12

-sPP~~ (lI: 5-engelmannii, ( 1 34-koyamai, leaf attach-

ments of, ( 1 ): 7polita, (1):39pimpernel, scarlet, (3): 23,

24pine, Chinese, (2): 26- apanese seaside, (3): 29-~acebark, (2): 32,33,34,

35, inside back cover,back cover; bark of, (2):36

-Scotch (1):3 3-white-~oned (2):34pines, Chinese, f 2): 15-Japanese,(2)~ 15Pinetum Arnold Arbore-

tuml, I): 7, 31"Pinus bungeana Zuccar-

ini-A Ghostly Pine,"by Robert C.Nicholson, (2): 32~8

Pinus (genus), (1): 3-bungeana, ~2,: 32, 33,

34, 35, 35, 37, 38, insideback cover, back cover;bark of (2): 36; femalebract o~, (2): back cover;section of leaf of, (2):back cover; seed of, (2):back cover; stamen of,(2): back cover

-massoniana, (2): 26-sylvestris, (I): 3-tabulxformis (2):34-thunbergii, (3~: 29, 30Piper pubicatulum, (2): 7Pittosporopsis kerrii, 2): 6plane tree London, (4S: 33Plant Rea~Data Book for

China (2): 4, 6Plymouth (Massachusetts),

(3): 18

67

Podocarpus fleuryi /2): 6-imbricata, (2): ~-nerrifolia, (2): 6-wallichii, (2): 4, 6Poikilospermum suave-

olens, (2): 7Polyalthia cheliensis (2): 3Pometia tomentosa, ~2): 7Pool, Stephen Decatur,

drawings by, (4): 43, 44poplar, Carolina, (3): 29Post Office Square

(Boston), (3): 14, 15Potentilla tridentata, (3):

23Pratt Institute, (2) : 22Primack, Mark, "Twenty

Years After: TheRevival of Boston’sParks and OpenSpaces," (3): 10-17

-Richard B., "Forestry inFujuan Province,People’s Republic ofChina, during theCultural Revolution,"(2): 26-29

privet, (3): 29Proprietors of the Botanic

Garden in Boston, (3):33,46

Prospect Park (Brooklyn,New York), (4) : 30

Protium yunnanensis (2): 7Pseudotsuga (genus), ~1): 4;

bark of, ( 1 12; branch-lets of, ( 1 ): 12; buds of,

( 1 12; cones of, ( 1 12;leaves of, ( 1 12-spp., ( 1 ): 5-menziesii, leaf scars of,

(1) : 7Pseuduvaria indochinen-

sis, (2): 4Pterospermum aceri fo-

lium, ,2):7 7-mengluensis, /2): 6-yunnanensis, (2): 6Pterygota alata, (2): 7 7Public Garden (Boston), (3) :

2-3, 1G back cover,inside back cover, 36,38, 39, 40, 41 ; (4): 23, 25

Public Garden Act(Boston), (3):34 38

Public Water Board (Lynn,Massachusetts), (4): 44,46

Pyrularia edulis, (2): 4Pyrus (genus), (2): 34Qian Songshu, (2): 11, 13,

18,22Qin Renchang, /2): 13, 15,

17, 18, 22Qlng dynasty (2): 10Quer, Jos~, ~4~: 54Quercus ro ur, (3): 24Quisqualis caudata, (2): 7

Radcliffe College, (2): 30,31 1

Radermachera microcolyx,(2) : 7

Rainsford Island (BostonHarbor), (3/: 21, 25

Ranunculus (genus), (2~: 18 8rattan, (2) : 4Rauvolfia yunnanensis, (2):

4Red Guards, (2): 27, 28redbud, (4): 54Redoutrs, Pierre-Joseph, (4):

23"Reforesting the Boston

Harbor Islands: AProposal (1887)," byFrederick Law Olmsted(reprinted), (3): 26-27

Rehder, Alfred, (1): 34, 37;(2) : 9,17 7

Reisner, John, (2/: 16Report on the Trees and

Shrubs Growing Nat- t-

urally in the Forests ofMassachusetts, byGeorge Barrel Emerson,mentioned (4):55

resin blisters, ~1): 4 4"Restoring Boston’s

’Emerald Isles,’" (3): 4Rhamnus (genus), (2): 34Rhodora (journal), (2): 11,

18 8Rist, Luigi, print by, (4):

front coverRobin, Jean, (41: 54-Vespasian, 4) : 54Robinia craze (4): 56Robinia pseuc~oacacia, (4/: ( :

52-57; (4): 53Robinson, Professor B. L.,

(2) : 13Rock, Joseph F. C., (2): 9Rocky Mountains, ( 1 34Rohmer, Emil "Sax," (4):

18 8Ronda (Spain/, (1):39Rosa rugosa, (3~: 29var. kamtschatica,

(3/: 29, 29rose, Kamtchatca, (3) : 30Round Marsh (Boston), (3):

32Roxbury (Massachusetts),

(4): 29, 30Roxbury Milldam Corpora-

tion, (3): 33Royal Botanic Gardens,

Kew (2) : 19Rubus~aciniatus (3): 24Rumex pallidus, ~3/: 23 23Rutland Park (Boston), (4):

34Salvia fragarioides, (2/: 7Sand River Hospital

(Guangzhou, China), (2):23

Sargent, Charles S rague,~1): 2, 23, 31; (2~ 9, 12,13, 14, 16, 20, 35; (3):36; (4): 26-28, 33, 54

Sauer, J. D., (3): 30, 31 1Saugus (Massachusetts),

(4) : 39, 44Saugus Iron Works, (4): 39Sauropus coriaceus, (2): 6Scarborough Pond

(Franklin Park, Boston), (,4) : 29

scarlet pimpernel, (3): 23,24

Schofield, Edmund A.,"’He Sowed. OthersReaped’: Ephraim WalesBull and the Origins ofthe ’Concord’ Grape," "

(4) : 4-16 6Schwanboot, (3): 37Science Society of China,

(2): 15 5Sea of Okhotsk, ( I 45

Sears, Sarah G., estate of,(4~: 18,19--estate (Boston), (3): 48Serrania de Ronda (Spain),

(1): inside front covershadblows, (3): 47Shanghai (Chma , (2): 3 33Shansi province ~Chma~,

(2): 34Shantung province (China),

(2): 37 7Sheep Island (Boston

Harbor), (3): 19Sheldon Travelling

Fellowship (2): 12, 13Shensi (ChmaJ, (1): 25Shensi province (China),

(2) : 34Sherfessee, Forsythe, (2): 34Shima superba, /2): 27 7Sierra Nevada, ( 1 23Sikiang (Chma), ( 1 ): 25Silva of North America,

The, 1 2 2Silviant~us bracteata, (2):6

Slade, James, (3): 34Sladenia celastrifolia, (2):

4,6 6Sloanea cheliensis, (2) : 6-tomentosa, (2): 7Smith, Captain John, (3): (:

18-19-Dr. Harry, (2): 34 4Snell, George, (4): 23"’So Near the Metropo-

lts’-Lynn Woods, aSylvan Gem in anUrban Setting," byElizabeth HopeCushm , (4): 37-51 1

sorbana, (3): 29 .Soulange-Bodin, Etienne,

(4): 23

South China, (2):3 3-Agricultural

University, (2):31 1Institute of Botany,

(2) : 21South End (Boston), (4): 34,

35Southwest Corridor Park

(Boston), /3): 11-12Spectacle Island (Boston

Harbor), (3): 21, 22Spiritualists, (4): 41-43spruce, tiger-tail, 1): 39spruces, the, (lj: 5Squantum (Quincy, Massa-

chusetts), (3): 19Squaw Rock (Quincy, Mas-

sachusettsJ, (3/: 19Stercuha villosa, (2): 4sterigma, (1l. 4

Steward, Albert, /2/: 15, 16Stickney, Charles O., /4/:42

Strachey, William, /4): 54Studies of the Essex Flora,

by Cyrus M. Tracy,mentioned, (4): 43

sumac, staghorn, (3). 31swanboats, (3): 32, 37-38,

37,45sweet gum, (4) : 33Symphony Hall (Boston),

(4): 25Syria, ( 1 ): 22Szechuan (China), (1): 25Szechuan province (China),

(2):34Tacca chantmen, (2j: 7Tamarixgallica, (3): 23Tang Xiyang, Livmg

Treasures: An Odysseythrough China’s Ex-traordmary Na tureReserves (reviewed), (2):39

Taraktogenos merrillana,(2): 4

Taxus genus) bark of, (lj:12; branchfets of, ( 1 ):12; buds of, /1/: 12;cones of, (1): 12; leavesof, / 1 ): 12

-sPP~~ I 1 ): 5-cuspidata leaf attach-

mentsof 11/:7 7Tennessee, ~1 28Termin4va m ynocarpa,

(2/: 7Tetramelacca;, (2): 3Tetrameles nudiflora, /2): 7"The Arnold Arboretum:

An Historic ParkI’artnersh~ ," by Shc~laConnor, (4) : 26-28

"The Boston HarborIslands" (reprinted), (3/:18-31 1

"The Boston Public

68

Garden, Showcase ofthe City" by Mary M.B. Wake~ield, (3/:32-47

"The Changing Flora of theBoston Harbor Islands,"by Dale F. Levering, Jr.,(3): 18-21, 23, 25

The History of DungeonRock, by Nanette SnowEmerson ("Ennessee"),mentioned, (4): 42

"The Introduction of BlackLocust (Robinia pseu-doacacia L.) to Massa-chusetts," by David C.Michener, (4I: 52-57

"The Making of BostonHarbor," by Irving B.Crosby (reprinted~, (3):24

"The Vulnerable andEndangered Plants ofXishuangbannaPrefecture, YunnanProvince, China " byZou Shou-qing, (2): 2-7

Thomas Hanbury School,(2): 10

Thomas Jefferson’s Farmand Garden Books,edited by Robert B.Baron, reviewed, (4):59-60

Thompson, David, (3): 18-Island (Boston Harbor),

(3) :20Tibet, (2): 31 1Tonawanda Street (Boston),

(4/: 36Toona ciliata, (2 : 4, 7-microcarpa I2):7 7Torrey, John, F~ora of the

State of New York,mentioned, (4): 55

Tracy, Cyrus M. (4J: 41, 44Studies o~ the Essex

Flora, mentioned, (4/:43

Tragopogon porrifolius, (3):24

Transcript (Lynn, Massa-chusetts), (4) : 44-45, 46

"Transplanting Botany to

China: The Cross-Cultural Experience ofChen Huanyong," byWilliam J. Haas, (2):9-25

Tree Planting Day (China),(2): 29

Trigonobalanus doi-changensis, (2): 7

Tsuga (genus) ( 1 4; barkof ( 1 12; branchlets of,(1~: 12; buds of, ( 1): 12;cones of, (1): 12, leavesof, (1/: 12

-sPP~~ ( 1 /: 5 leaf attach--caroliniana leaf attach-

ments of, ( 1~: 7Turkey, ( 1 22"Twenty Years After: The

Revival of Boston’sParks and OpenSpaces," by MarkPrimack (3) : 10-17

"Two Bunches of Grapes "by Luigi Rist (pnnt), (4):front cover

Union Park (Boston), (4) : 34Uppsala University, (2): 34Utah, ( 1 /: 23Vatica xishuangbannaen-

sis, (2/:7 7Veal, Thomas, (4) : 40, 42Veitch, John Gould, ( 1/: 46-& Sons, (2): 9Vienna (Austria), (2): 18 8Vietnam, 2 3vine, the 4 : 5-16Virgil, (1~:3 3V irginia, ( 1 28Vitex (genus), (2): 34 4Vitis (genus), (2): 34-spp., (4) : 5-16-armata ’Veitchii’, (4):

back cover

-coigneti~, (4): insideback cover

-labrusca ’Concord’, (4):5-16,9 9

-labrusca, (3): 24Voyages, by John Josselyn,

mentioned, (4) : 55 5Wagner, Richard, (3) : 37 7Wakefield, Mary M. B.,

photograph by, (3): backcover

"The BostonPublic Garden, Show-case of the City," (3):32-47

Walsura yunnanensis, (2/:7

Warren, Richard, andEthan W. Johnson, "AGuide to the Firs (Abiesspp of the ArnoldArborctum," (1): 2-48

Washington (state), (1): 41Washington, George,

statue of (Boston), (3) : ( :43

Webster, Mrs. Edwin, (4):20

Weeks, Edward, (3): 44"Our Disappearing

Opportunities" (reprint-ed/, (3): 6-9West China Union

University, (2): 30West Roxbury (Massachu-

setts), (4): 30Western Hills (China), (2):

inside back coverWheeler, William Morton,

(2J: 13Whitehill, Walter Muir, (4):

24Whitfordiodendron filipes,

/2/: 7Wilhamstown (Massachu-

setts), (4) : 20Wilson, ErnestH., (1J:25,

30,31,33,37; (2): 9,34;(4) :35

photographs by (1): /:inside back cover; (3): ( :30

Wmmsimet (Massachu-setts), (4): 39

Withers, William, (4): 53wolf pits, (4): 40, 48Wollaston Beach (Quincy,

Massachusetts), (3): 19 9Wood, William, (4/: 38, 44,

55New-England’s

Prospect, mentioned,

(4/:38 55Woodcoc~C & Meacham

(firm), (3):34Woods Brook (Lynn,

Massachusetts) (4):44Woods Hole [Woods Holll

Massachusetts), (3): 27;’4/: 55 5World’s End (Hingham,

Massachusetts), (3/: 20Wright, Elizur, (4/: 45Wuyi Mountain (China),

(2) 26 29Wuzhou (China), (2/: 19Xanthophyllum yunnanen-

sis, (2): 6Xerospermum bonii, (2): 7Ximen (Chma), (2): 26Xmhai revoluuon, /2/: 10XishuangbannaPrefecture

(China), (2): 2-7;vulnerable andendangered plants of,(2): 6

Yao, old, (2): 13Yedo and Peking, by

Robert Fortune(mentioned) (2): 33

Yen-fu-se temple (China),(2): 37

yews, the, ( 1 5 5Yu, T. T., (2): 31Yunnan Institute of

Tropical Botany,Academia Smica(China), (2)~ 5

Yunnan province (China),(2/: 3

Zanonia indica, (2): 7zelkova, (4):33Zhimmg Zhang, (2y 35Zhong Xinxuan, (2): 11, 18Zippelia begonixfolia, (2):

6Zou Shou-qing, "TheVulnerable and

Endangered Plants ofXishuangbannaPrefecture, YunnanPromnce, China," (2):2-7

Zuccarini, Joseph, (21: 33