There were, as shown in the plat below, eight short rows two feet apart, with the plants finally thinned on July 10th to five plants about fifteen inches apart in the row. The seed for half the rows (alternating) is called ' old stock,' and was raised in the garden the previous year, from seeds which descended from those raised on the place for nine years or more.

"The ' crossed stock' was obtained as follows: In 1877, some seeds of the same variety of beans purchased of Jas. Vick. These were planted in a drill evenly mixed with seeds of the old stock. These grew and looked alike, but the flowers were inter-crossed by bees. Seeds of this crop are termed ' crossed stock.'

" On May 31, 1878, fifteen seeds were planted in each of the eight rows. The plants from the crossed seeds were generally much the largest, and as will be seen kept green the longest.

In ten days after planting, seeds of the old stock came up in each row as follows: - - - - - - - - - 4 7 7 9 27

In ten days the crossed stock came as follows :

12

10

6

11

=39

In seventeen days the old stock came as follows:

7

11

10

10

=38

In seventeen days the crossed stock came as follows:

12

13

10

14

=49

"On July 22, the pods fit for cooking on each plant numbered as follows. The pods on the two lots of plants were about alike in size:

Old stock -

36

1

dead

7

13

=

57

Crossed stock ....

dead

0

0

41

0

=

41

Old stock.....

0

0

8

0

11

=

19

Crossed stock -

6

22

34

0

17

=

79

Old stock.....

30

0

0

0

0

=

30

Crossed stock -

41

37

21

31

0

=

130

Old stock .... -

0

0

0

0

2

=

2

Crossed stock -

16

29

30

26

2

=

103

Total old stock ...

=

108

Total crossed stock

=

353

" This variety is greatly raised for the purpose of supplying an early crop of beans to eat pods and all while young. The difference will be seen to be over three to one in favor of the crossed stock.

"On August 9, the pods fit for cooking or past that condition were as follows:

Old stock

52

60

dead

43

45

=

200

Crossed stock

dead

24

16

51

83

=

174

Old stock

38

46

44

71

37

=

236

Crossed stock

35

52

58

69

62

=

276

Old stock

39

34

30

47

87

=

237

Crossed stock

63

48

11

66

61

=

249

Old stock

38

46

54

33

39

=

210

Crossed stock

38

90

52

88

81

=

340

Total Old Stock

=

883

Total crossed stock

=

1048

'•On or before September 16, all were harvested. The pods on each plant numbered as follows:

Old stock

60

62

dead

45

39

=

206

Crossed stock

dead

160

54

29

139

=

382

Old stock

45

48

36*

71

37

=

237

Crossed stock

36

145

91

72

51

=

395

Old stock

45

35

37

38

35+

=

190

Crossed stock

103

68

55

128

75

=

429

Old stock

30

39

48

28

40

=

185

Crossed stock

136

159

58

172

128

=

653

Total old stock -

=

818

Total crossed stock -

=

1859

On comparing the table for August 9, with that of September 16, it will be seen that some plants of the old stock had lost part of their fruit. This was on account of the decay of 101 pods. The table also shows that two branches were broken and had died before maturing. These contained 73 pods.

Adding 101 and 73 to 818, we have 992 pods of the old, against 1,859 of the crossed. In harvesting, all those pods badly damaged were rejected. The beans of the old stock weighed 29.77 ounces avoirdupois, those of the crossed stock weighed 70.33 ounces avoirdupois, or nearly in the proportion of 100 to 236.

*This plant contained a dead branch with twenty-one imma ture pods.

+This plant contained a dead branch with fifty-two immature-pods.

The difference would be a little less if we allow for the broken plants and decayed pods on the old stock. One plant of the old, and one plant of the crossed stock died early and produced no fruit.

Six lots of 50 beans each were taken at random from the old stock and weighed as follows :

50 seeds - 281 grains.

50 seeds - 262 grains.

50 seeds - 270 grains.

Total, 1,616 grains.

50 seeds - 260 grains.

50 seeds - 259 grains.

50 seeds - 284 grains.

Average, 269 2/3 grains.

The same number of seeds was taken from the crossed stock and weighed as follows:

50 seeds - 220 grains.

50 seeds - 219 grains.

50 seeds - 200 grains.

Total, 1,279 grains.

50 seeds - 210 grains.

50 seeds - 210 grains.

50 seeds - 220 grains.

Average, 213 1/6 grains.

The average weights of an equal number of beans from each stock were nearly as one hundred to seventy-nine in favor of old stock".

[It scarcely follows that "crossing" has produced the results noted by Prof. Beal. Experiments with corn by cutting off the tassel, have shown that this alone was an advantage on the crop and its progeny. Nutrition goes wholly to the ear instead of being divided with the tassel. If we could discover a certain law, either by crossing or any other way, by which the men who get 100 bushels of corn to the acre, can get 153 bushels, it is certainly worth demonstrating. But, how easy it is to attribute results to wrong causes, is seen by the history of the Bean in this question of cross-fertilization. In 1857 Mr. Darwin evidently believed the Bean could not be fertilized at all, except by external aid. In his own experiment only those fruited when protected from bees, that had the wings of the flowers pressed down as a bee presses them when entering the flower. But the evidence that beans do seed just as freely when no bees visit them is so conclusive that the theory has been modified, and it now reads "cross-fertilize if you can, but self-fertilize if you must, is nature's law for flowers." But Prof. Beal assumes that because the plants were grown together they must have been "crossed by bees;" and he has no other reason for calling them "crossed stock".

We find nothing "below" showing where "the plants kept green the longest," unless we are to infer it from the fact that on the 22d of July there were a greater number of green pods on one lot than on the other. The pods were not, however, any larger in size in one case than in the other, so that the result must be sought for in number, not in size. The beans not being increased in size or weight, we have only the number of beans as the result of crossing This result is that for every 100 pounds of beans we get from seed uncrossed for nine years, we may get 230 pounds from crossed seed.

Now if we remember the modern, and undoubted doctrine that the bean can fertilize itself if neglected by the bee, and therefore some might have been neglected, and so seeded from their own pollen; and further that though the plants were mixed together the chances would be more than equal that the flower would have pollen from some other flower on the same plant as from the flower of a neighboring plant, at least three-fourths more of "advantages" ought to be given to the figures, and we ought to have nearly 375 pounds for the crossed to 100 pounds of the non-crossed per acre. In view of such stupendous results from crossed seed, Dr. Gray's remarks that the experiments "are very neat and to the purpose" have more than a poetical meaning. If we can put four dollars in our pocket instead of one, there is a very prosy but substantial purpose before us.

The teleological part of the question seems equally foggy. It is assumed that it is an "advantage" to the race that the individual plant should live a few days longer, and bear more seeds, as the result of crossing over the fail-average duration of one not crossed. It is a well known law of nature that an extra advantage to the individual is rather at the expense of the race. But we do not discuss this now. What we desire is to ask cultivators whether we may really look for such figures from crossing as are indicated by Professor Beal's figures; or from any laws of nutrition already well known.

There were ten more uncrossed than crossed beans failed to come up; but why should any fresh beans, crossed or uncrossed, fail to grow? And as in one case we have seventeen against sixteen in the row experiment in favor of the uncrossed beans, who knows how many more of these "advantageous" figures may have been produced if the other thirty-two beans had been allowed to grow? - Ed. G. M].