This grape has for a number of years occupied a prominent position before the horticultural world, and its merits, probable origin, and various collateral questions have been very thoroughly discussed. It seems, however, there is still a difference of opinion as to whether it is a native or foreign variety.

That it is not indigenous, but an exotic, one gentleman at least has, during the last year or more, manifested unusual anxiety to show; and if the most positive assertions to that effect, uttered in almost every imaginable form, are to be taken as conclusive, there is no room for further controversy. The gentleman referred to is my old friend and correspondent, Wm. R.Prince, of Flushing, whose communication in your September issue demands some notice.

In that communication, as well as in his grape catalogue, in most of his recent advertisements, and in numerous letters that have come under my observation, he declares in most positive terms that it is clearly and unmistakably a foreign vine in all its characteristics; and in one of his epistles declares that "no man of fair perception can be excused for the stupidity of classing it as a native." Nor is this all. He also denounces it as " one of the weakest foreign vines,,, and totally unsuited to exposed garden or field culture.

In regard to the nativity of the vine I am not prepared to speak in positive terms. It has always been my belief that it originated in the garden of Judge Provost; probably a chance seedling, and not unlikely from seed of fruit from a foreign vine. This, however, is merely an opinion, and may or may not be correct. Knowing it to be perfectly hardy, as free from mildew as any variety with which I am acquainted, prolific, of healthy and vigorous habit, and the fruit of unsurpassed excellence, I have not regarded it a matter of consequence whether it is a native or foreign variety. I have never, I believe, asserted that it is beyond all doubt a native; and if I have made declarations looking that way, they have been the result of evidence furnished by those in whose competency to express an authoritative opinion I have confidence. I think nine-tenths of those who have undertaken to classify it botanically have ranked it as a native; and if they are masters of the science it must be a native, or the science is fallacious. On the evidence of gentlemen of this class I am willing to rest the question, and acquiesce in their decision.

I will not attempt to collect the published testimony attainable, but will content myself with introducing two witnesses only, in the competency and judgment of both of whom I have great confidence. The first is a gentleman who occupies a conspicuous position before the horticultural public, and whose authority on questions such as this few would feel disposed to dispute. In a letter dated Jan. 18, 1859, he says:

"I have been a 'devotee' of botanical science for near twenty years, and think I can tell one species of grape from another. If the Delaware is of foreign origin, I shall have to believe botanical rules all 'nonsense.' There is certainly no foreign sap in its vessels".

The next witness I feel at liberty, under existing circumstances, to name. He is William R. Prince; and in a letter before me, dated Nov. 12, 1855, he thus expresses himself:

"Mark my words. I say your Delaware Grape is not a foreign variety. I don't say 'I don't think' - I say I know the fact The Traminer is the 'Au-. vernas Rouge Claire' of Burgundy and the Rhine, and has been well known to me [W. R. P.] these twenty-five years. I once had several thousand vines of it".

This is a literal extract, italicising included. It certainly is pretty strong, coming as it does from a gentleman who now claims that it "has all the attributes of the foreign species, and does not possess one solitary attribute of oar native species;" who is constantly quoted to prove that the Delaware is a foreign variety; and who seems to coincide with the opinion expressed some fifteen years ago (not now) by "Germans in Ohio,* that it is the Traminer.

A few words on the other branch of the subject. Mr. P. regards all who recommend the Delaware as adapted to exposed or vineyard culture as guilty of "gross fraud." In support of this theory he makes frequent reference to a visit he made to this place (Delaware, Ohio) in September last. In his article in your August issue, he says:

"I visited the town of Delaware, Ohio, last September, and, to my great surprise, I found but one Delaware vine in bearing, and that was trained against the south side of Mr. Campbell's stone house, and was so sheltered that any of the Chasselas grapes would mature their fruit in the same position".

The obvious intent of such language is to create the impression, as it in effect charges, that the Delaware does not succeed elsewhere than in the most sheltered positions. To undertake at this day to controvert an assertion like this would be decidedly a work of supererogation; all fair experience, sustained by a " cloud of witnesses" in all sections of the country, refutes it. I am not prepared to speak of its success in "vineyard culture," as I have not seen it so tried; but I do know that in this region of country (and a more trying locality, as regards variableness of climate, it is difficult to find anywhere) it does succeed admirably in any situation where any other grape will succeed; and my firm belief is, that a proper test will prove it to be most admirably adapted to "vineyard culture".

But Mr. P. "visited Delaware," and as 1 happen to know something of that visit, justice demands that I should refer to it. When here, Mr. P. had from one and a half to two hours at his disposal, and the day being a wet and disagreeable one, he visited but two gardens, Mr. Campbell's and my own. In Mr. Campbell's garden he saw three vines loaded with fruit, two ef them on the south, the third on the west side of the house. In my garden he saw some thirty vines, embracing most of the hardy varieties in cultivation, but on none of them, except an Isabella and a Catawba trained against the east side of my brick dwelling-house, did he see any fruit. And why not? For the very good reason explained to him at the time, and since twice or thrice repeated, that the unprecedented frost of the fourth of June preceding had utterly destroyed not only all the fruit, (of which there was a large quantity set,) but also all the wood grown up to that time, not of the Delaware alone, but of Clinton, Concord, and all other vines not thoroughly protected.