Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 40.djvu/80

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
70
THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY.

might be safely transferred to a northern climate; but would there be promise of enough future usefulness, in such a case as this, to warrant our carrying the plant north as an article of food? Suppose, further, we should ascertain that the fruit in question was relished not only by the natives of its home, but that it had found favor among the tribes of south Mexico and Central America, and had been cultivated by them until it had attained a large size; should we be strengthened in our venture? Let us go one step further still. Suppose that having decided upon the introduction of the plant, and having urged everybody to try it, we should find it discarded as a fruit, but taking a place in gardens as a curiosity under an absurd name, or as a basis for preserves and pickles; should we not look upon our experiment in the introduction of this new plant as a failure? This is not a hypothetical case.

The tomato,[1] the plant in question, was cultivated in Europe as long ago as 1554;[2] it was known in Virginia in 1781 and in the Northern States in 1785; but it found its way into favor slowly, even in this land of its origin. A credible witness states that in Salem it was almost impossible to induce people to eat or even taste of the fruit. And yet, as you are well aware, its present cultivation on an enormous scale in Europe and this country is scarcely sufficient to meet the increasing demand.

A plant which belongs to the family of the tomato has been known to the public under the name of the strawberry tomato. The juicy yellow or orange-colored fruit is inclosed in a papery calyx of large size. The descriptions which were published when the plant was placed on the market were attractive, and were not exaggerated to a misleading extent. But, as you all know, the plant never gained any popularity. If we look at these two cases carefully we shall see that what appears to be caprice on the part of the public is at bottom common sense. The cases illustrate as well as any which are at command the difficulties which surround the whole subject of the introduction of new foods.


  1. According to notes made by Mr. Manning, Secretary Massachusetts Horticultural Society (History Massachusetts Horticultural Society), the tomato was introduced into Salem, Mass., about 1802 by Michele Felice Corne, an Italian painter, but he found it difficult to persuade people even to taste the fruit (Felt's Annals of Salem, vol. ii, p. 631). It was said to have been introduced into Philadelphia by a French refugee from Santo Domingo in 1798. It was used as an article of food in New Orleans in 1812, but was not sold in the markets of Philadelphia until 1829. It did not come into general use in the North until some years after the last-named date.
  2. "In Spain and those hot regions, they use to eat the (love) apples prepared and boiled with pepper, salt, and olives; but they yield very little nourishment to the bodies, and the same nought and corrupt. Likewise they doe eat the apples with oile, vinegar, and pepper mixed together for sauce to their meat even as we in these Cold Countries do Mustard." (Gerard's Herbal, p. 316.)