One of the most important questions connected with our subject is: how far we are to regard our cereal grains, our esculent bulbs and roots, and the multiplied tree fruits of our gardens, as artificially modified and improved forms of wild, self-propagating vegetation. The narratives of botanical travellers have often announced the discovery of the original form and habitat of domesticated plants, and scientific journals have described the experiments by which the identity of particular wild and cultivated vegetables has been thought to be established. It is confidently affirmed that maize and the potato--which we must suppose to have been first cultivated at a much later period than the breadstuffs and most other esculent vegetables of Europe and the East--are found wild and self-propagating in Spanish America, though in forms not recognizable by the common observer as identical with the familiar corn and tuber of modern agriculture. It was lately asserted, upon what seemed very strong evidence, that the Aegilops ovata, a plant growing wild in Southern France, had been actually converted into common wheat; but, upon a repetition of the experiments, later observers have declared that the apparent change was only a case of temporary hybridation or fecundation by the pollen of true wheat, and that the grass alleged to be transformed into wheat could not be perpetuated as such from its own seed. The very great modifications which cultivated plants are constantly undergoing under our eyes, and the numerous varieties and races which spring up among them, certainly countenance the doctrine, that every domesticated vegetable, however dependent upon human care for growth and propagation in its present form, may have been really derived, by a long Succession of changes, from some wild plant not now perhaps much resembling it. [Footnote: What is the possible limit of such changes, we do not know, but they may doubtless be carriad vastly beyond what experience has yet shown to be practicable. Civilized man has experimented little on wild plants, and especially on forest trees. He has indeed improved the fruit, and developed new varieties, of the chestnut, by cultivation, and it is observed that our American forest-tree nuts and berries, such as the butternut and thewild mulberry, become larger and better flavored in a single generation by planting and training. (Bryant, Forest Trees, 1871, pp. 99, 115.) Why should not the industry and ingenuity which have wrought such wonders in our horticulture produce analogous results when applied to the cultivation and amelioration of larger vegetables Might not, for instance, the ivory nut, the fruit of the Phytelephas macrocarpa, possibly be so increased in size as to serve nearly all the purposes of animal ivory now becoming so scarce Might not the various milk-producing trees become, by cultivation, a really important source of nutriment to the inhabitants of warm climates In short, there is room to hope