No special amount of prophetic acumen is required to foresee that the time will soon come when the people of this country must necessarily place a much higher value upon all kinds of food than they do at present, or have done in the past. In this we are pre-supposing that in the natural course of events, our population will continue to increase in nearly the same ratio it has since we assumed the responsibilities of an independent nation.

The very existence of animal life on this planet depends upon the quantity and quality of available food, and while some sentimentalists may assume to ignore and even attempt to deprecate the animal desires of their race, nature compels us to recognize the fact that there can be no fire without fuel, and the great and useful intellectual powers of man are the emanations of the animal tissues of a well-nourished brain. The brawny arm that rends the rock and hurls the fragments aside, gets its power through the same channel and from the same source as those of other members of society, whatever the nature of their calling; for mankind is built upon one universal and general plan, varied though it may be in some of the minor details of construction. We certainly have no cause to fear that the theories of Malthus, in regard to the overpopulation of the earth as a whole, will ever be verified in the experience of the human race, because with necessity comes industry, also the inventions of devices to enable us to avoid just such dangers, and if these fail to keep pace with our wants and needs, wars, earthquakes, drouths, floods, and contagious, epidemic and other diseases, become the weapons which nature employs to prevent overpopulation. But we cannot deny that nature does sometimes encourage or permit a somewhat redundant population in certain favorable countries and localities, and then follows a struggle for existence, and food becomes the paramount object in life. To ward off danger of this kind and keep the supply in excess of the demand, is a problem which should seriously engage the attention of every one who takes the least interest in the general welfare of his countrymen, even though the day of want or scarcity of food may be very far distant.

Among the various sources of acceptable and nutritious food products heretofore almost entirely neglected in this country, the edible nuts stand preËminently and conspicuously in the foreground, awaiting the skill and attention of all who seek pleasure and profit—to be derived from the products of the soil. For many centuries these nuts have held a prominent position among the desirable and valuable food products of various European and Oriental countries; not only because they were important and almost indispensable in making up the household supplies of all classes of the people, but often because available for filling a depleted purse, and the thing needful for this purpose has, in the main, been received from far-distant nations, who through indifference and neglect failed to provide themselves with such a simple and valuable article as the edible nuts.

Much as we may boast of our immense natural resources and advantages, we have not, as yet, availed ourselves of one-half of those we possess, and the remainder is still awaiting our attention. We also neglect to avail ourselves of the many superior domestic traits and practices of the foreign nations with whom we are in constant communication. It may be that the absence of incentives has made us careless and indifferent in regard to a day of need, which in all probability will come to us sooner or later; but whatever the cause, the fact remains that we have been spending millions annually on worthless articles and sentimental problems and projects, which have brought us neither riches nor honor; in truth, to use a homely phrase, we have been following the bellwether in nearly all of our rural affairs and pursuits. As a natural result we are spending millions for imported articles of everyday use which might easily and with large profit be produced at home, and in many instances the most humiliating part of the transaction is that we send our money to people who do not purchase any of our productions and almost ignore us in commercial matters. I am not referring to those products ill-adapted to our climate, nor to those which, owing to scarcity and high price of labor, we are unable to produce profitably, but to such nuts as the almond, walnut and chestnut, which we can raise as readily as peaches, apples and pears. There certainly can be no excuse for the neglect of such nut trees on the score of cost of labor in propagation and planting, because our streets and highways are lined and shaded with equally as expensive kinds, although they are absolutely worthless for any other purpose than shade or shelter, yielding nothing in the way of food for either man or beast. Can any one invent a reasonable excuse for planting miles and miles of roadside trees of such kinds as elm, maple, ash, willow, cottonwood, and a hundred other similar kinds, where shellbark hickory, chestnut, walnut, pecan and butternut would thrive just as well, cost no more, and yet yield bushels of delicious and highly prized nuts, and this annually or in alternate years, continuing and increasing in productiveness for one, two or more centuries. Aside from the intrinsic value of such trees, they are, in the way of ornament, just as beautiful as, and in many instances much superior to those yielding nothing in the way of food except, perhaps, something for noxious insects.

I am not attempting to pose as the one wise man engaged in rural affairs, but am merely recounting my personal observation and experience, having in my younger days taken the advice of my elders, and at a time when a hint of the future value of nut trees would have been worth more than a paid-up life insurance policy. But as the hint was not given, I selected for roadside trees ash, maples, tulip, magnolias, and other popular kinds, all of which thrived, and by the time they were twenty years old began to be admired for their beauty, although their roots were spreading into the adjoining field, robbing the soil of the nutriment required for less vigorous-growing plants. Later, however, the discovery was made that I was paying very dearly for a crop of leaves and sentiment, neither of which was salable or available for filling one's purse. When thirty years of age the very best of my roadside trees were probably worth two dollars each for firewood, or one dollar more than the nurseryman's price at the time of planting. The greater part of these trees, however, have since been cremated, a few being left as reminders of the misdirected labors of youth and inexperience.

In this matter of following a leader in tree-planting along the highways, it appears to be a predominant trait of our rural population and as old as the settlement of this country, for nowhere is it more pronounced than in the New England States, where the American elms attracted the attention of the Pilgrims and their contemporaries and descendants, and even continued down to the present day. No one will deny that the American elm is a noble tree in appearance, is easily transplanted and of rapid growth, and yet it is one of the most worthless for any economic purpose. It may be that its worthlessness for other purposes made it all the more acceptable for streets and roadsides, the better kinds being reserved for firewood, fencing, furniture, and the manufacture of agricultural and other implements. But whatever the cause or object, the elm became the one tree generally selected for planting in parks, villages, cities, and along roadsides in the country, not only in the older but in many of the newer States. From present indications, however, the glory of this much over-praised tree is on the wane, for the imported elm-leaf beetle (Galeruca calmariensis) is slowly but surely spreading over the country, defoliating the elms of all species and varieties, and it is a question whether we should bless this insect for the work it is doing or look upon it as a pest. Perhaps future generations will sing pÆons in its praise, and they certainly will have reasons for rejoicing if better and more useful kinds are planted in the places now occupied by the worthless elms.

In other localities some pioneer or leader in roadside ornamentation selected or recommended some species of maple, linden, catalpa, poplar or willow, but it made little or no difference as to kind, because, as a rule, all his neighbors followed without a thought or question in regard to adaptation to soil, climate, or fitness in the local or surrounding scenery, or of its future economic value. The result of this want of taste and forethought may be seen in whatever direction one travels throughout the older and more thickly settled portions of this country.

Had the early settlers of the New England States planted shellbark hickories, or even the native chestnut, in place of the American elm, they would not only have had equally as beautiful trees for shade and ornament, but the nutritious nuts would scarcely have failed to bring bright cheer to many a household and money to fill oft-depleted purses, while their descendants would have blessed them for their forethought. Of course there are other valuable kinds of nuts which thrive over the greater part of the New England States, but I refer only to the two, which were so abundant in the forests that one or both could have been obtained for the mere cost of transplanting. But it is not fair to prate about the remissness and follies of our ancestors, unless we can show by our works that wisdom has come down to us through their experience.

What is true of the New England is equally true of all the older States, and is rapidly becoming so in many of the newer, little attention being paid to the intrinsic value of the wood or the product of the trees planted along the highways. There are also millions of acres of wild lands not suitable for cultivation, but well adapted to the growth of trees, whether of the nut-bearing or other kinds. But for the present I will omit further reference to the planting of nut trees except on the line of the highways, just where other kinds have long been in vogue and are still being cultivated for shade and ornament,—with no thought, perhaps, on the part of the planter, that both could be obtained in the nut trees, with something of more intrinsic value added. The nut trees which grow to a large size are as well adapted for planting along roadsides, in the open country, as other kinds that yield nothing in the way of food for either man or beast. They are also fully as beautiful in form and foliage, and in many instances far superior, to the kinds often selected for such purposes.

The only objection I have heard of as being urged against planting fruit and nut trees along the highway is that they tempt boys and girls—as well as persons of larger growth—to become trespassers; but this only applies to where there is such a scarcity that the quantity taken perceptibly lessens the total crop. But where there is an abundance, either the temptation to trespass disappears, or we fail to recognize our loss. As we cannot very well dispense with the small boy and his sister, I am in favor of providing them bountifully with all the good things that climate and circumstance will afford. It is a truism that conscience is never strengthened by an empty stomach.

A mile, in this country, is 5280 feet, and if trees are set 40 feet apart—which is allowing sufficient room for them to grow during an ordinary lifetime—we get 133 per mile in a single row; but where the roads are three to four rods wide, two rows may be planted, one on each side, or 266 per mile. With such kinds as the Persian walnut and American and foreign chestnuts, we can safely estimate the crop, when the trees are twenty years old, at a half bushel per tree, or 66 bushels for a single row, and 133 for a double row per mile. With grafted trees of either kind we may count on double the quantity named, presuming, of course, that the trees are given proper care. But to be on the safe side, let us keep our estimate down to the half-bushel mark per tree, and with this crop, at the moderate price of four dollars per bushel, we would get $264 from the crop on a single row, and double this sum, or $528, for the crop on a double row—with a fair assurance that the yield would increase steadily for the next hundred years or more; while the cost of gathering and marketing the nuts is no greater, and in many instances much less than that of the ordinary grain crops. At the expiration of the first half century, one-half of the trees may be removed, if they begin to crowd, and the timber used for whatever purpose it may best be adapted. The remaining trees would probably improve, on account of having more room for development.

There has been a steady increase in the demand, and a corresponding advance in the price of all kinds of edible nuts, during the past three or four decades, and this is likely to continue for many years to come, because consumers are increasing far more rapidly than producers; besides, the forests, which have long been the only source of supply of the native kinds, are rapidly disappearing, while there has not been, as yet, any special effort to make good the loss, by replanting or otherwise. The dealers in such articles in our larger cities assure me that the demand for our best kinds of edible nuts is far in excess of the supply, and yet not one housewife or cook in a thousand in this country has ever attempted to use nuts of any kind in the preparation of meats and other dishes for the table, as is so generally practiced in European and Oriental countries.

The question may be asked, if the demand is sufficient to warrant the planting of the hardy nut trees extensively along our highways or elsewhere. In answer to such a question it may be said that we not only consume all of the edible nuts raised in this country, but import millions of pounds annually of the very kinds which thrive here as well as in any other part of the world.

I have before me the records of our imports from the year 1790 to 1894, but as I purpose dealing more with the present and future than with the distant past, I will refer here only to the statistics of the four years of the present decade, leaving out all reference to the tropical nuts, which are not supposed to be adapted to our climate.

Of almonds, not shelled, and on which there is a protective duty of three cents per pound, we imported from 1890 to the close of 1893, 12,443,895 pounds, valued at $1,100,477.65. Of almonds, shelled, on which the duty is now five cents, we imported 1,326,633 pounds. The total value of both kinds for the four years, amounted to $1,716,277.32. Whether this high protective duty is to remain or not is uncertain, but it is quite evident that it has had very little effect in stimulating the cultivation of this nut except in circumscribed localities on the Pacific coast.

Of filberts and walnuts, not shelled, and with a duty of two cents per pound, we imported during the same years from eleven to fifteen million pounds annually, or a total for the four years of 54,526,181 pounds, and in addition about two million pounds of the shelled kernels, on which the duty was six cents (now four) per pound. The total value of these importations amounted to $3,176,085.34.

I do not find the European chestnut mentioned in any list of imports, although an immense quantity must be received from France, Italy and Spain every year, and they are probably imported under the head of miscellaneous nuts, not specially provided for, and upon which the duty was two cents per pound in 1890-'91, but was later reduced to one and a half cents.

Under the head "miscellaneous nuts," or all other shelled and unshelled "not specially provided for," there was imported during the period named 6,442,908 pounds, valued at $235,976.05. The total for all kinds of edible nuts imported was $7,124,575.82. These figures are sufficient to prove that we are neglecting an opportunity to largely engage in and extend a most important and profitable industry. It is true that in the Southern States considerable attention has been given, of late, to the preservation of the old pecan nut trees and the planting of young stock, but it will be many years before the increase from this source can overtake the ever-increasing demand for this delicious native nut. Californians are also making an effort to raise several foreign varieties of edible nuts on a somewhat extensive scale, but all these widely scattered experiments are mere drops in the ocean of our wants. Under such conditions I ask, in all seriousness, if it is not about time that our farmers and rural population generally began to count their worthless and unproductive possessions, in the form of roadside and other shade trees—which have probably cost fully as much to secure, plant and care for during the few or many years since they were set out, as would have been expended upon the most beautiful and valuable nut-bearing kinds. If our ancestors were at fault in the selection of trees for planting, we need not expect that posterity will excuse us for continuing and repeating their folly, especially when our dear-bought experience should teach us better.

At the present time there might be some difficulty in procuring, at the nurseries, a choice selection of nut trees in any considerable quantity, suited to roadside planting, because heretofore there has been little demand for such stock; and nurserymen are only human, and conduct their establishments on business principles, propagating the kind of trees in greatest demand, regardless of their intrinsic or future value to purchasers. They will also continue producing such stock just so long as the demand will warrant it, and further, it is but natural that they should sometimes recommend and advise their customers to purchase worthless, and even pestiferous kinds, such as the ailanthus and white poplar, because the profits in raising these trees are large and there is little danger of loss in transplanting. But if purchasers will insist on having better kinds and refuse to accept any other, they will soon be accommodated; and if not, then let everyone who owns a plot of ground become his own propagator of trees. It is not beyond the ability of any moderately intelligent man (or woman, for that matter) to raise nut trees, and as readily as one could potatoes or corn.

Where farmers want a row of trees along the roadside, to be utilized for line fence posts, they cannot possibly find any kinds better adapted for this purpose than chestnut, walnut and hickory; and these will give just as dense a shade, and look as well—besides, in a few years they may yield enough to pay the taxes on the entire farm, the crop increasing in amount and value not only during the lifetime of the planter, but that of many generations of his descendants.

This appeal to the good sense of our rural population is made in all sincerity and with the hope that it will be heeded by every man who has a spark of patriotism in his soul, and who dares show it in his labors, and by setting up a few milestones in the form of nut-bearing trees along the roadsides—if for no other purpose than the present pleasure of anticipating the gratification such monuments will afford the many who are certain to pass along these highways years hence.

It is surely not good policy to enrich other nations at the expense of our own people, as we are now doing in sending millions of dollars annually to foreign countries in payment for such luxuries as edible nuts that could be readily and profitably produced at home. There need be no fear of an overproduction of such things, no matter how many may engage in their cultivation, because in such industries many will resolve to do, and even make an attempt, but a comparatively small number will reach any marked degree of success.