e a success in growing these trees for their delicious
product. However, it is only in the twenty-eighth year of such work that
I have made an important discovery about the particular hickory with
which I have had the most success; I refer to the variety known as the
Weschcke shagbark hickory.

I began to graft such varieties as Beaver and Fairbanks
(bitternut--shagbark hybrid) hickory on Wisconsin native bitternut
hickory (_Carya cordiformis_) in 1920, and some grafts are doing very
well at this time, 1948, but they are practically barren of fruit.
Since then I have accumulated more varieties to test from many different
sources, to continue the work down to the present day. During that time
I noticed, but did not appreciate, the significance of the relationship
of growth between scion and root system. True, I have been very
cognizant of the so-called compatibility between stock and scion in the
hickory family, and have written about this matter for publication
several times, but I was then more concerned with the stock and scion
living together in a harmonious state of existence and health without
realizing that there was something else necessary to this relationship
in order to promote heavy bearing.

+Experiments in Grafting Black Walnuts+

Parallel to these early experiments, I was grafting in the same family
as the hickories, known as the walnut, or _Juglandaceae_ family, using
wild native butternut (_Juglans cinerea_) as a stock for grafting to
such varieties as the Thomas, Ohio, Stabler and Ten Eyck black walnut
(_J. nigra_). Some of these trees, so grafted, exist today, being more
than 25 years old, and they have never borne more than a hatful of
walnuts to a tree, even when they became large trees. Most of them are
entirely barren year after year. I often remarked to persons who were
interested in this phase of my work, that the black walnut was
non-productive on the butternut root system, but it was very evident
that there was not completecompatibility because the walnut scion
greatly outgrew the butternut stock causing a marked difference in their
trunk diameters just below and above the union. This great difference,
the butternut being so much smaller, was no doubt the cause of a
shortage of food supply elaborated through the bark circumference which
limited the top to a mere growth of leaves, not leaving sufficient
additional supply for the growth of fruit.

My observation among the hickories, with wh