SECTION III.

NOTE I. Page 57.

MARSHALL has a specious way of adjusting the differences between these conflicting systems; although he seems to give it in the end in favour of the former, (that is, of the system of raising trees from the seed,) in situations where the nature of the ground will admit. "The dispute about sowing and planting (as he observes) may in some measure be reconciled in the following manner. Where the strength of the land lies in the substratum, while the surface soil is of an ungenial nature, sow, in order that the roots may strike deep, and thereby reap the full advantage of the treasures below. (Qu. Where did Marshall meet with land of this description?) But, on the contrary, where the top soil is good, and the bottom of an opposite quality, (a very common case,) plant, and thereby give the roots the full enjoyment of the productive part of the soil. Or, under these last circumstances, sow; and tap the young plants as they stand with a tapping instrument, and thereby check their downward tendency, as well as strengthen their horizontal roots.

"By this method of treating seedling plants, the peculiar advantage of planting is obtained. The dispute, therefore, seems to rest entirely upon this question; which of the two methods is least expensive? To come at this, there are two things to be considered; the actual expense of labour, and other contingent matters, and the loss of time in the land occupied. With respect to the former, sowing is beyond comparison the cheapest method; but in regard to the latter, planting may seem to gain a preference; for the seed-bed is small compared with the ground to be planted and while that is rearing the seedling plants, this continues to be applied to the purposes of husbandry. However, if we consider the check which plants in general receive in transplantation, and if the interspaces of an infant wood may for several years after sowing be still cultivated to advantage, the preference, we conceive, is evidently and beyond all dispute on the side of sowing."-Rural Ornament, vol. i. pp. 121-123.

As this is a question of some moment, and has divided the most judicious writers and planters for a century back, it must be interesting to the young planter to have a concise summary of the evidence as furnished by our best writers on the one side and on the other, such as may assist him to determine which is most consonant to rational theory, supported and enforced by the best practice.

Miller, no mean authority as an arboriculturist, says (as we have seen) that no trees transplanted, and especially the Oak, will ever produce such valuable timber as those raised from the seed. Marshall, as we have seen also, prefers sowing the seed, wherever the ground is capable of being worked with the plough. Evelyn, Emmerich, and though last, not least, the intelligent Speechly, are of the same opinion, although Speechly's extensive practice was sometimes at variance with this sentiment. Nicol and Pontey have practised both methods extensively, and they offer no arguments against sowing, where situation and circumstances admit. Sang, who in point of practical skill is not inferior to any of these writers, says, "It is an opinion very generally entertained, that planted timber can never in any case be equal in durability and value to that which is sown. We certainly feel ourselves inclined to support this opinion, although we readily admit, that the matter has not been so fully established by experiment, as to amount to positive proof. But, although we have not met with decided evidence, to determine on the comparative excellence of timber raised from the seed, without being replanted, over such as has been raised from replanted trees, we are left in no doubt as to the preference in respect to growth of those trees which are sown, over such trees as are planted.”— Planter's Calendar, p. 43. The same writer prefers, and with great justice, this mode of raising the Scotch Pine and the Larch.

The late Dr Yule, an able botanist, in an excellent paper which he gave to the Horticultural Society of Edinburgh, (for want, as he remarked to me, of a more appropriate body to which he might communicate it,) strongly recommends the sowing of seeds, for permanent plantations. "It is a well ascertained fact (he says) that seedlings allowed to remain in their original station, will, in the course of a few seasons, far overtop common nursed plants, which are several years older. This principle, however, is of course strictly applicable to foresttimber trees. Where shelter or ornament is speedily wanted, the transplanting of grown trees, laying, budding, inarching, and other means must consequently be substituted."-Horticult. Mem. vol. ii. pp. 418, 419. The ingenious author of the "Encyclopædia of Agriculture," on impartially considering these different opinions, observes, respecting those of Sang and Yule in particular, that they seem to be founded on the idea

that the tap-root is of material importance to full-grown trees, and that when that is once cut off, the plant has not the power of renewing it. "That the tap-root (he observes) is of the utmost consequence for the first three or four years, is obvious from the economy of nature at that age of the plant, perhaps for a longer period; but that it can be of no great consequence to full-grown trees, appears highly probable from the fact, that when such trees are cut down, the tap-root is seldom to be distinguished from the others."-(P. 572.) Forsyth, an arboriculturist of considerable experience, has distinctly shown by experiments, that trees have the power of renewing their tap-roots; and he further proves the great advantages that are derived from cutting down trees, after two or three years' planting, in order to form healthy and vigorous woods. He transplanted, as he states, a bed of Oak-plants, cutting the tap-roots near to some of the side roots, or fibres springing from them. In the second year after, he headed down the one half of the plants, and left the other half to nature. In the first season, those headed down made six feet long, and upwards, and completely covered the head of the old stem, leaving only a faint cicatrix, and produced new tap-roots upwards of two feet and a-half long. That half of the plants which was not headed down, was not one fourth part the size of the others. Some time after, when he wrote the account, one of the plants cut over was found to be eighteen feet high, and fifteen inches in circumference at six inches from the ground; while one of the largest of the plants not cut over, measured only five feet and a half in height, and three inches and three quarters in circumference.-See Treatise on Fruit Trees, p. 144.

On considering the whole question, it appears to me, that as the Pine and Fir species receive the greatest check from transplanting, and as, when planted at four and five years old, they do not readily grow to timber, it is clear, that they should always be sowed, or at least planted very young, in high and cold regions. Respecting all trees that stool, I entirely concur in opinion with the intelligent author of the "Encyclopædia of Gardening," that, with any tolerable soil and situation, planting will be found preferable to sowing, if strong and healthy plants be used, and such as have not been too much drawn up by the heat of the nursery, taking care to cut them down after the second, or, much better, after the third year, when they have been established in the ground.

NOTE II. Page 59.

As I consider Miller as one of the greatest authorities we have, for whatever relates to trees, I shall beg leave to give his opinion at large

on the subject of the removal of large trees. To this art he undoubtedly was not partial, from the great want of science which he saw displayed by those who practised it in his day; and he could form no conception, either of the general progress of science which we see now attained, or its application to this particular branch of rural economy.

"The modern practice of transplanting forest-trees, from hedge-rows and woods of large size, and at a great expense, has too generally prevailed in this kingdom (England,) the generality of planters being in too great haste, and by a mistaken notion of saving time, begin by transplanting such large trees as they find on their own estates, or that they can procure in their neighbourhood, and please themselves with the hopes of having fine plantations soon; but if, instead of removing these trees, they would begin by making a nursery, and raising their trees from seed, they would save a great expense, and much time, and they would have the constant pleasure of seeing their trees annually advance in their growth, instead of growing worse, as will always be the case where old trees are removed; though many persons flatter themselves with the hopes of success, when they find their trees shoot out the following season.

"I have seen great numbers of tall Oaks transplanted, which have appeared to thrive for some years, when first planted; but in five or six years after, they have begun to decay at top, and have leisurely died to the ground, than which nothing can be a more disagreeable sight to the owner. And the method which is commonly practised in transplanting these trees, would destroy them, were there a possibility of such large trees surviving their removal, which is, that of cutting off all their branches: for were the same practised on a tree of the same age unremoved, it would stint the growth so much as not to be recovered in several years, nor would it ever arrive to the size of such as have all their branches left on them. But the reason given for this practice is, that if the branches were left upon the trees, they could not be supported-the winds would throw them out of the ground; and another (which is bad philosophy) is, that, as the roots have been greatly reduced by transplanting, so the heads of the trees should be reduced in the same proportion. As to the first, it must be allowed that trees which are removed with great heads, are with great difficulty preserved in their upright situation; for the winds will have such power against the branches as to overset the trees, if they are not very strongly supported with ropes; therefore, this may be brought as an objection to the transplanting of large trees, rather than in support of a practice which is so prejudicial to them. And as to the other reason, it has no foundation: for, if large amputations are made at the root, there should not be the same practised on the head;

because the wounded part of the head will imbibe the air at every orifice, to the great prejudice of the tree.

"Besides this, if we pay any regard to the doctrine of the circulating of the juices in plants, we must allow that the heads of the trees are equally useful to nourish the roots, as the roots are to the heads; so that, if there is a waste of sap both at the top and bottom of the trees, it must weaken them in proportion. For whoever will be at the trouble to try the experiment on two trees of equal age and health, and cut the branches off from one, and leave them upon the other at the time of transplanting, if the latter is well secured from blowing down, it will be found to succeed much better than the other. Or, if the same thing is practised upon two trees left standing, the tree, whose branches are cut off, will not make half the progress as the other, nor will the stem increase in its bulk half so fast. Therefore, where trees are transplanted young, there will be no necessity for using this unnatural amputation, and the success of these plantations will always give pleasure to the owner."-Gardener's and Botanist's Diction. in voc. "Planting.”

I have particular satisfaction in quoting these sentiments from the great work of Miller, and I have little doubt of their being perused with equal satisfaction by the discerning reader. In fact, no advocate of the system which is attempted to be established in this Essay, could have given this material part of its principles with greater force and truth. It clearly shows that, if arboricultural science, in respect to this art, had not been stationary for a century in England, the giving immediate effect to wood, instead of being, as it now is, a rude and uncertain practice, would long since have risen to the rank of a regular art, justly esteemed, and as generally cultivated.

NOTE III. Page 63.

According to the best late phytologists, water is an agent as necessary to the development of vegetable life, as it seems to be a constituent of vegetable organisation. A dry seed does not act on the surrounding air, until it has imbibed water. Water is likewise the vehicle by which nutrient matter is carried into plants, and in the opinion of some, is even reduced in them to a solid form, and applied to the purposes of nutrition. See ELLIS, Veget. Physiol. in Suppl. Encyclop. Britan.

Notwithstanding what is here said in the text, respecting light as a condition of internal development peculiar to plants, it may be doubted whether it be not nearly as necessary to animals. Cattle will not fatten so well, when stall-fed or shut up, as on good ground, and in fine weather, with the free enjoyment of light. Light is caloric; and