to the planter, who will perceive, that where so great a point is gained, no visible injury is suffered, as is admitted by all, who have examined the Trees at this place. That almost every naturalist and Georgical writer, antient and modern, from Theophrastus to Virgil, and from Virgil down to Evelyn and his followers, has insisted on an opposite practice, as quite indispensable to the health and well-being of woody plants, is little to the purpose. It is nothing more than a reiterated precept, handed down from one age to another, in the face of the most unquestionable experience of its fallacy.*

*

Upon the whole, in considering this fairest, and most beautiful of vegetable productions, it is interesting to observe the curious and complicated mechanism, if I may so speak, that is displayed by nature, in nourishing and bringing it to perfection, and the intimate connexion, which subsists between the most distant parts. In fact, every part of a Tree is the condition of every other part, which continually acts and reacts. The judicious planter, therefore, will regard the treatment to be given to none of these parts with indifference; it being clear, that the preservation of all the parts, in as entire and perfect a state as possible, is a matter of first-rate moment to his Art. He will

*NOTE V.

also see, that his success mainly depends on the due Regulation of the Sup, and a careful protection of the Sap-vessels.

In the course of the foregoing remarks and illustrations, I have endeavoured to show, the importance of the four main Properties or Prerequisites, which Trees should possess, to render them fit for removal to exposed situations. I have also given a cursory idea of the nature of the different organs of woody plants, by which those properties are designated. From what has been said, the intelligent reader will perceive, that the principle adopted, for a new Theory of the Art, is founded on the laws of vegetation, and the researches of the most eminent phytologists. By reducing it to practice, the Mutilating system, now generally prevalent, will be rendered unnecessary, and a method established, which is obviously superior in itself, and more agreeable to observation and experience. This system I shall venture to call the PRESERVATIVE. But, before concluding these remarks, it is but fair, towards the existing system, to take a short view of the actual merits of both, and, by taking them in a comparative way, endeavour to show how each applies to practice.

We will suppose that a planter, according to the Mutilating method, is to remove, to an exposed situation, a Tree eight-and-twenty or thirty feet

high, three feet and a half in girth (or fourteen inches in diameter), at a foot from the ground. We will suppose further, that it displays the most perfect symmetry of form, having an expansion of top from five-and-twenty to eight-and-twenty feet, with boughs descending to within three or four feet of the ground. Such a Tree we may consider as a very handsome subject, and such as has frequently been removed at this place.

Having prepared the roots, according to Lord Fitzharding's method, three or four years before, and taken them up as well as he can, perhaps seven feet out from the stem (which, according to Marshall, is well-rooted for its height *), we will suppose that this planter then proceeds to lighten and lop the top, in order to reduce it, as the same intelligent writer recommends, " to the ability of the roots." We will, moreover, take it for granted, that he deals mercifully with this beautiful Tree, and cuts away only a half, or a third part of its boughs, and thus transfers it to its new situation. Under these circumstances, we may presume, that some props or fastenings, whether of wood or cordage, may be requisite, especially about the equinox, to preserve the Tree in an upright position. Now, will not all the evils, ascribed by Miller to the Mutilating system, independently altogether

* Rural Ornament, Vol. I. p. 367.

of picturesque considerations, begin to assail it? Having the roots and top (which are both Conservative organs), curtailed and injured at one and the same time, the supply, not less than the preparation of the Sap, is completely impeded. From the obvious want of Leaves sufficient to elaborate the sap, and the as striking want of Branches to communicate nourishment to the stem, and ultimately to the roots, the whole Tree, in most instances, becomes stunted and paralyzed. Pale and yellowish tints supply the place of a deep and healthful verdure of foliage, and the larger boughs, as well as the light spray, gradually decay and drop off. Even in cases, which are the most eminently successful, and where the Tree fortunately escapes these mischances, ten years at least, as I conceive it, in the best English climates, and fifteen and twenty years in the northern counties, and in Scotland, are scarcely sufficient to replace the amputations with fresh wood, and to restore the Tree to its natural health and strength.

What, we may ask, have now become of its fine symmetry of form, its characteristic and ample top, its happy surface (as Gilpin expresses it), for catching great masses of light?" What also has become of the fair promise, which before removal it held out, of enduring vigour, and of sound and healthy wood? All these are gone, as Miller truly states; all are utterly annihilated, by the