himself is far from recommending), suggested good ground for miscarriage, without having recourse to imaginary causes.

There is no writer, ancient or modern, who ever had more science, or more practical skill than Miller, in the cultivation of Wood, and he distinctly states, that, from repeated trials," he could not observe the least difference in the growth of those Trees, which were so placed (that is, as they had previously stood), and others which had been reversed." See Gardener's and Botanist's Dict. in voc. Planting. A few of the later phytologists support the same opinion, in which long experience obliges me to coincide; although I am surprised to observe, that modern writers of some name are not wanting, to perpetuate the prejudice.

SECTION V.

NOTE I. Page 147.

THE important principle, here touched upon, is not so fully illustrated as it might have been. If the reader have attentively considered, first, the principles promulgated, and next, their developement and application, in the Selection of Subjects, the conclusions, which he should arrive at, will necessarily follow. In the words of the text, "He may rest assured, in this case, that his success or miscarriage will be in the precise ratio, in which his subjects may have obtained the Protecting Properties. If fully obtained, the progress of the Trees will be visible from the beginning; but, if imperfectly, their progress will be retarded, until the deficiency be made up." Yet, as the errors most commonly committed by planters, and the ill success that attends them, usually result from an improper Selection of Subjects, I shall say a few words upon it here, by way of practical commentary.

Nineteen times in twenty, or, much more probably, ninetynine times in a hundred, planters, who remove large Trees, select their subjects injudiciously. Perhaps, more correctly speakng, they make no selection at all, according to any preconceived principle, or rule of choice. Supposing a man carefully to take up and plant a Tree, so selected, which has tolerable roots, it - necessarily follows, that it must have tolerable branches. But it may happen, from the circumstances in which it has been placed, that it is deficient in stoutness of Stem, and, what is still worse, it may have no thickness and induration of Bark, to protect the sap-vessels. We shall further suppose, that he has only cursorily perused the foregoing pages; and, without altogether denying the correctness of the principles laid down (be

cause no man, attentively viewing natural causes and effects, can deny them), he considers this as a pretty fair experiment of the efficacy of the Preservative system.

What, then, happens? The roots being not extensive, and the stem slender, it is soon discovered, that, without propping, the tree cannot stand. This is thought very strange indeed, in the new system, which professes to discard all such unsightly appendages. We will next suppose, that the props are applied with due diligence and success, for two or three years; and, meanwhile, that the roots and fibres, being comparatively undisturbed, extend underground for five or six years more. As to the branches, few or none having decayed in the beginning, the Tree, by the second year, has probably carried a good leaf, but has made no shoots of any sort.

Now this Tree, as it was not in possession of all the Protecting Properties, could develope those, which it possessed, only in an inferior degree; therefore," its progress must be retarded (as the text has it), until the deficiency be made up." If it chance to be in a situation relatively sheltered, and in a favourable soil, it will, after five or six years more, in this climate, begin to obtain the proper stoutness of stem, and thickness of bark, which it should have had in the beginning: But if the exposure be great, whatever be the soil, ten or twelve years still may elapse, ere "the deficiency be made up." Thus, in the last mentioned case (which is by far the more common of the two), after about eighteen or twenty years, the Tree, having struggled under the unnatural circumstances of cold and exposure, to generate provisions, which warmth and shelter, in the previous Plantation, or Transplanting Nursery would have speedily conferred on it, at length surmounts the evils incident to injudicious selection, and begins to shoot forth with proper vigour. Such at least is its progress in the climate of Scotland.

This is no exaggerated picture, but a plain statement of facts, such as always occur when the laws of Nature are disregarded, and the developement of the properties she confers are checked in their progress. But what says the planter to the issue of his experiment?" Formerly," he observes, "we had a lightening and lopping system, or, as modern improvers chuse to call it,

a mutilating method,' "and one of mere physical force.' By vigorous exertion of this force, however, we dragged a large Tree out of one hole, and dropped it successfully into another, first lightening or pollarding the top; and, after eighteen or twenty years, or more, we had, to a certainty, and with little trouble, a good bushy head. By this means, likewise, a fine uniformity in all our park-wood was brought about, much superior to the wildness of an uncultivated forest.-By the New, or what is called the Preservative system, we go through a process much less simple and compendious, which is in so far much worse; and, after waiting just as long as by the old method, we have, after the same space of twenty years, a thriving Tree, although it is admitted, with its original top. The boasted Preservative system, therefore, pretty clearly promises more than it performs; and, as every candid person must see, is not worth the extra labour, and the minute attention which it costs."

The above illustration of the doctrine set forth in the text, that "we must wait till the deficiency be made up," is given on the supposition, that the Tree has tolerable roots and branches, but is without the other prerequisites. But, on a supposition that the Tree possessed the other Protecting Properties, and that roots or branches were deficient, there would be a corresponding result; and no vigorous progress could, in the same way, be expected from the plant, until the deficiency were made up in like manner.-I sincerely believe, however, that the above argument has been used, is used, and will continue to be used, notwithstanding all that science and experience can hold out, whether in this, or any other work,

SECTION VI.

NOTE I. Page 155.

ACCORDING to Bergman, the soil best adapted to culture consists of 4-10ths Clay, 3-10ths Sand, 2-10ths Calcareous earth, and 1-10th Magnesia. Fourcroy and Hassenfratz found 9216 parts of fertile soil to contain 305 parts of Carbon, together with 279 parts of Oil; of which, according to the calculations of Lavoisier, 220 parts may be considered as Carbon; so that the whole of the carbon, contained in the oil, may be estimated at nearly 525 parts, not reckoning the roots of vegetables, or about 1-16th part of its weight. Young, a scientific agriculturist, observed, that equal weights of different soils, when dried and reduced to powder, yielded, by distillation, quantities of air, in some measure corresponding to the ratio of their values. The air was a mixture of fixed and inflammable air, proceeding probably from the decomposition of the water, but partly also, as may be supposed, from its power of abstracting a quantity of air from the atmosphere, which the soil is likewise capable of doing.

One of the most favourable soils in England, for the production of fine wood, is said to be Sheffield-place, the seat of Lord Sheffield. "What is most remarkable (as Pontey observes), is, that the Oak and the Larch flourish equally upon it; though it would seem too light for the former, and too stiff for the latter." Profitable Planter, p. 106. In order to ascertain the constituent parts of a soil so celebrated for the production of Timber, Sir Humphrey Davy submitted one hundred parts of the entire soil to analysis, of which the following was the result: