the Art, and, as he himself states, from "real practice."* Still his subjects, like those of his predecessor Boutcher, were drawn mostly from close plantations, for the purpose of thinning them. They were, in the same way, conveyed on "men's shoulders;" sometimes also on handspikes; and, on particular occasions, on "high timber-wheels." The roots he cut and multiplied, in the same careful manner as is directed by Evelyn and Boutcher, but without the numerous Removals, recommended by the latter; from whose treatise, however, he seems to have taken the whole of that process.

For the Removal of saplings of twenty feet high, and from nine to twelve inches in girth, his plan is of considerable use. In forming side-skreens near the mansion-house, in which grove and underwood are frequently united, it will not disappoint the planter. In new designs, he will find it extremely serviceable, for raising the former, if in low and sheltered situations, where a propitious climate is created; and for producing a speedier effect, than can be expected by the ordinary methods.

Although Marshall had too much taste to wish to pollard, or utterly decapitate his trees, still, like most of his predecessors, he lopped and lightened the tops, in order to "proportion them (as he

* Rur. Ornam. pp. 43, 356–361.

states) to the ability of the roots." * Had he advanced the roots to the ability of the tops, and preserved entire the fine forms of the latter, it would have been a better system. But his method of giving gracefulness, and a sort of natural elegance to the above operation, is so extraordinary, that it is worth while to quote it, for the amusement of the reader. "To head down a Tree (he says) in the pollard manner, is very unsightly; and to prune it up to a mere Maypole, so as to leave only a small broom-like head at the top, is equally destructive of its beauty. The most rational, the most natural, and, at the same time, the most elegant manner of doing this, is to prune the boughs in such a way, as to form the head of the plant into a Conoid, in resemblance of the natural head of the Lombardy Poplar, and of a size proportioned to the ability of the root. Whoever was the inventor of this method of pruning the heads of trees, deserves infinite credit. It only wants to be known, in order to be approved; and we are happy to see it growing into universal practice."+

In this anxious wish, I apprehend, no planter of taste will now probably concur: Neither will he feel disposed to admire the " rationality, naturalness, and elegance" of the device of fashioning the

* Rur. Ornam. Vol. I. p. 43.

† Id. Ibid.

fine heads of the Oak, the Elm, or the Chesnut, after the manner of the Lombardy Poplar, the most formal, perhaps, and most unpicturesque of all existing Trees. Yet, notwithstanding a few such absurdities, we must candidly admit, that Marshall was a planter of great skill, and a writer of unquestionable diligence, and, together with the judicious Boutcher, did more to improve the Art, than all who had gone before, and, probably, all who succeeded him.

If there be any other work in our language, or in any of the languages of modern Europe, in which the art is treated in a preceptive way, or in a way that furnishes any important materials for bringing its history down to our own times, the work has escaped my search. Miller, one of the best Arboriculturists and Phytologists, that England has ever produced, informs us, that, in his time, that is, in the beginning and middle of the last century, the Transplanting of Large Trees had come much into fashion in England. Planters, he says, were "in too great haste" to anticipate the slow, but certain effects of time; and, by unfortunately adopting the worst possible methods for their practice, they were far less assured of attaining the end they had in view (or, more properly speaking, they were assured of never attaining it), namely, the speedy acquisition of thriving Trees, than if they had begun, at once, by raising

them from the seed. This failure he mainly attributes to the unnatural and unscientific method of lopping or lightening the Tops, at the time of Removal, which, as he affirms, is destructive alike of the health, and the value of Trees. He truly observes, that, were planters fully aware of the doctrine of the Circulation of the Sap, and the curious anatomy of plants, they would perceive, that a Tree is as much nourished by its Branches, as by its roots. "For (adds he), were the same severities practised on a Tree of the same age unremoved, it would so much stint the growth, as not to be recovered in several years; nor would it ever arrive at the size of such, as had all their Branches left upon them."*

He is, therefore, no advocate for the Removal of Large Trees; and the reason evidently is, that he never saw it executed, but on principles, utterly at variance with Phytological science, and the Law of Nature respecting the growth of plants :-For Miller seems to have been well acquainted with their history and constitution, and with the beautiful action and reaction, which all their parts constantly maintain on one another.

Although it is pleasing to observe so much good sense, and so much sound science displayed, at so early a period of our Arboricultural history, yet it

Miller's Gardener's and Botanist's Dictionary, voc. "Planting."

is a curious fact, that neither the precept, nor the example of Miller produced any good effect, nor any material change in the general practice, and, by consequence, any improvement in the Art. I can speak, partly from my own knowledge, of the general Transplanting system, now established in England and this country, and partly from the information, communicated by some of the most experienced planters in both countries, that the method, so justly reprobated by this eminent man, is in pretty general use. I will not assert, that there is no planter, who preserves the Tops of his Trees entire: But the ordinary method still is, to transfer Old Trees, in the same way as Nurseryplants, that is, by lopping off a third part, a half, and sometimes the whole of the Top, erroneously conceiving, that both can be managed on the same principles. They trust implicitly to the plastic powers of the Trees, to replace these amputations with fresh wood, and to recover themselves from these severities. But they seem to make no account, either of the years which are lost, until such recovery is effected; of the frequent failures and deaths that occur, when not effected at all; and of the utter loss of distinctive and peculiar character which ensues, by reducing the heads of the most different Trees, to one monotonous and formal figure. † May not we, then, fairly con

*NOTE XV.

+ NOTE XVI.