440 EDITOB'S BOX. [April, 



risk of calling down the vengeance of such an entity, such a practical, 

 well-known, and tried forester ; yes, at any risk — from his opinion I 

 altogether differ, and consider his tuition not only deceptive, but 

 absurd and opposed to the fact. Again, how criticism can injure 

 ' Forestry,' or aught written therein, is not apparent. But if criticism 

 harm anything, it must be the chartalan, the egotist, his amour- 

 ^Toprc, or his prittle-prattle. Criticism is invigorating and wholesome, 

 seeing that its object is to deprecate and expose counterfeit articles. 

 However,there are certain persons who would parade their own doctrine 

 as the only true and absolute doctrine, and the humble lay members 

 outside the arena of this infallible and all-wise clique, who cannot 

 swallow all the spurious pills of their manufacture without protest, 

 are doomed to eternal isolation and the confederated scorn of the 

 sylvan gods. 



Last time I wrote under the assumed name of ' Sylvestris,' and for 

 fear of again provoking the ire of Mr. Mackenzie this time I subscribe 

 my own name. 



Glendye. James Faequharson. 



Sir, — I, at least, as one of the readers of 'Forestry,' find but 

 little difficulty in forming an opinion as to which side the ' pre- 

 ponderance of reason and argument lies ' in the ' thrashing-out ' 

 process of the above subject ; and although enough, and perhaps 

 more than enough, has already been written on this very significant 

 matter, you, will perhaps grant me your kind indulgence and 

 space enough to add my item of experience; for when such as 

 ' Bannockburn ' write on important subjects such as the above, it 

 makes one pause and think over all they have done and seen. 



To pare very grassy surfaces for ordinary plants, when pitting is 

 not necessary, is so uniform a practice North and South that it almost 

 seems too simple to have been mentioned by Mr. Scott in his monthly 

 article on ' Forest Work ' ; but when such articles are meant for the 

 instruction of the young and as a remiu'ier to the old forester, it is 

 quite in place. That it is proper to criticise such articles is very 

 questionable etiquette ; and I think, with Mr. McKeuzie, that if it is 

 done, such writers should be as manly as to also subscribe their name 

 and address. 



A practical forester * Bannockburn ' cannot be, or else his practice 

 is very limited indeed. How can he explain the following quotation 

 from his own letter, which appeared iu your issue of last month 

 (p. 377) : — ' No one will dispute the practicability of paring, provided 

 the initial cost of planting is not considered ; but as to the necessity 

 or utility of it, I entirely demur'? 



