OCTOBEE. 295 



information ; but it being shown that witnesses coming from every quarter 

 of the kingdom would be a heavy affair, and that to send a person 

 through the country would be open to objection on the score of partiahty, 

 therefore it was ultimately agreed that the evidence as brought forward 

 would be admissible, if duly attested, and bearing the post-mark of 

 the several localities from which they came. 



The following witnesses were called to support the prosecution : — 



Mr. Busby, Stockwood Park, Luton, Beds., stated that his crops of 

 Peaches, Nectarines, and Plums were very fine indeed ; that he had not 

 allowed defendant's entrance into his grounds for these ten years ; that he 

 had never failed to have a crop when many of his neighbours, who had 

 employed the defendant, had repeatedly failed. Witness stated that he 

 had always used broad coping to his walls, that his borders were well 

 drained, and that he paid great attention to the summer treatment of 

 his trees ; also, that throughout his general observations he had seen 

 equally good crops upon trees fully exposed as upon those protected. 

 This witness also further stated that if the trees were not too deeply 

 planted, and not overcrowded with wood, the spring thinning began in 

 time, gradually thinning through the summer, and stopped towards 

 the middle of August, good crops, he would venture to say, would be 

 the result. 



Mr. H. Dowling, Woolstan Lawn, Southampton, deposed that fruit 

 was very thin in his neighbourhood ; that in most places they use pro- 

 tection, but there are better crops where the trees were not covered ; 

 that he is sorry to see such neglect in that most essential point, draining 

 the borders, and that he has generally seen better crops upon un- 

 protected trees than upon those protected ; he also stated that with good 

 coping and well-drained borders, he is confident of better crops and 

 trees in better health and vigour. 



Mr. Abbott, Westwood, Lancashire, stated that the crops were very 

 bad in his neighbourhood ; that he covered his Peaches and Nectarines 

 with canvas upon poles, but got no fruit — Apricots without protection, 

 good crops ; his borders are thoroughly drained ; that he has generally 

 seen the best crops upon trees fully exposed, and his opinion upon the 

 whole is, that covering is a very useless and expensive affair. 



Mr. Don, Knole Park, Sevenoaks, deposed that the crops round him 

 were generally as bad as could be ; that the defendant was employed in 

 a great many cases in the form of cotton and woollen netting ; that the 

 borders are not generally drained ; but, nevertheless, he has generally 

 seen better crops without covering than with it ; when he lived in Suffolk 

 they never covered, and he never remembered a failure. He also 

 remembered in his young time full crops of wall fruit upon the open 

 walls in Scotland, Apricots especially. 



Mr. George Hood, Mamhead Park, Exeter, was the next witness, 

 who stated that crops of wall fruit were very poor in his neighbourhood ; 

 that defendant was denied entrance to his place, but his borders 

 wanted draining, and that he had generally seen better crops upon 

 unprotected than protected trees. 



Mr. Cai-penter, Great Barr Hall, Birmingham, next deposed that 

 Peaches and Nectarines were bad crops in his locality ; Plums, Apricots, 



