1871.] ON PEACH-TREE TRAINING. 85 



P. Fire -King. — Bright scarlet. Immense truss; free and fine 

 bedder. 



P. Lucius. — Very bright rose ; very large trusses in great profusion. 

 We have not proved this variety on an extensive scale, but from what 

 we saw of it last season, and heard of it at Kew and in the midland 

 counties, it must prove to be the finest of all our rose-coloured bedders, 

 and in a pot it is splendid. 



P. Jean Sisley. — This is a fine zonal variety, its form and substance 

 being much like Lord Derby, with a richer colour. Much is expected 

 of this variety. 



P. Bayard^ William Tliomson, Douglas Pearson., and Dr Murat. — 

 These are crimson varieties, of which we think very highly as bedders, 

 more especially the two first named, which are both excellent in habit, 

 having immense trusses produced very abundantly. Bayard's charac- 

 ter is well established, and William Thomson, though we had only two 

 plants of it planted out this year, we think quite equal to it. 



P. Blue Bell. — Bluish-lilac ; very pleasing colour ; large truss ; mode- 

 rately-profuse bloomer ; well worth growing in beds on account of its 

 lively colour. Should be plunged in 6-inch pots, when it flowers more 

 freely. Fine pot-variety and late winter-bloomer. 



P. MoM of Kent — Have not proved this variety, but from reliable 

 authority learn that it has been superior to Christine — to which class 

 it belongs — in England these last dry summers. It has not run so 

 much to seed as Christine ; but for wet seasons and northern districts 

 we suspect Christine is not easily conquered. 



From among numerous varieties we have selected several other sorts, 

 of which we prefer not to speak confidently at present. 



Growers who do not possess Glow and Violet Hill, the former a 

 scarlet, the latter a dwarf rose-colour, should add them to their collec- 

 tions. Glow is a very fine bedder, and Violet Hill the best dwarf Rose 

 we have ever seen. D. T. 



December 12, 1870. 



ON PEACH-TREE TRAINING. 



My attention has been accidentally drawn to Mr M'Millan's strictures 

 (page 541) upon my remarks on the above subject in the November 

 number of the ' Gardener,' which call for a word from me. Inten- 

 tionally or otherwise, Mr McMillan thinks that I claim to be the dis- 

 coverer of the system I advocated ; to show that such is not the case, 

 I recommend him to a more attentive perusal of my first paper. He 

 warns your readers that, at the end of a few years, trees trained in the 



