ON THE CULTUHE OF TALL OR CLIMBING ROSES. 



367 



1843, a piece of the limb of an apple tree, 

 affected by the iScolijtus, was brought to 

 me for examination. It was twenty-eight 

 inches in length, and three quarters of an 

 inch in diameter at the lower end. Its 

 surface bore the marks of twenty buds — 

 thirteen of which were perforated by the 

 insects; and, from the burrows within, I 

 took twelve of the blight-beetles in a living 

 state; the thirteenth having previously been 

 cut out. In July, 1844, 1 took one of these 

 beetles on a plum tree ; and, in August fol- 

 lowing, I found a large number of them in 

 some pieces of a blighted branch of the 

 apricot. 



To check the increase of this kind of in- 

 sect-blight, it is not enough to cut off the 

 infected limbs. The insects contained in 

 these limbs must be destroyed ; for, if they 

 are suffered to make their escape, they will 

 certainly continue to propagate the disease. 

 To make sure of the destruction of the in- 



sects, every limb affected by them should 

 be cut off and immediately burned, as soon 

 as the existence of the disease is discovered. 

 I am, dear sir, yours very truly, 



Thaddeus Wm. Harris. 



Cambridge, Mass., Jan. 7, 1843. 



[There is no vegetable malady in which 

 the cultivator of fruit trees, in America, is 

 so much interested at present as the pear 

 tree blight. To wage successful war against 

 it, nothing is so important as to have a clear 

 and distinct idea of the different forms of 

 the disease, and their origin. 



The foregoing remarks, from Dr. Harris, 

 whose able work on our "Insects Injurious 

 to Vegetation," has established his reputa- 

 tion, not merely as a scientific entomolo- 

 gist, but one who labors to render science 

 directly applicable to the dail)^ requisitions 

 of the cultivator of the soil, are most ac- 

 ceptable at the present moment. Ed.] 



ON THE CULTURE OF TALL OR CLIMBING ROSES.] 

 BY MR. A, FORSYTH, ALTON TOWERS, ENGLAND.* 



If we wish to convey correct ideas of plants, 

 we must adhere to botanical descriptions, 

 and not to terms used in common conversa- 

 tion ; for we find the term tree used in 

 speaking of ligneous, herbaceous, and even 

 annual plants. We have tree-paeony, tree- 

 violet, and even tree-mignonette : no won- 

 der, then, that we should have tree-roses. 



The standard rose is generally termed a 

 tree-rose ; and; before we go further with 

 the subject, it may be necessary to state, 

 that " when the branches are perennial, 

 and supported upon a trunk, a tree is said 

 to be formed. "t 



If I recollect rightlj', Loudon has some- 

 where set the boundary mark for a tree at 

 from " four to six inches diameter, with a sin- 

 gle bole or stem." Now there are rose-plants 

 here with stems 6 inches in diameter ; still 



• From the Journal of the London Hort. Society, 

 t Luulley':! Introd uction tu Botany. 



these dimensions do not constitute them rose- 

 trees ; for the common laurel will attain a 

 diameter of six feet, and form an enormous 

 head, yet the normal form of the laurel, as 

 well as that of the rose, is decidedly a 

 shrub ; and accordingly in botanical works 

 we find them constantly so named. The 

 largest rose-plant to be met with, scarcely 

 amounts to the character of a small tree, 

 {arhiiscidvs) by any reasonable stretch of 

 courtesy. But I am reminded' to get rose- 

 plants with the appearance at least, and with 

 the size of head of a tree, (arbor) aye, even 

 of such a tree as the princely cedar, so 

 graphically portrayed by Exekiel in his vi- 

 sion of the fall of the kings of Egypt and 

 Assyria ; and if the fall of such a tree be 

 terrible to behold, surely its standing clad 

 with roses, would be majestic and goodly 

 fair to see. 



