CRITIQUE ON THE MARCH HORTICULTURIST. 



plant should be in some degree of maturity before its bearing properties are heavily taxed, 

 than that the animal creation should not be over-burthened when j'oung. 



All growing things have their periods of infancy, maturity, and decay. The grand de- 

 sideratum is to understand their true nature, and treat them accordingly. 



Vegetable Physiology, §*c. — Mr. Barry I believe to be right in principle, and I trust 

 he will be able to introduce the general practice to accord with such principle. But he'll 

 have a hard time of it. Take us Americans, " by and large," we prefer the " hop-skip- 

 and-jump" mode of doing things — in the pruning line, particularly. 



Why won't Mr. Barry write a distinct, practical, familiar, understandable treatise on 

 this subject? It would certainly be an acquisition to our Pomological books, of which we 

 have several good ones. Still no treatise, be it ever so good, and ever so plain, will direct 

 the workman in all things, unless he be well grounded by study and observation, in the the- 

 ory of the particular fruit on which he works. The principle on which the plant groMs, 

 blooms, and bears; its habits; the soil on which it stands — all must be consulted. Dear 

 me! after a cart-load of reading, how little one knows of this subject when he sets him- 

 self to work in the orchard. It is the work of a life almost, to do these things success- 

 fully. 



The Progressive Decline of the Vital Powers of a Plant. — Mr. Towni.ey is given 

 somewhat to speculation in this, and a previous article, on the Decline of Fruits; and he 

 certainly manages his subject with much ingenuity. I don't say that he is not right; but 

 I am not j^et convinced of it. Diseases, and various circumstances, affect plants, and va- 

 rieties of plants. The potato is probably the best subject to illustrate his theory, but not 

 at all conclusive. One great difficulty in arriving at the truth of the theory, is from the 

 absence of data to govern the origin of the varieties of the plants or fruits, in question; 

 and until he produces some reliable Jact of the kind, I fancy he will be slow to find be- 

 lievers to the extent of his speculations. I admit this last assertion is no proof that he is 

 wrong. Every great discoverer of a new thing, or a new principle — very different, how- 

 ever, from a new theory — has had the misfortune to combat prejudice, and ignorance; the- 

 ories are infinitely harder than facts to surmount, unless they be fortified by illustrations 

 conclusive and irrefragible. 



Notes on Pears. — Mr. Allen looks on the dark side of the picture. Still he may be 

 partially right. Let us compute the number of Pear trees advertised by the different 

 nurserymen in this March number of the Horticulturist: 

 Daniel Brinkerhoof of Fishkill, has 20,000, of over 100 varieties. 



William R. Prince & Co., of Flushing, have " 8,000 very large," besides an imtnense number of 

 all sizes; and as Mr. Prince does things on a great scale, we may safely set him down at 

 100,000 altogether. 

 A. Saul & Co., of Newburgh, have over 50,000 saleable trees, besides an equal number, as we 



may infer, of smaller ones. 

 Hovey &, Co., of Boston, have 80,000 trees of all the popular varieties, to say nothing of the 

 ?/«popiilar ones. 



Here are 250,000 pear trees advertised by four nurserymen. Then there are fourteen 

 other advertisements of as many different nurser^'men, who may average 20,000 each, 

 making 280,000 trees more; in all, upwards of half a million of trees produced by eigh- 

 teen leading nvirseries. This amount may be safely multiplied by four, for nurseries not 

 represented, and we have the snug number of two millions of pear trees now on sale fit for 

 ing! One half of them, if sold, may be safely estimated as lost bj'- casualty 

 may be included losses in planting, blight, and destruction from other causes 



