76 THE ROSE GAEDEN. 



In the spring of 1844 a few plants of the Duchesse de Nemours (Hybrid Per- 

 petual) were neglected : the soil in which they grew was neither manured nor 

 forked ; the plants were not pruned, the variety being counted Avorthless. They 

 grew, but their vigour was greatly diminished ; and what were the consequences 1 

 The flowers were produced in surprising beauty, the novelty and richness of the 

 colour attracting eveiy one's attention, and all who beheld admired them. But, 

 mark ! a plant that had been treated well, in common with other Roses, dropped 

 every bud before expanding. 



Prunino-, in the light in which we have hitherto considered it, mav be said to 

 consist of thinning and shortening ; but it has long appeared to me that thinning 

 might be in part done away with, by practising disbudding ; i. e. rubbing or 

 cutting out some of the buds when swelling in spring. The Rose, when in robust 

 health, throws forth a great number of shoots during the season of growth, and 

 the merciless havoc that is made with them in the pruning season must, by the 

 waste it creates, and by the wounding of the plant, prove highly injurious. True ; 

 it is necessary some should be removed when such numbers are present ; but why 

 are more than will be required suffered to grow ? It is questionable whether the 

 theory of branches and leaves elaborating the crude sap, and thereby fitting for 

 assimilation a greater quantity of food, is in favour of their developement. A few 

 vigorous branches, with leaves healthy and well developed, must, I think, better 

 accomplish this end, than a great number crowded together, the leaves becoming 

 puny and sickly through the exclusion of air and light. Now, by rubbing out a 

 portion of the buds when swelling, and others at any season when they may sprout 

 forth in a position where shoots are not wanted, the remaining buds form stronger 

 shoots ; and thus, perhaps, a larger — certainly, a healthier — surface of foliage is 

 the result. It is bad policy, then, to suffer more buds to be developed as shoots 

 than are required for forming the tree, or for flowering; for by cutting away 

 these when pruning, there must be a waste of the elaborated juices of the tree. 

 But this is not the only evil : beyond this, the tree is sorely maimed in the opera- 

 tion. Now, if the nutritive matter, which has been supplied in the developement 

 and sustenance of numerous branches, was confined to a lesser number, they 

 would have been more powerfully developed, and the loss by removal, and the 

 injury the tree suffers by thinning, would have been avoided. I believe disbudding 

 to be the system best calculated to produce flowers in the finest possible condition, 

 to keep a plant in full health and vigour, and to bring it to the highest pitch of 

 beauty. It has been successfully applied in the cultivation of other trees, and why 

 should it not answer when applied to Roses ? But it does answer, and, as one 

 fact is said to be of more weight than a load of argument, I will relate an experi- 

 ment commenced in the spring of 1844. I marked, at that season, from 50 to 

 100 Dwarf plants, which were budded in the previous summer; consequently, 

 they were what is termed in bud. My object was, to test the efficiency of dis- 

 budding. They were intended to be grown in pots for exhibition, and each 



