( 106 ) 



The ftudy is certainly ufeful. It is true it 

 has none of the larger parts of painting for 

 it's object compofition or the mailing of 

 light and (hade : but we confider it as neceflary 

 for thofe to underftand, who wifh either to be 

 acquainted with the particular charaSler of 

 each tree -> or it's general effett. 



Nor is it an unplealing ftudy. There is 

 much variety in the ramification of each 

 fpecies ; and much alfo in that of each indi- 

 vidual. We fee every where fo many elegant 

 lines ; fo much oppofition, and rich in- 

 terfection among them, that there are few 

 more beautiful objects in nature, than the 

 ramification of a tree. For myfelf, I am in 

 doubt, whether an old, rough, interwoven 

 oak, merely as a Jingle objeEt, has not as 

 much beauty in winter, as in fummer. In 

 fummer it has unqueftionably more efFect; 

 but in point of fimple beauty, and amufe- 

 ment, I think I mould almoft prefer it in 

 winter. 



If a man were difpofed to moralize, the 

 ramification, and fpray of a thriving tree afford 

 a good theme. Nothing gives a happier idea 



of 



