THE DAWN OF SPRING 



against the cutting back of climbing Roses have a rich, 

 deep soil, and live in a district where they commonly get 

 rains in late spring. Those conditions favour speedy 

 establishment and rapid growth. The growers who 

 favour cutting back have a drier and less fertile soil, in 

 which the plants only establish themselves slowly. If a 

 horse has an uphill journey, we give him a lighter load 

 than if he has a level road before him. The root system 

 of a Rose with a number of long shoots, each furnished 

 with several scores of buds, which want sap sent up from 

 the roots, has a heavy load. If the soil is rich and rains 

 come, the road is level ; if the ground is dry and poor, 

 the road is hilly. In the former case the burden can be 

 borne, in the latter it is too heavy, and should be re- 

 duced. Is it clear now ? I have often found amateur 

 rosarians with poor land reluctant to cut back newly- 

 planted Roses, but I never yet found one who, when he 

 at last screwed himself up to do the deed, regretted it 

 afterwards. When I speak of cutting back I really mean 

 it. It is not a case of snipping off an inch and a quarter 

 of the tips with a small pocket-knife or a pair of nail- 

 scissors, but of cutting the plants back to within six inches 

 of the ground. The only Roses that I would except 

 are the very vigorous Roses of the Wichuraiana class, of 

 which Dorothy Perkins, Alberic Barbier, and Ruga are 

 shining (literally shining — look at the glossiness of the 

 leaves) examples. These Roses have such marvellous 

 root-power that no load is too heavy, and no hill too 

 steep for them. They have strength, and speed, and 

 stamina in a degree that no other class possesses. 



As far as dwarf and standard Roses are concerned, I 

 unhesitatingly advise severe pruning for newly-planted 

 trees. You are told, or you read in some learned publi- 

 cation, that some varieties only need light pruning. That 

 123 



