4&4 Relrospaihe Criticism. 



Ft'l)riiarv, 1830, in your Number for Auiiust, 1831, I perhaps should not 

 have amiiii obtruded upou you, if 1 hail uot eousidercd myself as publicly 

 treated with jjreat illiberality aud iujiistice, iu both your Majjaziue aud 

 F.uct/clojHcdift ; but, as this is the case, I trust you will eousider nic en- 

 titled to a public explauatiou, and afiord nie an o|)portunity to defend 

 myself, by giving this address an early insertion in your iMagazine. 



On cxamiuing the index of your Enn/rlupa'dia, I coulil not find my 

 name; but observing that of" lleywood," I referred to the page directed, 

 ftnd there I fountl that you had given my name correctly, but described nie 

 as having been a Yorkshire clothier ; \s hereas I never w as a Yorkshire, 

 but was a Wiltshire, clothier. 



In your descri|Jtion of the practice of gardening, under tiic head Ptacli, 

 you say (§ 4503.), " Hay ward suggests the umvi/-fait manner, as likely to 

 answer better than the common mode of fan-training;" thus treating 

 it as a mere theory ; but if you (|uote my book (Science of Horticti/liire) 

 at all, why not ([uote correctly? I do not merely suggest that mode 

 (IS likcli/ to answer, but give it as the result of demonstrated experi- 

 ment, and sni/ jxisiliir/i/ that it is better than the common mode, but not 

 equal to the mode by two stems (which I have described and elucidated 

 by sketches), except on a low wall, because it does not produce so equal 

 a division of saj). I have also described the principles and laws of 

 nature upon which my dirt'erent methods of training are grounded ; and 

 have proved, not only that the peculiarity which you term (he wavjj is 

 essential to the regular extension of the tree, but also (by a reference to 

 the sketches), that, this mode being more conformable to those laws of 

 nature, a tree by it may be brought to cover a greater space of wall, and 

 to produce more fruit, in a less time, than can be done either by Hitt's, 

 Forsyth's, or Knight's methods of training ; and that the sjjace of wall 

 allotted to each tree may be more regularly covereil with bearing wood, 

 and be thus continued for a greater length of time, than can possibly 

 be done by other methods : but you do not explain tliose laws. The 

 sketch with two stems you have in another place given correctly ; but 

 there you say, " lleywood considers," &c., instead of giving my name, and 

 explaining it to be a mode which 1 had successfully practised for many 

 years, and found it in ever}' way i)ossessing advantages su|)erior to any 

 other mode of training the [)each, because it promoted a more complete 

 division of the sap, and produceil a greater equality in the growth of 

 branches. You also give a correct sketch of my mode of training from a 

 single stem ; but again treat it as a mere theory, by siiying, " lleywood pro- 

 poses," &c. And in another place you give correct sketches of my mode 

 of training spiral dwarfs, but do not name me i-s the author. On training 

 the vine, you treat me with great injustice: in ^ 2979. }ou give my name 

 correclly, but the sketches you give are not mine, and such a.s neither 

 resemble n)ine, nor fairly exhibit the advantages of my mode of training 

 on the |)rinciples I have explained ; which |irinci|)les you do not explain, 

 but you give sketches of iVIr. Main's moile, which, although they nearly 

 resemble mine, are but a bungling representation ; and the merits of this 

 mode rest entirely on my principles. Mr. iSeton's plan, also, is grounded 

 on my principles, and the success of his method nuisl di|)cnd entirely upon 

 their being strictly c()nt()rmed to. Then, as my principles and moiie of 

 training the vine were |)ul)lished in vol. i. p. 17:^. of the llorticitllttral 

 Tiunsdcitons, am I not entitled to the merit of their first publication ? 



In your INIagazine, Vol. VII. |). 687., you say, " The peach tree, 

 trained as a .specimen of Seymour's method, already covers a .space of 

 .30 ft. in length. Mr. Thompson, as we have before observed, considers 

 this mode ilecidedly the best for |)eaches and nectarines, and we therefore 

 are very desirous of repeating our reconunendations of it. // is the only 

 decided sc'u nlijic method that has ever been proposed, because there is a spe- 

 rijic reason for the j'osition of evny brtiuch and shoot of which the tree niai/ 



