Kelrospcctive Criticism, 711 



and I should have left it with him, had I not been strongly called on to 

 reply by the latter part of Mr. Howden's letter, and by the conclusions Mr. 

 Murphy naturally drew therefrom. There is only one part of Mr. How- 

 den's description of the Irish peasant to which I shall advert, and that is, 

 the passage in which he speaks of his countenance expressing fear. He 

 must know little of the Irish character, indeed, who will not admit that, of 

 all people under the sun, the Irish peasant is the least actuated by that 

 passion. 



That Ml". Howden has too highly coloured his picture, it would be a 

 waste of time to prove ; I can only suppose that he fancied himself in the 

 precincts of a lunatic asylum, and was describing one of its maniacal in- 

 mates just emerging from the terrors of an obdurate keeper : his description 

 is certainly more in keeping with the latter. However, it ought to be re- 

 membered, at all events, that an Irish peasant, whatever he may be, is as 

 he came out of the hands of his Creator. 



Mr. Howden has asserted (to bring up the rear of his libel) tliat, " when 

 in Lord Doneraile's employment, he paid ten men, four women, and four 

 boys, with two pound notes on a Saturday night." This he has stated in 

 the most emphatic terms ; but, if so, I beg leave to tell him that he did not 

 pay them in full, as that was precisely the ten men's wages in Mi*. How- 

 den's time, without bringing into account the four women and four boys. 

 He afterv/ards winds up his assertion by supposing " they are not much 

 better at present." As I do not deal in suppositions but facts, I assert, 

 without fear of contradiction, that Lord Doneraile's workmen are as ivell 

 paid, as resjjectable and comfortable, as those of any other nobleman in 

 either England or Ireland. Their wages in cash, for nearly twenty years 

 past, have been 55. per v/eek, together with a good slated house, rent-free ; 

 as much fuel as supplies them, without expense ; as much potato-ground as 

 can be spared to each, at a light rent j and, in all cases where they have 

 their own manure (which is the case, with very few exceptions), they have 

 tiie ground free, and tilled : in short, at the most confined calculation, theii- 

 wages, <&c., amount to at least from \s. 3d. to \s. id. per day. 



I have now done with Mr. Howden and his descriptions altogether ; and 

 wUl leave him for the future to some one better calculated and inclined to 

 take up his literary gauntlet, than, Sir, yours, &:c. — Jo/ni Hai/croft, Donc- 

 raile, Sc2}L2\. 1S31. 



Dovetail- Grafting. — Sir, In Vol. VI. p. 698. is a letter from Sir. Alex- 

 ander Diack, in which he expresses " no little degree of surprise" at seeing 

 announced in some of the periodical publications and newspapers, as copied 

 from the Transactions of the London Horticultural Society, a. mode of grafting 

 on the large branches of old trees, the merit of which is ascribed to me. As 

 I have no wish whatever to claim any merit due to another, and to show 

 that I am the author of that mode of grafting called dove-tail grafting, as 

 well as to allay that " no little degree of surprise" created in the mind of 

 Mr. Diack, please to insert these few observations. I would, then, ol>- 

 serve that Mr. Diack might have seen, in your iS'Iiigazine for July LS27 

 (Vol. II. p. 4.30.), that a paper, describing my mode of grafting, was read 

 at a meeting of the London Horticultural Society held on the 6th of May, 

 1823; for which paper the thanks of the Society were then counnunicated 

 to me in a letter by the secretary (Mr. Sabine). Now, Mr. Diack's paper 

 on his mortise-grafting was not publicly known till the 28th of August, 

 1827, which was eight weeks after my dovetail-grafting had been noticed 

 in the Gardener's Magazine, and above four years after it had been read £it 

 the meeting of the London Society. I must here beg leave to assure you, 

 that, in being thus particular, I have no other motive than that of esta- 

 blishing my claim to the priority of the invention, having no wish whatever 

 to lessen that merit which I am fully persuaded is due to jMr. Diack. 

 Mr. Diack states that his process " is nearly the same as mine," wluch 



z z 1 



