76 



the previous situation of the trees, aic ahiiost quite enough 

 to insure miscarriage ; and no more needs be said about it 

 than this, that it is a better edition of Lord Fitzharding's 

 system, but with infinitely worse subjects. The roots were 

 to be more elaborately trained, and in every way more scien- 

 tifically treated ; but entire decapitation is held forth as a 

 leading feature in the plan, which that ingenious nobleman 

 had the skill to avoid.* 



The other author, to whom we have to refer, is Marshall, 

 an intelligent and voluminous writer on Rural Economics, 

 in the end of the last century. Marshall was by profession 

 a West Indian planter ; but, on coming home in 1775, he 

 dedicated his attention to planting and landscape gardening, 

 an(J in general to rural affairs, in all of which he displayed 

 considerable skill. He is one of the few among our writers, 

 who studied the removal of large trees as an art, and laid 

 down rules to regulate the execution. His precepts, there- 

 fore, as well as his practice, are entitled to regard, not only 

 from their own intrinsic value, but as they serve to bring 

 down the history of the art nearly to the present day. 



This judicious writer was too well aware of the difficulty 

 and hazard of removing large-sized trees of any sort, to 

 practise on subjects of great magnitude. For " thinning 

 plantations," he says, " for removing obstructions, or hiding 

 defects, or for raising ornamental groups or single trees ex 

 peditiously," he conceives that the practice may be recom- 

 mended ; but he declares it to be decidedly " the most diffi- 

 cult part of planting," and therefore is of opinion, that it is 

 inapplicable to general purposes, and not often practised for 

 any purpose, "with uniform success."! 



At the various places, where Marshall was consulted, 

 whether aa a Landscape Gardener, or a surveyor of estates, 



* Treatise on Forest Trees, p. 256—259. 

 t Rural Ornament, Vol. I. pp. 40, 41. 



