ed OR 
Nowy? 
UV 5 
664 THE GARDENER’ 
CHRONICLE. 
[Serr: 23, 
the most elastic carpet, parterres of all gay dwarf flowers, 
interspersed with crowds of Roses, pinnacles of Hollyhocks, 
small groves of Dahlias, and ranks of standard Roses, placed as 
sentries over all. It was a happy thought that, which deterred 
the contriver of this gay scene from making it a level; for if 
that had been done the garden might still have been beautiful, 
but its beauty would have been commonplace and little interest- 
ing. As it now isthe effect is charming. It shelves gradually 
from either end to the middle, and falls moreover inthe direction 
of the neighbouring valley; so that when you stand at one ex- 
tremity of a noble turf terrace which bounds this garden on the 
side of the hill that backs it, the eye includes at once the whole 
varied pattern of that living glowing carpet. Beyond it, to the 
right, the wood retreats, and discloses the rich valley of the park, 
its ample lake, and the distant hills, while on all other sides the 
scene is closed by stately and most graceful trees, from which all 
others have been thinned by no unskilful hand. This is the true 
way to enjoy the effect of a geometrical garden, which by itself 
is the most dull and insipid thing in the world; but which thus 
introduced, amidst wild hi!l scenery, produces the same agreeable 
clay; but we must at once proceed to a little gem, called the 
Durcn Garpen. This is a nook among thetrees near the House. 
broad tessellated circular area in the centre, and paved with red 
and black lozenge-shaped tiles. Next these walks is a narrow 
gravel path, which, joining the gravel walk of the circumference, 
leaves for flower-beds four dge-shapi aces, with their 
points towards the centre. Each of these flower-beds is 
edged with Box. The space within them is divided into two 
equal parts, by a series of three lozenges, commencing in the 
middle of the back, and terminating at the point of the wedge. 
The lozenges themselves have two edgings of dwarf Box separated 
y a narrow path, paved with white pebbles. By these means a 
pattern is formed of very great beauty. The general effect thus 
f Rebietvs, 
| Dr. Justus Liebig, in his Relation to Vegetable Physi- 
ology. By Dr. Hugo Mohl. (Dr. Justus Liebig’s 
Verhiltniss zur Pflanzen-Physiologie.) Tubingen, 
Frues. 1843, 
(Continued from page 648.) 
(Erratum.—In the last article, p. 648, towards the end, instead 
of 3 feet, and in the plain from 15 to 18 feet,’’ read inches.] 
In a subsequent part of this chapter (p. 124) Dr. Liebig 
expresses his surprise, that in all the works of Agronomists 
and Physiologists, one looks in vain for the leading prin- 
ciples of cultivation; nevertheless, at the end of this part 
of his work, he states that cultivation supplies every plant 
with that sort of food which it requires for the develop. 
ment of such organs or substances as are most available to 
man. He further dwells on the means of arriving at that 
end, viz., the chemical analysis of the inorganic ingredients 
of soil. But these latter facts, says Dr. Mohl, were known 
long before Liebig, Charles Sprengel having written a 
series of memoirs, to demonstrate the importance of the 
inorganic ingredients of the soil, both for the general 
growth of crops, and for that of certain organs in particular, 
Under this head, Liebig certainly ought to have men- 
tioned the name of Sprengel, and although he has not 
done so (concludes Dr. M.), the history of science will 
amply repay the omission. 3 
In the last chapter, which is headed ‘‘ Rotation and 
Manures,’’ L. opens the difficult question, why several 
crops of the same plant will not succeed on the same soil 
in an uninterrupted succession, and why, therefore, farmers 
resort to rotation. He thinks De Candolle’s theory the 
best explanation of this, forgetting, it seems, that that 
coarse excrementitious theory has no better foundation 
than bad and injudicious experiments of Macaire Prinsep, 
the same man who misled De Candolle on other occasions 
also. Liebig, however, (says Dr. Mohl,) who has no idea 
that these experiments are fallacious and controverted by 
all succeeding ones of the same kind, works out this theory 
in its most minute details, and proves, a priori, (p. 149,) 
that plants must have excrements. He divides the latter 
into two classes : those, namely, which have been absorbed 
by the roots, but not being adapted for the nourishment 
of plants, are again returned to the soil 3 and secondly, 
el ae 3 nay, they may even be essential for 
pase of the second, however, cannot be 
the-formation of woody fibre, &c. 
* Wwhich/is abundant at Hewell in other places, in conse- 
ent by little cuttings of its fibrous roots. 
until changed into humus, and decomposed into ammonia, 
carbonic acid, &c. 
This theory, says Dr. Mohl, is not only destitute of all 
reasonable foundation, but is directly contradicted by the 
proof of the existence of such excrementitious matter. It is 
true, Liebig says, that such must be the case, but then he 
adduces no proof except an ambiguous analogy with the 
animal kingdom, and forgetting, as he so often does, 
what he said—page 24—“‘ that analogy is the parent of 
that unfortunate comparison between vegetable and 
animal functions which places both on the bed of Pro- 
crustes, and is the cause of all error.’’ ‘There is not,” 
concludes Dr. Mohl, ‘ the least necessity for assuming a 
secretion from roots. If substances formed by vital pro- 
cesses are of no further use to a plant, they are excreted in 
the form of gas through the leaves, or deposited in the form 
of secretion in the glands and other organs, or thrown off 
with decaying leaves.’’ This theory is, moreover, at variance 
with the experience of what takes place in the shifting of 
crops. According to Liebig’s views, the excrementitious 
matter of the second class above mentioned would not 
only injure the plants whence it is derived, but could not 
be assimilated by any others before it is transformed into 
humus. But experience points quite another way, 
because the stubble of Clover, Lucerne, or Saintfoin, 
which is unfit for the growth of those species, will 
at once produce excellent crops of other plants. If 
Liebig should attempt to meet this objection by saying 
that such excrementitious matter cannot be assimilated 
by the plants, whence they are derived, but may be used 
by others, he will upset his whole doctrine of vegetable 
nutrition, according to which not only all the organic 
compounds which remain behind after the formation of 
starch, sugar, &c., but even starch and sugar themselves 
(and thus all the organic substances of plants,) are abso- 
lutely deleterious to other plants. It is impossible, there- 
fore, not to arrive at conclusions entirely opposite to 
those of Liebig, especially if we consider the phenomena 
of rotation at greater length. The barrenness of soil for 
the growth of one kind of plant, whilst it is still fertile 
for others, can only depend (says Dr. Mohl) on two 
causes. The first generation of plants may exhaust the 
soil of such subst as are indisy ble to growth, so 
that the second generation will be starved; and this cer- 
tainly takes place: but it cannot be the main cause of 
the failure of crops, else manure would again render the 
soil suitable for the same crop, which is only the case to 
a slight extent. We must, therefore, assume that the 
first crops do communicate to the soil substances detri- 
mental to the subsequent crops. These substances must 
be of an organic nature. It has been shown that these 
cannot be excrementitious, and therefore it follows that 
such deleterious substances must consist of organic cém- 
pounds, derived from the roots which have accumulated 
and remained behind in the land. If, then, ina soil filled 
with the remains of roots, the same crop will only succeed 
after a lapse of years, whilst other crops will thrive luxu- 
riantly, we may conclude, that the organic compounds of 
such roots will be absorbed by plants previous to their 
being decomposed into inorganic substances; and that, 
consequently, plants of a different kind will use them for 
food, although those of the same kind will be injured by 
them, 
(To be concluded in our next.) 
upon by at least some botanists : last July I heard a clever botanist 
express his regret that the Achimenes would soon be ruined by 
hybridisation. Another botanist and acute naturalist writes me, in 
answer to a remark I made on crossing—“I do not dislike the 
which has been in flower with me since last June. I impregnated 
them about this time last year, and he remarks—‘‘ Your Achimenes 
will be improved I doubt not. ‘fry the same process with coccinea 
longiflora, grandiflora, &c., and some high-coloured large 
varieties might turn up.’? This I haye already done, but I find 
ngiflora rather difficult to seed; rosea is merely a natural cross, 
and not a species, if the question was worth arguing; it will not 
reproduce itself true from seed, and it will soon be the parent of an 
endless race. Apart from the interest of producing crosses in this 
family, what would you think of shaking the validity of the family 
name, notwithstanding the high authority on which it rests (viz., De 
Candolle)? I think I see in them already the elements necessary for 
the purpose, but whether I shall be the first to obtain across between 
them and the Gloxinias or Gesneras, or to prove such a cross impos- 
2 
5 
tubers peculiar to Achimenes in G. maculata; therefore, without 
diving into botanical matters, let us suppose the Achimenes pedun- 
culata and Gloxinia maculata fit subjects for proving whether or not 
the Achimenes is a true genus, It is true we may fail in the first 
instance, or may have many ‘‘ miserable aspects,’’ or perhaps run 
nevertheless, the thing is feasible enough, and worth trying. As to 
the Achimenes interbreeding among themselves, there cannot be a 
doubt on the subject; and I hear there are several others of them in 
away next year, and keep the finer crosses from it in its stead ; and I 
would advise every one who has it and the coccinea to cross a few 
now; to sow the seeds early next February, and when the 
seedlings begin to flower, next June, to select the finer varieties in 
the same way. A. pedunculata and coccinea are the two latest- 
flowering ones, and if an equal number of the roots of each were 
spaces below, and flowers down to near the edge of the pot; the 
contrast is very good in plants we have thus treated here this season, 
but not knowing how they would turn out, I did not suggest the 
union specimens at the time, but I shall always treat a few pots this 
uture, 
Lean Mr. Markham having discovered that it may be pro- 
ted to any ext 
I,—KITCHEN-GARDEN AND ORCHARD; 
ment. 
.—A schoolfellow, who has been rooting up some 
aye you tried the plan for thorou; 
top wood which I spoke of last week ? 
never adopted a better or a safer 
you will, of course, prune the plants in the usual way. 
should now be well stirred with a fork, to make a light, 
face, as long as the weather keeps fine. 
border; any little jobs of this kind, which 
II.—FLOWER-GARDEN AND 
other plants; the other side of the walk, bein 
would make an admirable bed heated on Rend 
sis the only part of the Calend 
f you 
her, 
same way, your friends and neigh= 
plant Vines to run up the rafters, 
or if you attempt climbers in the 
bours will say, ‘* What a taste!” 
least a score of times this very season. 
ther near London for the week endin, 
o 
Pitch 
ou wi 
ghly ripening the 
w 
‘e nearly all down 
Vine-borders 
’» Porous sur- 
of these should be tied up 
for blanching, when they are in a fit state and dry. 
Waren-cress.—Are you going to try a bed of this on a north 
border in the kitchen-garden? They 
b @ sooner you get them in now the less likel: 
thrown out of the ground by the frost. 
is a very good time to pull up 
a fresh bed. 
can be done in the 
y may he planted for weeks yet, 
ly they are to be 
“ Devonian’? that a west aspect, 
ie con- 
, with trellissed shelves over, for 
close to the glass, 
f done by a 
y will he required ; besides, there are 
ar I dislike. 
of March to the 
is the best time to plant climbers ; hut recollect, 
e done with this Calendar next Christmas, and must have 
ou manage to get up the necessary 
these beds? I have been asked at 
by beginning early in 
rything without a particle of artificial heat, 
he open air, the rest in long, narrow boxes, four 
p, in close, cold frames.—D.. Beaton, Shrubland Park 
ici 
ig Sept. 21, 1843, as 
iswick. 
y dew; exceedingly fine throughont. 
the week nearly 9° above the average. 
State of the Weather at Chiswick during the last 17 years, 
v 
mm wre INE. 
Wind. | Rain, 
nd sultry ; cloudy} rain at night: 
ar at night. 
hot and dry ; very bright sunshine; 
for the ensuing 
evailing Winds. 
way in 
the 25th, 
1828—thermometer 24% 
