484 Retrospective Criticism. 



February, 1830, in your Number for August, 1831, I perhaps should not 

 have again obtruded upon you, if I had not considered myself as publicly 

 treated with great illiberality and injustice, in both your Magazine and 

 Encyclopedia ; but, as this is the case, I trust you will consider me en- 

 titled to a public explanation, and afford me an opportunity to- defend 

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



On examining the index of your Encyclopedia, I could not find my 

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

 and there I found that you had given my name correctly, but described me 

 as having been a Yorkshire clothier ; whereas I never was a Yorkshire, 

 but was a Wiltshire, clothier. 



In your description of the practice of gardening, under the head Peach, 

 you say (§ 4503.), " Hayward suggests the wavy-fan manner, as likely to 

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

 it as a mere theory ; but if you quote my book {Science of Horticulture) 

 at all, why not quote correctly? I do not merely suggest that mode 

 us likely to answer, but give it as the result of demonstrated experi- 

 ment, and say positively that it is better than the common mode, but not 

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

 ■i>y sketches), except on a low wall, because it does not produce so equal 

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

 .nature upon which my different methods of training are grounded; and 

 have proved, not only that the peculiarity which you term the wavy 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 space of wall 

 allotted to each tree may be more regularly covered 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 those laws. The 

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

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

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

 years, and found it in every way possessing advantages superior to any 

 other mode of training the peach, because it promoted a more complete 

 division of the sap, and produced 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 saying, " Heywood pro- 

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

 of training spiral dwarfs, but do not name me as the author. On training 

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

 correctly, but the sketches you give are not mine, and such as neither 

 resemble mine, nor fairly exhibit the advantages of my mode of training 

 on the principles I have explained ; which principles you do not explain, 

 hut you give sketches of Mr. Main's mode, which, although they nearly 

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

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

 on my principles, and the success of his method must depend entirely upon 

 their being strictly conformed to. Then, as my principles and mode of 

 training the vine were published in vol. i. p. 172. of the Horticidtural 

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



In your Magazine, Vol. VII. p. 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 decidedly the best for peaches and nectarines, and we therefore 

 are very desirous of repeating our recommendations of it. It is the only 

 decided scientific method that has ever been proposed, because there is a spe- 

 cific reason for the position of every branch and .shoot of which the tree may 



