Retrospective Criticism. 75 



Trees, reviewed in Vol. IX. p. 687. — Sir, J. M., in his review of this work, 

 states that the author is " chargeable with misrepresentation, for asserting that 

 the sole object of the forest pruner is to obtain bulk of stem." He then states 

 that " length of stem and clearness from knots, whether dead or alive, con- 

 stitute the strength and value of timber ;" and infers that these qualities 

 cannot be obtained without the aid of the pruner. Now, in no part of the 

 Treatise is it asserted that the primer's sole object is to obtain bulk of stem ; 

 and in chap. iv. is the following sentence : — " The pruning of timber trees 

 may be said to have for its object, first, to advance the growth and bulk of 

 trees; secondly, to improve their form; and, thirdly, to improve the quality of 

 the timber." Each of these objects is treated of in a separate chapter. I 

 leave you, therefore, to decide whether it is I or J. M. that has been guilty 

 of misrepresentation. 



J. M. states that " it is well known that the oak sheds its sprays, and the 

 larch many of its lower branches." This wonderful and admirable provision 

 of nature may be well known, but I have never seen any account of it, 

 except in my own Treatise. J. M. considers the natural shedding of sprays 

 an argument in favour of pruning ; I would ask him if, because trees shed their 

 leaves, he would consider this an argument in favour of taking their leaves 

 off? Leaves are not shed until they have performed the functions for which 

 they were designed ; neither are sprays shed so long as there is sufficient 

 space for their growth : nothing is lost through having the parts shed pre- 

 maturely ; for, in the works of nature, when the intended effect is produced, 

 the cause is withdrawn. Yet some men will rely on their own judgment, in 

 preference to the unerring rules of nature. 



I cannot agree with J. M. in his notion, that the oak, beech, &c, if permitted 

 to stand alone without the aid of pruning, would only form vast bushes, 

 wholly worthless to the builder. A very little observation of the nature and 

 growth of trees will lead to a different opinion. 



As J. M. states that length of stem and clearness from knots constitute the 

 value of timber, perhaps the following extracts from my Treatise may give a 

 hint how timber possessing these qualities may be procured : — " Some imagine 

 that whenever a stem is free from branches it is owing to pruning, or to the 

 browsing of cattle ; but this is not the case, it is natural to a timber tree, be 

 its situation what it may, to have a certain portion of its stem clear of 

 branches. . . .There are no pruners in the uncultivated forests, whence we 

 have the long pines and deals imported, with often 30 ft. or 40 ft. clear stem 

 before the branches begin. These trees have grown without the assistance of 

 the pruner ; and they have shed boughs that were far above the reach of 

 cattle. These forests clearly prove that trees have the power of shedding such 

 sprays as are useless or unnecessary ; for a tree could not reach the height 

 of 30 ft. or 40 ft. without a great number of branches. It must have branches 

 when but 1 ft. or 2 ft. high ; the number and size of these branches must 

 increase, as the tree increases in height ; and a tree 30 ft. in height must 

 have a great number of branches ; yet we have the stems of trees 30 ft. high 

 without a single branch. How do the advocates for pruning reconcile this to 

 their philosophy ? Will they assert that the stem is stretched, or protruded ; 

 so that the boughs, first situated near the ground, are, by the growth and 

 lengthening of the stem, lifted up farther from the earth ? This they cannot 

 say ; yet they will have great reluctance in admitting the existence of this 

 natural shedding of sprays ; for no person who well understands the subject 

 will ever prune under the idea of improving the shape or increasing the 

 quantity of timber. . . .It is impossible that a tree can be thrifty with a long 

 stem, without lower boughs, in an open and exposed situation. It is equally 

 impossible that a tree can, when closely surrounded by others, as it would be 

 in a grove, have large and long spreading lower boughs, and a short strong 

 stem. If we want long-stemmed timber, we must have it from the grove 

 or wood ; if short and large, we shall find it in the detached and exposed tree. 

 The pruner never can, with all his imaginary skill, procure, from the detached 



