4)92 Retrospective Criticism. 



Tulip wood. If by this is meant the wood of the tulip tree (Liriodendron 

 Tulipifera), it is common in North America, under the name of poplar j but 

 the kind here mentioned is probably only another variation of rosewood, some 

 what different in the veining. 



Satin-ivood is generally supposed to be the Fcroh'a guianensis of Aublet ; 

 which is said to be a large tree, with alternate oval leaves, and flowers dis- 

 posed in bunches at the extremity of the branches. It is aUied to the order 

 JSosacese ; but has never been seen in a living state in Europe. 



Botany Bay Wood. This is probably the gigantic species, or kind, of ma- 

 hogany found in great abundance at the Swan River, and in other parts of 

 Australia, mentioned in Vol. XI. p. 104. From the specimens of the wood 

 sent to England, it appears to be of a coarser grain than the common ma- 

 hogany, and not so beautifully veined. 



The Cork Tree (Quercus jSuber) is well known in our shrubberies and plea- 

 sure-grounds ; but, though it stands in the open air without the slightest pro- 

 tection in this country, its bark does not become in a sufficiently mature state 

 to be used as cork. — Cond. 



The Kincairney Ashy noticed by Mr. Gorrie in Vol. X. p. 384., is certainly 

 a very remarkable tree; andl am glad to learn that it is likely to be propagated 

 in the Perth Nursery, as it must be an object worthy both of the nurseryman 

 and the landscape-gardener ; especially if it is found, after propagation, to 

 retain its present singular appearance. In my own opinion, there is a species 

 of beauty apparent in the ash, to which few trees in our woods can lay any 

 claim, and to which even the lord of the forest, the oak, is an utter stranger : 

 this beauty does not confine itself merely to its mutability in form, or to its 

 exterior appearance when viewed at a distance, but it extends itself to the 

 leaves, flowers, and seeds ; the former of which will, indeed, bear the minutest 

 inspection without endangering an opinion as to the merits which I have en- 

 deavoured to show as exclusively belonging to the tree. — George M^Liesh. 

 Ville parmi les Collines, Sept. 10. 1835. 



The Pendency of the Spray of the Ash is not unexceptionably the result of 

 old age ; to prove which, I may refer to a number of ash trees growing out of 

 the rocks immediately below the Rumbling Bridge, on the Duke of Athol's 

 estate, a few miles from Dunkeld, which are not yet, apparently, 40 years of 

 age, and, probably, not above 30. I visited this place in the year 1826, for the 

 purpose of seeing the beautiful and romantic waterfall immediately above 

 the bridge ; and I was struck with this emblem of humility in the trees above 

 alluded to, which seemed to vie with one another in the lowness of their obei- 

 sance. I may further remark that I have frequently observed the same phe- 

 nomenon in similar situations, and under similar circumstances. Whether the 

 air is more ponderous at such places, from a draught being generated by the 

 current ; or whether the branches are instinctively attracted downwards from 

 the evolution of some sort of gas from the waters, which, in opposite cir- 

 cumstances, abounds at a greater altitude ; are questions which I shall leave 

 for the research of those who are fitter for the task. I can, most probably, 

 appeal to none with more propriety than to Mr. Gorrie himself, for a solution 

 of these matters. It is not by any means uncommon to see one side of an 

 ash tree with drooping branches, while the other evinces no propensity to 

 such a position, but the indecisive and wavering character of the one described 

 by Mr. Gorrie is certainly, to me at least, a perfect novelty. — Id. 



Culture of Epiphytal Orchidecs. — In looking over some of the numbers of 

 the Gardener's Magazine, which were published during my absence in Mexico, 

 I observe that a Lancashire correspondent, signing himself H. P. (Vol. XI. 

 p. 252.), has favoured your readers with a few cautionary remarks upon a 

 paper published by me on the culture of tropical Orchideae, which my absence 

 has prevented me from answering sooner. 



In answer to the first part of H. P.'s communication, I shall only remark 

 that, in writing ray paper, I had no intention of slighting or depreciating any 

 practical knowledge which might have been acquired; but merely of laying 



