lielrospective Criticism. 493 



is concerned, I have called in question the utility of that system. Mr. Mearns has 

 an undoubted right to overthrow my propositions, and strengthen more firmly 

 his former statements : and what more protection would any man require, who 

 unflinchingly sacrifices every opposing feelmg at the shrine of justice and of 

 truth ? That there are men who cannot brook the idea of investigation, I know 

 full well ; but rather would I remain ignorant of their discoveries, than receive 

 them at a cost which their value never would compensate. Surely, Mr. Mar- 

 nock knows that truth needs no protection; that, instead of injuring it, the 

 keenest scrutiny, and the strictest investigation, are the very elements in which 

 it thrives. Leave it to itself, and it assumes a giant-hke form, walking with 

 majestic strides over moral hill and vale : wrap it in the mantle of protection, 

 and you render it weak and imbecile as the infant in its cradle. AH history, 

 all experience, proves this. Examine the state of religion, of politics, and 

 science, and say if the mighty changes and improvements effected in one and 

 all have not been the result of the naturally unfettered mind, nobly asserting 

 its native right to think, discuss, and form conclusions for itself; thus bursting 

 through the trammels of that protection afforded to a peculiar but almost 

 universal system of reasoning, which diffused a lethargic torpor over its best 

 faculties, and tied down, spell-bound,its loftiest aspirings to a tacit acquiescence 

 in the propositions of man ; as if they had been the incontrovertible emanations 

 of divinity. Looking upon discussion as the great friend of truth, whatever 

 may be the result of the present enquiry, I shall rest satisfied that thu course 

 I have adopted was the only one by which I could discharge my dutv to my- 

 self, to Mr. Mearns, or to the gardening public, — Robert Fish. Hyac Fark 

 Corner, Aug, 5. 1835. 



The Shrivelling of Grapes, S^c. (X. 18.) — The other day, in lookmg over 

 some former numbers of your Magazine, I met with a paper written by 

 Scientiae, &c. (X. 18.), a writer I admire for his respectful and consistent 

 mode of arguing. He there alludes to the shrivelling of the grape; and I, 

 having written a paper on it in the same volume (p. 137.), in which you omitted 

 to insert what I think the most important matter, am induced to make t] 's 

 second attempt to state what I consider to be the general cause of the gra e's 

 shriveUing. In the paper alluded to, in X. 137., you omitted to state clciirly, 

 that I considered it was from the footstalk of the berry not being grown suffi- 

 ciently firm and hard, which I believe is the only cause. If the grape is gro in 

 a humid atmosphere, it elongates the footstalk, and causes it to be of a slender, 

 thin, delicate texture ; and, in case of a sudden change, even for a short time, the 

 footstalk is easily affected. I think, almost invariably, if the berries which are 

 shrivelled be examined, they will be found to be of a very slender delicate 

 texture, and with a black speck on the footstalk. Wlien this injury take 

 place, as I believe, from the delicacy of the footstalk, the sap ceases to circulate 

 in the manner required, I think this disease may be remedied by keeping the 

 early-forced grapes with less humidity in the house than some use when the 

 crop is young, which helps to elongate the footstalk. In later grapes, if there 

 were more air admitted, or artificial heat kept up in cold damp weather, either 

 would remedy the disease; but, as I stated in my former paper, give air and 

 artificial heat at the same time. As I am making this second attempt to im- 

 press on the mind of the reader that the cause is really in the footstalk, I can 

 and will advance a few things to make it more evident. I was asked, this season, 

 by a gardener, what I would say to a vinery being left a little open all night 

 at top ; my reply was, I had not tried it, but I would not hesitate in saying 

 it was more likely to do good than harm. He said that there were the finest 

 grapes in a house so treated that he had seen all the season. I was asking a 

 gardener, about Christmas, how his grapes had done this year; his reply was, 

 " Very well ; I adopted your plan (except one light, which 1 could not move), 

 giving plenty of air. The grapes under the light which I could not move were 

 not so good as the others." In a house I had this disease take the crop, with 

 the exception of a vine at the end where the steam-pipe entered producing a 

 great and drying heat j and there was a door, with a ventilator over it, which 



