j/egetahle Staticks. 145 



flicks, II aa Fig. 28, 29. the bark fwdlcd 

 more at the upper part of the disbarked 

 places than at the lower, viz. becaufe thofe 

 lower parts were thereby deprived of the 

 plenty of nourifhment which was brought 

 to the upper parts of thofe difabled places, 

 by the ftrong attraction of the leaves 011 

 the Buds 7, ire. of which we have a fur- 

 ther confirmation in the ringlet of bark 

 N°. 13. Fig. 29. which ringlet did not fwcll 

 or grow at either end, being not only de- 

 prived of the attraction of the fuperior leaves,, 

 by the bared placed N°. 12. but alfo with- 

 out any leaf Bud of its own, whofe branch- 

 ing fap Veftels, being like thofe of other leaf 

 Buds rooted downwards in the wood, might 

 thence draw fap, for the nourifhment of its 

 felf and the adjoining bark N°. 13. But had 

 thefe rooting fap veffels run upwards , in- 

 ftead of downwards, 'tis probable, that in 

 that cafe the upper part of each ringlet of 

 bark, and not the lower, would have fwelled, 

 by having nourifhment thereby brought to 

 it from the jnmoft wood. 



We may hence alfo fee the reafon why., 



when a tree is unfruitful, it is brought to 



bear fruit, by the taking ringlets of bark off 



L from 



