FBU1T AND KITCHEN GARDENS NEAR PARIS. 



231 



Fig. 3 represents a portion of a branch of one of M. Lepere's 

 trees, not pruned. 



Fig. 4. 



Fig. 4 — Another portion, on which the operation of winter- 

 pruning has been performed. 



It will be observed that he prunes the bearing-shoots very 

 short ; and unless this be done the Peach-tree will not long con- 

 tinue to thrive. In consequence of leaving the fruit-bearing 

 shoots too long, or in some cases not shortening them at all, very 

 many Peach-trees in this country become worn out, even in their 

 youth, and that too in richer soil than is to be found at Mon- 

 treuil. M. Lepjre, it will be seen, has plenty of fruit-bearing 

 shoots : he shortens them to 6 inches ; is satisfied with one or 

 two fruits on eacli ; and so from each of his trees he obtains on 

 an average 40 dozen of fine large peaches. This certainly ought 

 to induce people to shorten sufficiently the bearing-shoots, what- 

 ever the mode of training may be. 



It is necessary to remark that, on the main stems, A A, of Le- 

 pere's trees, the spaces between the origin of one secondary 

 branch and that of another are not naked. On the contrary, 

 they are all along furnished with bearing wood, on the upper 

 as well as the under sides. Shoots produced in one season 

 bear fruit the next, and then, at the winter-pruning, they are 

 cut back close to the base of the successional shoot. A large 

 quantity of fruit is thus obtained along these main branches ; but 

 there is another advantage, as regards the health and duration of 

 the tree. When branches are naked to any great extent, they are 

 liable to become sunburnt, as was found to be the case with those 

 of a tree trained according to Seymour's mode, in the Society's 

 Garden. The bearing-shoots on this were from 12 to 15 inches 

 apart, and on the upper sides only of the branches. When fur- 

 nished with shoots at closer intervals, to draw sap, and better 

 shaded by foliage, scorching is not apt to occur. 



From what has been sfated, and by referring to Figs. 1 and 

 2, it will be perceived that M. Lepere's method differs essen- 

 tially from the Montreuil, as regards the greater length of time 

 which elapses before any branches are permitted to grow on the 

 upper sides of the two main branches. That the principle is 

 good, there can be no question. A great objection to its adop- 

 tion in this country would doubtless be, the large space of wall 

 between A A and the centre of the tree remaining so long 



