THE planter's guide. 



59 



from the one, while he leaves them, at the time of trans- 

 planting, on the other ; in that case the latter will be 

 found to succeed far better than the former. Or, let 

 him practise the same thing on two permanent trees of 

 equal health and appearance ; and the tree of which the 

 boughs are lopped will not be found to make half the 

 progress of the other, nor will the bulk of the stem 

 increase in nearly the same ratio."" 



But, say the planters who advocate the mutilating 

 system, since the roots are severely curtailed by the 

 operation of taking up, the branches must necessarily be 

 curtailed in proportion, and suited to the ability of the 

 roots, whose province it is to sustain the branches. If, 

 however, there be any truth in the foregoing statement, 

 and that it be reciprocally the province of the branches 

 also to nourish the roots, that argument, how specious 

 soever, must fall to the ground; for it is obviously calcu- 

 lated to make bad worse, by subjecting the tree to two 

 evils instead of one, to which it must at all events be 

 subjected. Besides, these reasoners are well aware, that 

 if they abstained from the lopping of the top and 

 branches, and left them entire, the greater part would 

 decay during the first season, for want of nourishment, to 

 the utter discredit of their system. The objection of 

 Miller, therefore, is perfectly unanswerable. It would be 

 quite superfluous to add any further illustrations, however 

 conclusive, drawn from the constitution or anatomy of 

 plants, as these will more properly be brought forward in 

 the sequel. 



His second objection is, that if trees be removed with 

 large heads, it is next to impossible to maintain them 

 against the violence of the wind, in an upright position, 



* Note II. 



