THE planter's GUIDE. 



325 



tary and coimtervailing disparagement. But Gilpin's ob- 

 ject was merely the consideration of the external form of 

 trees, as applicable to landscape. Had he had occasion 

 to investigate their history and properties, his remarks 

 would have appeared less contradictory, as he would then 

 have given them a more appropriate application. In this 

 case, he would have been aware that there are two dis- 

 tinct sorts or varieties of the tree, and that all he says is 

 quite true ; though not of any one of those species, but of 

 the two species respectively. He would thus have been 

 satisfied, that the earlj or spreading kind is as remarkable, 

 whether young or old, for its light, airy, and picturesque 

 character, as the late or upright is for its heaviness. 



As the name of so popular a writer as Gilpin has 

 given currency to some unjust prejudice against a tree 

 which is eminently useful, as well as beautiful, I shall be 

 the more particular in describing its two varieties in 

 question, for the information of the planter. 



The writers who have paid most attention to the 

 Beech, have given it two varieties, as already mentioned, 

 the black and the white. But, in calling them by those 

 names, they have stated no marks of distinction that can 

 be uniformly recognised ; as the colour of the bark, or, 

 according to some, of the wood, is often the effect of soil 

 and climate, and not of any pecuKar properties inherent 

 in the trees themselves. Accordingly, we find the bark 

 of all Beeches, in close and shady groves, usually glossy 

 and of a light hue, whereas it is always rougher and 

 darker in open exposures. 



There is no tree, the Oak excepted, in which these two 

 varieties, the spreading and the upright, are more dis- 

 tinctly delineated than in this. In its style of ramifica- 

 tion, the spreading sort at a distance somewhat resembles 

 the Lime, as may be seen by comparing the two when 



