I'KrNlXd : AVJIAl FOlJ, JIOW, ANJ) ^VIIEX. 
119 
PRUNING : ^Y^AT FOR, HOW, AND WHEN. 
By Mr. R. P. Bkothehston. 
[Head August 15, ISOH.] 
Let me first of all say that your Secretary is responsible for the compre- 
hensive title that heads this paper, and that after having made a few 
preliminary notes as guides to those parts of the subject calling for the 
greatest prominence, I was compelled to give up attempting anything 
beyond a discussion of the broad facts connected with pruning, along 
with such illustrations as, it is hoped, may tend to enhanced lucidity. 
Pruning, it need hardly be said, is a practice of very ancient date, and 
though we may hesitate to believe with Milton that it formed one of the 
accomplishments of Eve, there is yet good reason to think it must have 
been a common detail in Grape cultivation in antediluvian times, 
because wherever the Grape vine is cultivated pruning is a necessary 
concomitant. It was practised by the ancient Jews, Greeks, and 
Romans, and we may be pretty certain it was also known in ancient 
Britain, though it was not until printed books became a necessity, and the 
conveniences of living began through their medium to be discussed, that 
anything much can be discovered of our ancestors' ideas on the subject. 
As early as Elizabeth's time a few^ writers treated of the matter ; but, 
so far as I am aware, no definition of the practice, that in any sense can 
be termed scientific, was made till towards the end of the seventeenth cen- 
tury, when De la Quintiney's " Compleat Gardner " appeared. Quintiney 
gave his reasons for pruning thus : *' First, To take away all Branches 
that are naught, or might be prejudicial to the Abundance or Goodness 
of Fruit, as also to the Beauty of the Tree. Second, To preserve those of 
good use to those Trees. And Third, Prudently to clip those that are too 
long, and not to cut anything off those that have not too much length." 
In the succeeding century, Switzer, whom M'Intosh declared to have 
been the father of modern fruit-culture, formulated the following 
reasons : — " First, that the tree may last longer. Secondly, that it 
may have a handsomer shape. And thirdly, that it may bear better." A 
hundred or more years before this Lawson strongly advocated pruning as 
conducive to the longevity of hardy fruit trees. The theory was adopted 
by Evelyn, who, it may be noted, briefly defined] pruning as follows : 
"Pruning, I call all purgation of trees from w^hat is superfluous." 
Coming down to the present century, we find Forsyth silent as to 
general reasons. Loudon, however, in the Encyclopaedia of Gardening," 
wath that lucidity of statement for which he is remarkable among writers 
on horticulture, says that " the objects of pruning are various, such as 
promoting growth and bulk, the renewal of decayed plants and trees, 
modifying the form, enlarging the fruit, promoting the formation of 
fruit buds, lessening the bulk of trees, adjusting the branches to the 
roots, and the removal or cure of disease." M'Intosh, as well as 
other writers on fruit culture and forestry, w^as so pleased with these 
reasons that he and they transferred them bodily to their own works, 
forgetting, however, to make acknowledgment of their origin. 
The author last named has very clearly defined the rationale of root- 
