208 
On Fences. 
get to the centre of the bundle, which usually falls a prey to the 
searching winds of spring. Plants which are so lifted before they 
are actually required should have the full benefit of the soil by 
being laid in thinly, so that the roots may not in any case touch or 
rest against each other. Of course, plants which have been lifted 
carefully, with few of their roots injured, are to be preferred to 
those which are in other respects better suited. A small plant, 
with its root uninjured, is better than a strong plant, as to size, 
with an indifferent root. Ignorant labourers and thoughtless gar- 
deners pay little attention to the offices of roots, and h^nce it is 
that so many of the spongioles or extremities, by which alone the 
plant derives its nourishment, are barbarously detached through 
sheer carelessness. In selecting plants, therefore, the roots should 
be particularly examined. 
17. The preparation of the plants consists in cutting off the 
tops to within "2 inches of the ground mark, so that when set they 
will appear this length above the surface of the soil. This is the 
only operation connected with hedge-fencing which I cannot exactly 
reconcile with physiological principles. Experience has always 
convinced me that the plants thrive better when so treated, though 
it is generally thought that the branches and leaves are required 
to assist in renovating the roots which suffer by transplantation.* 
Be this as it may, it is unquestionable that plants which are 
headed-down in the way recommended, shoot out much more vi- 
gorously than those which are planted with their tops on. Tlie 
roots should not be touched with the pruning-knife at all, for the 
removal of every healthy root, and especially the spongioles, which 
are most apt to be removed, is the loss of as many hfe agents. 
Plants, indeed, under favourable circumstances, have the power 
of forming new spongioles, but this is by no means a reason 
* About eight years ago I saw both methods pursued in adjoining fields 
by two different parties, and have since watched the result with some 
interest. By the one, a resident proprietor, who superintended the work 
himself, fine strong plants were put in with much care, but cut down. By 
the other, an absentee landlord, inferior plants were put in carelessly by 
contract, but uncut. In each case in the spring, but No. 2 rather later, 
with a dry succeeding summer, so that it had by no means as fair a chance 
as No. 1. In the winter following. No. 2 was cut down, and in about four 
years, notwithstanding the above and other disadvantages, it was nearly, if 
not quite, as goodafence as No. 1. It is true that neither was the treatment 
sufficiently similar in other respects, nor the result sufficiently decided to 
justify a positive preference, but it left a strong impression on my mind 
that if the trial had been perfectly ccBteris paribus, the plants not cut till 
the subsequent winter would have carried the day. At all events the 
point should not be taken as decided till such trial has been made. — W. 
H. HVETT. 
