154 
GARDENING AS A SCIENCE. 
influence of one season. The proof or subversion of the theory might be obtained 
by cutting away every fruitless branch of a pear or other tree, reserving only 
those with fruit upon them. If, by comparison of two trees or bushes of the 
same species and variety, the fruit of the one which retains all its branches be 
found superior, it might be fairly inferred that leaves, however remote, exert some 
general influence upon the plant ; and we know that Mr. Knight entertained that 
opinion with respect to the melon plant at least. 
" 3. But if all the fruit which a healthy tree will show is allowed to set, and 
a large part of its leaves is abstracted, such fruit, be the summer what it may, will 
never ripen." 
The truth or fallacy of this generalization must be found in a mode of treat- 
ment which is never adopted by any one worthy of the name of gardener. Take 
away all the leaves, and you degrade all the fruit ; divest a fruit-branch of all its 
foliage, and a local injury will follow ; remove the leaves from unfruitful branches, 
and the buds upon them will be paralyzed : but we have no proof, founded in 
practice, that the fruitful shoots will sufi*er by careful pruning ; at all events, 
hundreds of laterals and supernumeraries are cut away every year from peach and 
nectarine trees. The smaller shoots, or spurs, have a fruit at their base, are 
frequently shortened to within a bud or two above that fruit, and yet every sound 
fruit matures to luscious perfection. Would it do so were all the developments 
which proceed from eyes, retained at the spring dis-budding, permitted to remain 
without subsequent regulation ? 
" 4. Therefore, if a necessity exists of taking ofi" a part of the leaves of a tree, 
a part of its fruit should also be destroyed. 
" 5. But, although a tree may be able to ripen all the fruit which it shows, yet 
such fruit will neither be so large, nor so sweet, under such circumstances, as if 
a part of it is removed ; because a tree only forms a certain amount of secretions, 
and if those secretions are divided among twenty fruits instead of ten, each fruit 
will, in the former case, have but half the amount of nutrition which it would 
have received in the latter case." 
The conditions implied in Nos. 4 and 5 demonstrate that Nature does not 
provide the means to perfect her own productions ; in other words, they show that 
art must be called in aid, otherwise its limited "secretions" are not sufficient to 
bring to excellence the fruit which a tree develops. If, therefore, it be admitted 
that the balance of nutritive and productive powers supplied by nature be imper- 
fect, we must appeal to art ; and, as it is seen that wall-fruit of transcending 
qualities is obtained upon trees from which the pruner rescinds three-fourths of the 
subsidiary branches, it becomes less than doubtful that severe pruning is beneficial 
when the quality of fruit is the grand desideratum. 
The ohject in mew should always be duly considered, otherwise we mistake 
principles. We have repeatedly contended against amputation and pruning of any 
kind, if vitality and perfect growth of timber (as in forest-trees) be contemplated, 
