812 QUKRIES, ANSWERS, REMARKS, ETC. 
PART HI. ' 
M 1 S C E L L A N E 0-WW^'>WT'1EPIPV?IWE'^ C'EI?";''"'" 
''ill;*- 7'i to 1- "•'^ • '1? 11 'OiiiJ s'kH ''-lid ■^, 
1. QUERIES, ANSWERS, REMARKS ETC'.''- ' I ' '" ' ^' 
— ;. /ij/i ar.Ki i(m ,■§ u w tariij-i lo 
ivjjrf 1 >criJ .nsmJina:^ «■»«<' , 
On ScARiFyiNG Fruit Trees. — Never having' paid mnch attention to the 
management and cultivation of fruit trees, I was lately much astonished on no- 
ticing for the first time, an operation which had been performed on a number of 
young standard trees, planted about four years since, in a small orchard belong- 
ing to a friend of mine. I allude to the practice of dividing the bark in a per- 
pendicular line, commencing from immediately below the first branches, and 
continued to the base of the stem; the knife penetrating at the same time, 
through the outer bark and the liber to the wood. Upon enquiring into the uti- 
lity of this process, I was told, that it allowed the wood to swell and expand ; 
that if the bark be not separated in this manner, it confines and cramps the ener 
gies of the tree, and consequently retards its growth, and impedes increase in 
bulk. Then again, it is said, this operation secures a vent to the exuberance of 
sap, which, if confined, would be injurious to the tree. These reasons are so 
puerile, so contradictory, so worthless in the way of argument, and so easily 
proved to be untenable, that I am constrained to suppose, that the practice can 
be supported upon other and far better principles ; more especially, as I am in- 
formed, that there are men, who are esteemed to be good gardeners, who ap- 
prove of and follow it. I can claim but little acquaintance with the science of 
vegetable physiology, still this operation appears to me to outrage every princi- 
ple of that science, and reasoning from analogy, to be wholly inconsistent with 
nature. The question is simply this, can it be supported upon right principles l 
Is it beneficial, or otherwise ? It will readily be seen to which side of the question 
my sentiments lean ; but as I can only maintain them by mere hypothesis and 
abstract reasoning, and cannot speak from experiment and actual observation, I 
am desirous of further information pro and con, before I venture to form a deci- 
ded opinion. Therefore I should feel obliged if G. I. T. and other correspond- 
ents of the Register, who may be qualified to speak on the subject, would favour 
me with their opinions. G. A. L. 
Jill,/ 26th, 1832. 
Hard Water, Great Promoter of the Growth of Plants. — I was 
reading this morning, the introduction to Parkes's Chemical Essays, "accord- 
ing to Doctor Home, hard water promotes the growth of Plants, in a much 
greater degree than soft water." This naturally surprised me, and I would fain 
know the Doctor's reasons; but being unable to apply to the work itself for in- 
formation, in consequence of my ignorance of its name, I am induced to hope, 
that one of your scientific readers, will do me the favour to enlighten mo on a 
subject, that must be of importance to all Horticulturists, more especially to a 
!yrt) like voiu- hunil'le servant, Pax. 
