PARK AND CE/AETERY. 
49 
Pruning Trees in Summer Time. 
The reader will remember what has been said 
about the pruning of trees during the winter months; 
but if a tree be properly pruned during the summer 
season, there is really very little for winter pruning 
to accomplish. It is the strong vigorous growth of 
trees that takes the nourishment away from the 
weaker growth. In ordinary garden language 
‘•strong shoots or sprouts on trees are robbers,” and 
they should be pinched back or pulled off; the vig- 
or of the tree is then thrown into the weaker shoots. 
In this way, any part of a tree that is naturally 
weak, can be made strong. 
This point can be illustrated by the way in 
which street trees are trimmed. They are usually 
cut in the winter time, the chief reason being that 
at that time there is little work for men to do, and 
it is natural to recomemnd, as the best time, that in 
which they can find employment; but it must be 
within the experience of everyone, that the branch- 
es shoot out all the stronger at the point where the 
tops are cut away, by reason of the cutting away 
of these tops, and the- lower branches that we 
wish to strengthen become still weaker. This must 
be frequently experienced, but if after a tree has 
been trimmed, in winter, in the manner referred to, 
these strong sprouts, which in summer follow the 
cutting, were pulled out after they had grown a few 
inches, the sap would then be thrown into the low- 
er branches. In this way the winter pruning would 
not be so injurious; on the contrary, it might in 
many cases bring about what is so much desired, 
namely, a strengthening of the lower shoots. This 
summer pruning is especially effective with conifer- 
ous trees. In the case of pines, we know that in the 
spring time three or four branches push out at the 
end of last year’s shoots, looking like gas burners. 
The central one is very vigorous and those on the 
sides are weaker. If we pinch out the point of the 
stronger one, the sap at once flows into the weak- 
er ones, and they become strong, and new buds 
form at the place where the strong one was pinch- 
ed off, next year this bud continues the growth of 
the branch almost as straight as if it had never been 
pinched back. We can pinch off the terminal bud 
of the main stem, a new bud forming a leader with- 
out any bend. One who understands this business 
of summer pruning an evergreen can so manage 
that the tree forms an absolutely perfect specimen 
from the ground to the top, no one branch being 
stronger than the other. The chief thing to remem- 
ber is that in summer pruning the weak branches of 
the shoot should not be touched, it is only the 
stronger ones that require checking. — Meehan's 
Monthly for May. 
A Town can Accept a Bequest for Improving Cemetery. 
A cemetery may be kept in repair and in prop- 
er order, the supreme court of Vermont says by 
cultivating flowers, improving and beautifying lots 
and the cemetery, and fencing the cemetery. Fur- 
thermore, a town having power to raise money for 
such purposes, the court holds that it may accept a 
gift, the interest of which is required to be expend- 
ed annually, — one-half in cultivating flowers on the 
donor’s burial lot in the cemetery, improving and 
beautifying it, the other half in fencing, improving 
and beautifying the cemetery, even if the gift is 
coupled with the condition to keep the principal 
sum intact or good through all coming time, and a 
vote of the town accepting the bequest will bind it 
to the performance of the conditions. 
Validity of Testamentary Wishes as to Burial. 
The surrogate ofErie County, NewYork, holds val- 
id a condition imposed in a will by the maker thereof, 
to be buried in a certain cemetery and making a be- 
quest to her husband dependent upon his not prevent- 
ing or opposing the execution of the will. What 
makes this decision the more important is the fact 
that the surrogate holds that the husband forfeited 
his legacies when he failed to comply with the direc- 
tion of the testatrix in relation to her burial, he hav- 
ing been informed of the contents of the will on the 
afternoon or evening of the day of her death, though 
this information came to him after he had bought a 
lot in another cemetery, purchased the coffin, and 
engaged the undertaker, yet having ample oppor- 
tunity to comply with her wishes had he so desired. 
The surrogate says that many cases have come un- 
der his observation where testamentary disposition 
has been made by a testator in relation to his funer- 
al and burial, and it has been the universal custom, 
so far as his experience extends, to recognize such 
a right in the testator. The present state of society 
demands that courts should compel the performance 
of all reasonable directions made by a person in his 
will relating to his funeral and interment. If a per- 
son desires to pass from this earthly sphere through 
the legal process of cremation, he should have his 
testamentary wish effectuated by the court. 
Rights in Cemetery Lots Purchased for Family Burial 
Places. 
The supreme court of Pennsylvania has decided 
several very interesting points in affirming the de- 
cision of the court of common pleas of Allegheny 
county in the case of Lewis O. Walker. A ceme- 
tery lot was jointly purchased by four brothers, 
manifestly as a burial place for their family. A 
monument was erected, at the joint expense, in the 
