81 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE S' AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ January 29,1983. 
strenuous efforts were quickly male to obtain a supply from its native 
home. The result was that a large importation was brought to this 
country and distributed, placing it in the bands of many growers. Whether 
it was from one of Ihese or from one of Messrs. Veltch’s plants we do not 
know, but Sir Trevor Lawrence, Bart., Burford Lodge, Dorking, repeated 
the cross already named, with the exception that C. insigne punctatissi- 
mum was employed instead of C. insigne Maulei. This also proved suc¬ 
cessful, and a pan of the p’ants so obtained was exhibited at the last 
meeting of the Royal Horticultural Society, January 13th. The influence 
of both the parent Orchils was clearly perceptible, but the offspring 
varied greatly amongst themselves, some being scarcely distinguishable 
from C. Spicerianum and others from C. punctatissimum ; they were also 
less bright, the dorsal sepal being narrower than the Chelsea C. Leeanum. 
As, however, they will doubtless pass under the same name, Messrs. 
Vei'ch have wisely decided to term their production C. Leeanum 
superbum, the Burford Lodge variety taking the original name. At the 
meeting last mentioned Mr. Harry Yeitch had flowers of the older 
variety (one of which is shown in the fig.'), and when compared with the 
later production the superiority of the former was unquestionable. 
C. Leeanum superbum has a broad rounded dorsal sepal, slightly 
arched and unfolded at the apex like C. Spiceranum, pure white nearly to 
the base, which is greenish, with numerous violet purple dots scattered 
over it, varying in size, being largest towards the base. The sepals are 
white, the petals being greenish with a few purplish dots and a tinge of 
reddish brown, a similar hue suffusing the lip, but this varies consider¬ 
ably, some being very dark and others very light. The flower is large 
and bold in appearance, possessing all the valuable enduring qualities 
of old C. insigne, and that it will take a foremost rank amongst the most 
favourite Cypripediums there can be no doubt when it has become suffi¬ 
ciently numerous to be generally known. Its strong free habit will admit 
of quick increase, and we may expect in a fe w years that it will be found in 
most collections of Orchids. 
TRENCHING GROUND. 
I should he sorry to be thought disrespectful to ray elders and too 
self-conceited to be open to correction and instruction from them. If we 
touch old-established doctrines we must be prepared to meet the protests 
of those who for many years, and their fathers before them, have been in 
the habit of preaching and practising what we criticise. Fortunately 
this discussion has been conducted without giving rise to any bad feeling ; 
and if I have lost ground in the estimation of many practical readers of 
this Journal, it is yet some satisfaction to observe that my expressed ideas 
on the subject of trenching ground has brought out several very in¬ 
structive replies from correspondents who do not often venture into 
print. I have also received several opinions on the matter in the course 
of private correspondence, and although for the most part in opposition 
to what I have advanced, giving me the unenviable position of being a 
glorious minority of one, I yet do not regret having exposed myself to 
the certainty of defeat. The experience of one respected friend, who, I may 
be allowed to add, is generally considered one of the best gardeners of the 
day, is, I should think unique, and I propose to give it in his own words. 
He writes, “ I was much interested in your ideas on trenching, and after 
forty years’ practice I think you are right and you are wrong. I have 
done a lot of trenching, and had some queer soils to tackle. In 1851 I 
took charge of six acres of kitchen garden that had not been trenched for 
half a century for aught that I knew. The soil was the most tenacious 
yellow clay, and in the park the footprints of the cattle stood full of water 
all the winter. The top spit of the garden was so far improved by 
manuring and liming, and the rest was pure solid clay. Well, it was first 
drained and then the trenching began. The top spit and all that was 
•tolerably workable was turned into the bottom, and the second and third 
spits were such clay that each man had a pail of water into which he 
dropped his grafting tool to make his next spit slip off it. The two spits 
were all burned into something like powdered bricks, and as each quarter 
was finished, the heaps were spread regularly over the top spit. Next 
great quantities rotten leaves, road scrapings, and various other accu¬ 
mulations, with a liberal addition of manure, were wheeled on top of all, 
and then it was all turned and mixed much the same as wo would soil on 
a potting bench. It would have made a grand Vine border, and such 
vegetables as it grew I never obtained before nor since. Here we have a 
heavy cold subsoil, which I dig or fork, and leave it in the bottom, 
keeping the manure just under the top spit.” 
To attempt to write down such a thorough renovating process as that 
above related would be the height of folly on my part, and by quoting it 
I may be said to bave made a rod for my own back. If I had denounced 
trenching in every shape and form the case would have been different. 
What I have endeavoured to prove is, that trenching carelessly performed 
may easily spoil the working of the top spit without greatly benefiting 
the garden as a whole ; and further, that it is quite possible to have a too 
deep root-run. A subsoil well drained, and with which is incorporated a 
liberal quantity of porous and lasting material, may prove most congenial 
to the roots of many vegetables, but I am not yet persuaded that the 
addition of a quantify of soluble manure mixed with the subsoil is of any 
real or lasting service. I repeat, that not unfrequently a quantity of good 
manure is actually buried out of the reach of the roots of some kinds of 
vegetables, and where it is not properly assimilated by those that do 
reach it. It may be it is mixed with the subsoil with the idea of eventually 
preparing it for bringing to the surface after the process so well described 
by “ J. L. B.” on page 6. In our case, and in that of many others, this 
process would have to be repeated several times before the subsoil would 
be fit to bring to the surface. And why bring the wretched stuff to the 
surface, burying that which was both fertile and in good working order 
Is the fertile top spit buried in order to further improve it, or is it done 
with the motive of gradually making all alike? This may be accomplished, 
but if clay principally abounds it will take a lifetime unless burning is 
resorted to, and which “ F. H.,” page 48, also strongly recommends. 
All of us are not in a position to do much trenching, but there is less 
excuse for neglecting the surface soil. The latter is not so easily exhausted 
as some seem to imagine, and in many cases the reverse happens, a too 
free use of manure without close cropping, resulting in a poisoned inert 
mass of soil. Many surface soils would be improved by a dressing of 
lime, others with road scrapings, a-hes, including those from the stoke¬ 
hole, leaf soil, burnt garden refuse, and such like ; these being forked into 
the surface rather than deeply buried. Some soils may be improved by 
the mixing with it of the “shovellings” that are left when bastard 
trenching behind the first top spit; but this should not be left lying on 
the surface, but should be well forked in. 
Mr. Cakebread allowed his fancy rather too much p’ay, or he would 
not have quoted me as having said I had never lived where trenching has 
been done. What I did state was that I had never worked in a garden 
where trenching has been much resorted to. I also fail to see where I 
convey the impression that I had never tried what could be done by 
judicious trenching. As a matter of fact 1 have had a good deal of trench¬ 
ing done at different times, and have even recently had two quarters 
trenched for dwarf Roses. If I had not given the plan a fair trial I 
should not have ventured to express an opinion in the matter. “ A 
Thinker,” although he quotes correctly, yet misinterprets my meaning. 
He infers that I have only had one example of trenching as a guide, 
whereas what I meant to convey was this : I had only one example on a 
large scale of the effects of trenching, and in this case a garden of four 
acres or more was completely spoilt, the subsoil being brought to the 
surface. This was done thirty years ago, and in spite of re-trenching 
and vaiious schemes short of burning a layer of it, it is yet one of the 
worst work’ng gardens I am acquainted with. In my exhibiting days the 
ground was we'l trenched for several sorts of vegetables, but in too many 
cases the results were very disappointing. For instance, if we ex¬ 
perienced a wet spring the whole of the soil became badly saturated and 
very unfavourable to either early working, and, strange as it may sound, 
to an early deep root-action. Peas became badly diseased or had warted 
roots, Cauliflowers buttoned rather than started quickly away, and various 
other crops made poor progress. Then on this deep and loose depth of 
soil the Brussels Sprouts formed too rank growth and but few good 
sprouts. Broccoli also became too luxuriant and liable to injury from 
frosts. Onions were “bull-necked,” and did not always ripen satis¬ 
factorily. Carrots, Beet, and Parsnips were much too coarse and badly 
coloured. Strawberries were much too luxuriant to be profitable, and, to 
finish up, this saturated trenched ground was more given to cracking in 
dry -weather than the ordinarily dug ground. My experience here is a 
repetition of what happened at my last place. We are advised to trench 
in anticipation of a dry summer, very few of which we get; but in our 
case our entrenched land is the most profitable during such a summer as 
last experienced. Why, then, should I go in for wholesale trenching ?. 
“A Thinker” mentiors several notable names—Messrs. Gilbert, Miles, 
and Muir—all being, I am pleased to admit, men of good experience ; but 
I was under the impression Mr Gilbert had one of the most fertile gardens 
in the country under his charge, and that it was only necessary to 
“ tickle” the surface with one of the labour-saving “ cultivators ” to make 
it yield extraordinary crops. If I remember rightly, Mr. Gilbert’s men 
presented him with a testimonial as a slight recognition of his kindness in 
inventing a machine that had only to be pushed or drawn through the 
soil, this superseding spades and the laborious digging. I will look up 
my back numbers, Mr. “ Thinker.” 
I am afraid I shall be abused for taking up valuable space if I attempt 
to further argue out the matter, but must ask to be allowed to refer once 
more to the unwisdom of encouraging deep root-action in the case of 
fruit trees. Here at any rate I am on safer ground. Without any infor¬ 
mation on the subject, I yet dare affirm that the trees at Barham Court 
are not rooted in the subsoil to any appreciable extent, and that such 
fruit as is grown there and also at Holme Lacy are produced on trees that 
are occasionally lifted in order to keep them rooting near the surface as 
much as possible. Mr. Austin when at Ashton Court was a great advocate 
of lifting and root-pruning, and he had a fine lot of trees, which produced 
during favourable seasons grand crops of fruit fit for any purpose. The 
most successful exhibitor of Pears in the Bristol district, Mr. Rye, gar¬ 
dener to J. Derham, Esq., Old Sneyd Park, Bristol, secures most of his 
handsome fully-developed fruit from pyramid trees planted thickly and 
lifted every second y< ar. The ground about these trees quickly becomes 
alive with roots, and fruitful the trees are bound to be. Fruit trees rooting 
principally or solely in the topspit are certain to form good fruiting wood, 
and occasional mulchings will do the rest. On the other hand, if enticed 
or encouraged to root into the subsoil, rank unfruitful growth will 
follow. Cease pruning and this growth will become fruitful, but what 
about the quality of the fruit ? If deep root-action is so congenial to the 
trees, why do 30 many preach and practise root-pruning ? “A Thinker” 
indirectly asks if I would form a Vine border only 12 inches deep. This 
would depend upon circumstances. If it was to be drained similarly to 
most borders I would make it 2 feet in depth ; but if it was to rest on 
an ordinary subsoil, then 12 inches in depth would be ample, and this 
shallow border properly treated would swarm with roots and be fed up 
at leisure. Half the Vine borders in the country are too deep, and in 
