May 22, 1884. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
405 
spreading.Sf: Stamens numberous; filaments adnate to the base of the 
calyx, the inner free. Ovary exserted, scaly. Style filiform. Stigmas five 
to 1 indefinite. Fruit scaly or tuberculated. Flowers lateral, often 
nocturnal. 
"PS FcJiinocereus .— Calyx tube short, sub-campanulate. Stigmas thick, 
green. Seed tuberculated. Stem dwarf, often sub-globose. 
Eucereus .—Calyx tube long. Stigmas pale. Seeds smooth, rarely 
rugose. Stem tall. Spines in flower bearing and sterile parts of the 
plant not different. 
Lejridocere-us .—Calyx tube short, scaly ; lobes few. Petals fleshy. 
Stigmas pale. Seeds smooth. Stem tall. Spines of floriferous or sterile 
fascicles alike. 
Pilocereus .—Calyx tube short, scaly ; lobes few. Stigmas pale. Seeds 
smooth. Stem tall. Sterile and floriferous fascicles dissimilar. 
Echinopsis .—Calyx tube elongate, downy; lobes numerous. Stamens 
Fig. 9S.—Cereus peruvianus at Cromwell House. 
in two series ; the exterior adnate to the calyx tube, inner free. Fruit 
scaly. Stem depressed, ribbed, globose, or cylindrical. 
Culture .—In so large a genus there must necessarily be some difference 
■of cultural requirements, but this chiefly refers to the temperature, and if 
the region and elevation at which the plant is found is known there will 
be comparatively little difficulty in ensuring its success. Most of the 
true Cereus (the Eucereus of the above table) need a tropical temperature, 
with similar soil to other genera, though as a rule the strong-growing 
species can be safely encouraged with a little well-decayed manure if 
necessary. The trailing sorts need very little rooting material, and some 
indeed, as C. grandiflorus and its allies, obtain sufficient nutriment by 
their stem roots alone when upon a suitable wall or trellis. They can all 
be readily propagated by cuttings of the growth, and even large portions 
of the stem will root if separated from the parent and placed in dry soil. 
So readily are roots produced that in some parts of tropical America live 
fences are formed by placing portions of the stems in closely together, 
and it is said that they rarely fail. The use of certain species as stocks 
for grafting other Cacteie upon has already been noted, and it need only 
be added that almost any species is suitable for the purpose provided it 
be not of too slow growth. 
SELECT SPECIES. 
It will be convenient in considering these to take the true Cereus first. 
Cereus peruvianus, Pfeiffer .—Under various names this Cereus has 
been known to botanists and grown in European gardens for upwards of 
150 years, and it is therefore the most familiar example of the columnar 
species. The titles by which it has been designated, such as pentagonus, 
bexagonus, and heptagonus, refer to the number of ridges or angles upon 
the stem, and owing to these varying considerably the same species in 
different stages has received the respective names. C. pentagonus of 
Haworth has been regarded as distinct from C. peruvianus, but there 
appears to be little doubt that in a broad sense all that have been described 
under these names are simply variations of one type represented by C. 
peruvianus, which is a native of many districts in tropical America. There 
with C. giganteus and other allied species it forms a remarkable feature, 
the tall rigid stems being sometimes freely branched in candelabra-like 
manner, and producing at certain seasons abundance of beautiful flowers. 
In cultivation this Cereus grows rapidly, and soon, if unrestricted, attains 
a height of from 12 to 20 feet, a few specimens being seen as much as 30 feet 
high. Probably the most remarkable in England are those in Mr. Major’3 
collection at Cromwell House, Croydon, of which an engraving is given in 
fig. 93, prepared from a photograph very kindly furnished by Mr. Major. The 
original plant (the central one in the figure) was bought in Holland in 1852 ; 
but by cutting down the stem at intervals a family of fine specimens has been 
obtained, some of which are equally as large as the parent. The old stem 
has two branches, each 4 feet high, three others G feet high, and a small one 
18 inches in height. One straight unbranched stem, the first top taken off, is 
13 feet high. The next cutting developed into a fine plant, now in Mr. 
Peacock’s collection, about 14 feet high, with several branches, and which 
last year had as many as thirty-six flowers. The fourth plant is 8 feet high, 
with two branches ; the fifth, which has been topped, has two branches 11 feet 
high, two 6^ feet high, and one 18 inches in height. It will thus be seen that 
one plant has produced a total length of stem, counting all the branches, of 
80 or 90 feet, of an average diameter of 5 inches, in about thirty years. The 
Cromwell House collection includes many rare and beautiful Cactaceous 
plants ; but this group of Cereus is undoubtedly the most remarkable of all. 
Plants of moderate age generally have the stem from 3 to G inches in 
diameter with narrow ridges 1 to 1J inch deep and 2 inches apart, very 
distinctly marked in the young growth, but on older stems the ridges are 
nearly lost. The clusters are 1 inch apart, containing six to eight 
brownish spines half to 1 inch long on a small brown tuft of wool-like sub¬ 
stance, which is sometimes scarcely perceptible. The stem is usually deep 
green, but the young growth occasionally assumes a glaucous blue colour 
almost as strongly marked as in C. Jamacara. The flowers are white or 
sometimes tinged with red, 4 to G inches in diameter, and are borne freely 
during the summer months on the upper portion of the stem or branches. 
C. peruvianus monstrosus. —This is a peculiar variety of the fasciated 
or contorted type so frequent in these plants. The substance of the stem is 
most strangely twisted and irregular in form, grotesque in the extreme, and 
not bearing the slightest resemblance to the species except in the flowers. 
Specimens 4 or 5 feet high are sometimes seen in cultivation, and one of the 
largest is in Mr. Boiler’s collection. A smaller form of this variety named 
minor is also grown, and rarely exceeds 6 or 8 inches in height, peculiarly 
contorted, but not^so fasciated as the other.—L. Castle. 
(To Ge continued.) 
VINE GROWTH. 
In last week’s Journal it is stated by “A Kitchen Gardener” that 
young Vines that are stopped “ as soon as the top of the house has been 
reached, and are never allowed to go further, become very much thicker 
on the part which will bear the fruit than they would do if allowed to 
grow unchecked ”—as some growers allow their Vines to do—permitting 
the shoots to grow down the back wall a3 your correspondent describes. 
I agree with “A Kitchen Gardener ” that it is best to stop the rods at a 
reasonable height, but it is certainly not the case that Vines so stopped 
grow thicker in the stem than those which are allowed to extend. The 
thickness of the trunk of any young or old Vine is exactly and invariably 
in proportion to the amount of top growth allowed ; and the fact is 
easily explained on physiological principles, well understood and acted 
upon by all intelligent workmen in thinning plantations. The Vine, 
however, shows this sooner than most other plants, and if your corre¬ 
spondent will grow two Vine rods of equal strength from the same Vine, 
and stop one and let the other grow, he will soon prove it to his own 
satisfaction, for the one that is stopped will be much the slenderest cane. 
I could show many striking examples of this here on young and old 
Vines, but the fact is admitted by growers generally. 
“A Kitchen Gardener” also states that the practice of leaving Vine 
rods 12 feet long the first year and fruiting them, instead of cutting 
them back in the old way, is associated in his mind with Mr. Pearson of 
Chilwell, whose experiments were conducted, he says, long prior to those 
of present Grape-growers. I know Mr. Pearson’s Vines, and was under 
the impression that the whole of the Vines at Chdwell at the period 
referred to were grown on the cutting-back system. I have also read 
Mr. Pearson’s writings and the book on the Vine published by him or the 
firm after the date referred to by “ Kitchen Gardener,” and to the best 
of my recollection it contains no instructions or allusions to the point 
raised by “ Kitchen Gardener so that if Mr. Pearson practised the 
system he has not thought it worth while to recommend it to others.— 
Non-Believer. 
Establishing Rooks. —My employers having some young rooks, they 
are very anxious to get them to build in our park. The trees are princi- 
