JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 393 
rience the experimental row would not be the last on which the 
operation would be tried.—J. Muir. 
THREE HANDSOME FLOWERING TREES. 
On visiting a friend’s garden a few days since I greatly admired 
some flowering trees, which, it appears to me, are not sufficiently 
well known. Everyone that saw them in flower expressed the 
highest admiration of them. One was Pyrus baccata, with pure 
white flowers over an inch in diameter and deliciously perfumed. 
The tree was 18 feet high and probably as much through, 
covered with bloom. P. spectabilis is a good companion to the 
former; the flowers are rosy pink, and have a tendency to come 
semi-double. The third is the double-flowered Cherry, Cerasus 
japonica flore-pleno, pure white with flowers an inch across, very 
double, and reminding one of small Roses. If these three trees 
were planted judiciously in borders and shrubberies they would 
produce a very pleasing effect. Why they are not more exten¬ 
sively planted it is difficult to imagine. They grow quickly, and 
if only a limited space can be spared for them they can be readily 
kept in bounds by annual pruning, and lifting and replanting the 
trees occasionally—W. K. 
OLD AND NEW PEACH TREE TRAINING. 
I would like to thank “ Single-handed ” for his information 
concerning old authors who have advocated “ extension ” in Peach 
culture. I am pleased to note any evidence, new or old, in favour 
of a system that I believe in. Whatever may have been written 
on the subject, however, in times past, it seems manifest from 
much that is being written now that our knowledge of the system 
has been almost lost. We have but to turn to the revised edition 
of the “ Gardeners’ Assistant,” published in 1878, and in which 
some additional illustrations on Peach training and pruning are 
introduced by its reviser, Mr. Moore, one of the Editors of the 
Gardeners' Chronicle, to see the kind of pruning and training 
advocated by such writers who, whatever their position and ability 
may be, certainly claim to stand in the forefront of modern 
horticulturists. The illustrations on Peach pruning in the new 
edition are the worst examples of mutilation it is possible to con¬ 
ceive. Fig. 280, page 453, represents a succession Peach shoot, 
which the pruner is shown must be cut clean off at the third bud 
from the base, leaving the shoot perhaps 3 inches at the most in 
length. Fig. 281 shows a branch with two succession shoots, in 
which the same method is more carefully delineated ; and in the 
same page we are informed that Peach pruning “ is reduced to 
three very simple rules :—1st, Shortening the intended bearing 
shoot at the winter pruning ; 2nd, Training a succession shoot in 
summer; 3rd, The removal of the shoots that have borne fruit, 
except such of them as are leading shoots or branches.” From 
what source the reviser of the “ Gardeners’ Assistant ” got his 
examples is not stated, but in all my experience I never saw the 
like, nor never met anybody who did. There can be no mistake 
about the meaning of the author. The figures are not simple 
diagrams, but carefully executed illustrations of bona-fide Peach 
shoots, showing both fruit and leaf buds, and the lines for the cut 
by the knife at the winter pruning are drawn above the third bud 
from the base of the shoot in each case. Following these direc¬ 
tions the pruner would cut about 9 inches from a well-ripened 
Peach shoot 12 inches long, and longer shoots in proportion ; and 
this practice is advocated for general Peach culture on walls 
and trellises, but which fortunately no experienced men follow, 
though no doubt many beginners and readers of the “ Assistant ” 
have attempted to put in practice and failed, to their own and 
their employers’ serious disadvantage. It seems to me to be time 
some one was lifting a voice against such mutilation of our fruit 
trees. 
Whatever objections may be entertained to the system of train¬ 
ing advocated by me, the following facts will, I daresay, not be 
unacceptable to those of your readers who are interested in fruit 
culture. One of the severest and most enlightened criticisms that 
have been passed upon my practice was that others might fail if 
I succeeded ; but I hope I am not prohibited from telling what 
I have done, or that cultivators are deterred from following me if 
they choose to do so. From four young Peaches and Nectarines 
planted here in 1878, and hardly larger than maidens, I gathered 
in 1879 about eighteen dozen good fruit, as the trees bore from 
four to five dozen fruit each. In 1880 the same trees bore from 
nine to thirteen dozen, and at the present time they have each 
upon them from twelve to sixteen or seventeen dozen about the 
stoning period. I shall probably thin them down yet consider¬ 
ably ; but if they do as well as they promise at present and have 
done before, I shall have gathered in less than four years from 
the date of planting between ninety and a hundred dozen fruit or 
thereabouts, striking the average as near as possible, and speaking 
within bounds. Probably Mr. Pettigrew and others who have 
been so long ahead of me in the matter may have equalled or 
excelled this, and if they have I should be glad to be furnished 
with particulars. So far these trees are pushing strongly near 
the trunk, and I anticipate no difficulty in keeping the trees fur¬ 
nished with wood. 
Kindly permit me also to correct an error fallen into by your 
reviewer in his allusion to the Peach tree at Wortley. The tree 
in question was planted in 1866, and was 15 feet across at the 
end of the third year. It was confined to this space till Decem¬ 
ber, 1878, and since then it has more than doubled its diameter. 
The time taken is really five years and a little while longer to 
reach the top of the house. The tree is to be seen, and the 
evidences of its removal too, and what is stated can be proved. 
These statements will be found more than corroborated, and 
reference to page 500 of the “ Gardener ” for 1870, where the same 
trees are described at that time.—J. Simpson, Wortley. 
[It will not be needful for our reviewer to reply to this com" 
munication, as Mr. Simpson’s statements as to the size and 
character of the tree have not been questioned. The yield of 
the young trees alluded to is excellent.—E d.] 
ADONISES. 
A SMALL group of plants, containing both annual and perennial 
kinds, with showy Anemone-like flowers. Two annual species are 
natives of England, a fact which too often leads to even a hand¬ 
some plant being turned out of the garden. In the present case, 
however, they are really deserving a place in the shrubbery 
border. Some of the species are very nearly allied, and it is not 
necessary to grow all those described in the following notes where 
space is limited, yet they are well worth attention where they can 
be accommodated. The perennial kinds should be planted in 
situations where they may remain undisturbed for some years, for 
they do not like their roots broken. Any good garden soil suits 
these plants, but if it should be stiff and heavy they will not 
thrive freely, as they decidedly prefer a light, rich, and retentive 
compost. The species are all confined to Europe and Asia, and 
are perfectly hardy. 
A. cestivalis .—An annual species, and a weed in common par¬ 
lance, but in the month of May travellers crossing Salisbury Plain 
often see it in fine condition. It forms a much-branched compact 
plant, attaining a height of about 2 feet. The leaves are very 
finely divided and deep green. Flowers bright scarlet and very 
showy. It blooms during May and June. Seeds should be sown 
in the borders in September. Britain. 
A. autumnalis .—This is also an annual plant, which, as its 
name implies, flowers at a different time of year. It grows about 
1 foot high, and is distinguished from the preceding by the length 
of its sepals, which do not exceed the calyx, whilst in the spring¬ 
flowering plant they are much longer; the colour rich crimson, 
approaching to black towards the base. It blooms in July, 
August, and September, and is sometimes known by the name of 
“ Red Morocco.” Britain. 
A. pyrenaica .—A perennial plant which has been neglected— 
like all its relatives, indeed—but this has been cast aside on the 
plea of its being only a taller-growing A. vernalis. It may be 
described briefly as a gigantic form of that plant; but it must be 
borne in mind that the flowers also are larger, whilst, instead of 
being solitary, they are produced three to five on each stem. The 
leaves are much divided into narrow deep green segments ; they 
appear larger than its near ally through having long footstalks, 
whilst the bright golden yellow Poppy-like flowers are often 
4 inches across. It attains a height of about 18 inches, and 
flowers in July. Pyrenees. 
A. vernalis— This plant certainly is one of our very finest 
spring flowers, but can only be seen in perfection where the soil 
is congenial and it has been allowed to stand undisturbed for 
some years. Then, indeed, it presents a picture which would 
defy an artist to render. The leaves are sessile, much divided 
into narrow, linear, deep green segments. Flowers terminal, 
solitary, about 2 to 3 inches in diameter, Poppy-like, and rich 
bright yellow. It attains a height of about 10 to 15 inches, 
seldom, however, exceeding a foot. If the season is genial it 
commences flowering in the month of March. Mountainous parts 
of Europe.—H. 
Grubs on Roses. —“Look after the grubs,” says “ D., Deal," 
on page 372 ; “ now is the time to make the onslaught.” I always 
mind what the parson says ; so I have spent the evening while 
