362 JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
look very beautiful on the house, but they provide nothing to 
relieve the appearance of the bare walls during the dreariest 
months of the year. The same with the Ampelopsis. I do not 
know anything that gives less trouble or looks neater than A. 
Yeitchii; but that unfortunately is deciduous, therefore does not 
answer the purpose of giving a winter as well as a summer cover¬ 
ing to the wall. 
I do not wish anyone to imagine that I would plant nothing 
but Ivy ; on the contrary, that with nothing to relieve it would 
certainly not produce a very cheerful appearance. What I would 
do is this : Cover the wall with Ivy so as to form a sort of back¬ 
ground ; then at intervals plant such plants as the old Virginian 
Creeper, Clematis, Roses, Wistarias, or any other hardy flowering 
or ornamental-foliage plant. They could be trained about on the 
Ivy according to taste ; the flowering plants would enliven the 
aspect during the summer and autumn months ; and what would 
produce a more pleasing effect against the dense green background 
of Ivy in the autumn than the rich varied colours of the Virginian 
Creeper? Then as these subjects die off at the approach of winter, 
we have still a fine covering of rich dark green, which is proof 
against all weathers. 
Where a ruin has to be covered the effect may be improved by 
planting a few Cotoneasters, and scattering a few seeds of Wall¬ 
flowers and Antirrhinums about in the crevices of the building. 
—Cantab. 
NOTES ON CURRENT SUBJECTS. 
Aquilegia chbysantha. —As this beautiful plant behaves 
here in the way that “ D., Beal," cannot understand, the best 
plan yet tried to have it in its best form is to raise a few plants 
from seed annually, for it assuredly dwindles after the third year. 
Happily it comes perfectly true from seed. 
Buds Changing in Character during Winter.—“ Irish 
Rector ” propounds a poser. Is he sure he knows flower buds 
while dormant ? If he is right, the only solution I can think of 
is that the temperature has been sufficient to keep his trees in at 
least a low state of activity, and that the young bark had been 
green enough to allow of its performing the function of leaves. 
Bark in a young state is furnished with stomates, which act, though 
less effectively, as they do in leaves. If this be not the solution of 
the conundrum somebody else will have to solve it. 
Muriate v. Sulphate of Potash. —“B.” does not think we 
are confined to the use of the sulphate of potash, and seems to 
prefer the more soluble chloride. What about the cost ? and is 
the muriate really more available because soluble 1 Have plants 
not the power of dissolving what they want ? Decidedly they 
have; how otherwise could plants take up tribasic phosphate ? 
The following quotation from a pamphlet sold by B. K. Bliss of 
New York on the chemistry of the Potato we commend to all 
who can fully realise all that it means :—“ The muriate of potash 
is open to the objection for use in Potatoes that it has a tendency 
to produce tubers of inferior quality, waxy and watery. It is 
recommended to use as a source of potash, when the formation of 
either starch or sugar is desired, either wood ashes or some grade 
of sulphate of potash as free as possible from any chloride salt.” 
Agricultural Reports. —Would “ Inquirer ” be so kind as 
to inform me where the reports he quotes from can be had, and 
the price 1 
Cordon v. Horizontal Fruit Trees. —Well done, Mr. Luck- 
hurst I What now, “ John Bull ?”— Single-handed. 
STEPHANOTIS FLORIBUNDA. 
A remarkably handsome specimen of Stephanotis in an 
11-inch pot is now in flower at Mrs. Mary Miller’s, Brentry House, 
near Bristol, under the care of Mr. Gibson. The plant covers the 
roof of an ordinary plant stove, half span, 22 feet long by IS feet 
wide, and a fortnight ago a thousand fine trusses of bloom were 
counted on it. I was greatly astonished at the small size of the 
pot, the strength of the wood, and the floriferousness. To see 
such a sight is worth a long journey. This plant suggests the 
inquiry why Stephanotis blooms are expensive. If the trusses 
were worth 12s. per dozen, £50 worth could be cut from one 
plant in about a month, and Mr. Gibson is not without flowers on 
the same plant for more than three months out of the twelve. If 
Mr. Gibson would give his experience it would be worth market 
gardeners’ consideration. 1 may say that there were also many 
other plants in different houses, and from those in 11-inch pots to 
those in small thumbs ail were proportionally as floriferous as the 
large one.—M. E. 
Digging amongst Raspberries.— Raspberries are surface-rooting 
to a large extent, but still we find in many instances they are not 
treated as 3uch. The spade is too frequently used amongst them, 
and then people wonder why they do not flourish and bear well. To 
have Raspberries in the best possible condition they should never be 
dug amongst, but each year after they are pruned and tied a good 
dressing of manure should be given to remain on the surface. It is 
surprising how the roots grow into it, and after a season or two it 
is next to an impossibility to get a fork into the ground. In gardens 
where manure as a surface-dressing is objectionable a little soil 
might be spread over it. This is our method of treating Raspberries, 
and they grow strongly, bearing abundantly.—W. D. 
THE FORK v. THE SPADE. 
I HAVE frequently noticed of late writers in gardening journals 
advocating the use of the fork in preference to the spade for 
digging. Not very long ago, I believe in the Journal, a writer 
went so far as to say that the fork was so much superior to the 
spade that the latter should be put out of the garden altogether, 
yet no one has, so far as I have seen, thought fit to say a word in 
favour of our good old friend. However, numbers of amateurs 
read the Journal, and as it is on the simple points where they 
make the most unfortunate mistakes, and I think the simple direc¬ 
tions are the most important, very few of us being so ambitious as 
to try growing prize Grapes before we have learnt the art of setting 
Potatoes right end up. As it is in the growing of a good crop of 
Potatoes that the spade plays the most important part, it is right 
that we should decide whether it is the right tool or not. 
I am decidedly in favour of the spade, and will try and give 
my reasons as plainly as possible. I may state that, having tried 
both fork and spade, I find the latter incomparably the best both on 
pure sand and on a heavy marly soil. On the sand the gardener 
has more control of his work, is able to mix in the manure and 
level the beds in a more workmanlike manner, more especially in 
very dry weather, than with the fork. Again, on heavy soil, if the 
spade be properly handled it does its work better. If the soil is 
too wet for the spade it is in exactly the same condition for the 
fork. If the soil is naturally very wet drains and the addition 
of some porous material as a dressing are wanted, and not a 
change of implements. 
The gardener, as a rule, who objects to the spade is he who 
thinks he hastens his work by lifting at each spit a clod of soil 
from 6 to 8 inches in thickness, tumbling it over and then cutting 
it into four or six pieces. This process I would not call digging, 
as it is not even good for the soil. Our heavy soil here after 
such working and the assistance of the wind and sun assumes 
the appearance of the refuse from a brick kiln. The gardener who 
wishes to get through his work quickly and well lifts at each spit 
a piece of soil varying from 1 to 2 inches thick, and this in the 
heaviest land, without the assistance of the foot. This piece of soil 
as he turns it over and slips off the spade receives a slight twitch 
from the under corner of the tool, which shatters it completely ; 
in fact in a way altogether surpassing the clumsy work of him 
who lifts the large clod. Not only is the work lighter but the soil 
is benefited, the produce is increased, and the work has a better 
appearance. I would advise all amateurs, in conclusion, when 
digging-in manure not to be satisfied with throwing the top spit 
on it, but to really mix it with the soil at the bottom of the 
trench ; they will find that the result will well repay the extra 
labour, and what is worth doing is worth doing well.— Hortus. 
WALLFLOWERS. 
That these, the sweetest of spring flowers, should prove them¬ 
selves to be a source of profit to those who grow them largely for 
market, and who make a speciality of them, cannot be wondered 
at, seeing that they are what the majority of people would call 
one of those good old-fashioned English flowers which never lose 
their popularity. It may be truly said that there is a charm and 
fragrance about them which is peculiarly their own, and to this 
must be attributed their being such great favourites with all classes 
of persons. Certain it is that they are highly prized and eagerly 
sought after by the humbler class of people in our large and 
populous towns. Notwithstanding that they are somewhat exten¬ 
sively grown by those whose business it is to supply the markets, 
how seldom it is that we see them grown on a large scale in any 
of our leading private establishments. There does not appear to 
be the slightest reason whatever why they should not be grown 
for the embellishment of flower gardens. When in flower they 
really make a very charming display, and invariably will be found 
to be at their best at a time when they would be greatly appre¬ 
ciated—viz., when families are down at their country seats at 
Easter. In many places it must be admitted winter and spring 
bedding is carried out on rather a grand scale, Conifers, Aucubas, 
Berberis, and many other plants being employed for that purpose 
