516 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ December 8, 1881. 
plants are still showing signs of keeping up the supply of blossoms 
for months to come. And such blossoms ! as large again as 
Victoria Regina, beautifully shaped, deliciously fragrant, a fine 
rich purple colour, and borne on stalks long enough and stiff 
enough for the largest bouquet. The foliage is very fine and 
distinct, and the whole habit of the plant all that can be desired. 
I enclose some blooms for your inspection.—R. W. Beachey. 
[We never saw such fine Violets as those Mr. Beachey sent, and 
which we have had engraved. They appear to possess all the 
good properties of the flower—size, form, substance, colour, and 
perfume—in a remarkable manner.—E d.] 
PEARS FOR WALLS. 
I did not endeavour to reply to the article of “A. H. H.” on 
page 4G8 sooner because I found, with regret, that he was under 
medical care and absent from home, and I was unwilling to im¬ 
pose on him further labour under those circumstances. 1 hope he 
is now well and in harness again. 
I must now take my readers back to page 327, October 13th, 
and ask if there was the slightest suggestion of personality in 
that article, or anything to call forth the smart reply on page 
39G, November 3rd. This letter, I submit, invited, even de¬ 
manded, such an answer as I gave on page 428, November 10th, 
and which your correspondent duly honoured on the page first 
quoted (468, November 24th.) These dates are collated for conve¬ 
nience of reference to those who are interested in the subject 
under discussion. 
It seems that “ A. H. H.” disclaims the quality of boldness that 
I attributed to him in writing as he did after reading the remarks 
of Mr. Warner (355) and the practice of Mr. Taylor (388) on the 
subject of Pears on Pear stocks, inasmuch as he had not read 
those articles when he penned his communication. This is a per¬ 
fectly satisfactory explanation ; but when I asked him to prove 
that borders 30 feet wide, concreted, See., were absolutely necessary 
in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred for such trees as I advocated, 
his reply is scarcely worthy of him, and if he had written at first 
what he has written now on this part of the subject there would 
have been little or any difference between us. Then when he 
stated that fruit could be grown with a hundredth part of the 
labour that is necessary under the old system, I naturally chal¬ 
lenged the accuracy of the statement: and now, fortified by expe¬ 
rience, I do not hesitate saying that what he advanced is absolutely 
unsustainable, and he has said quite as much as 1 expected he 
would say on that point. 
It is no fault of “ A. H. H.” that his experience is less than 
mine on hardy fruit culture, but at the same time he might credit 
others older than himself with having striven with the same zeal 
that he has done to acquire knowledge on this branch of their 
calling, and he will find it prudent to refrain from applying 
epithets to those who endeavour to impart information, be¬ 
cause he may happen to differ from them in opinion. Although 
your correspondent cannot adduce results of his own practice, I 
should not like to suggest, much less assert, that he is no gardener; 
on the contrary, his letter affords evidence of his capacity in that 
respect, although, in my opinion, he has yet much to learn on the 
most economical method of growing hardy fruit. 
Several years ago I entertained somewhat similar opinions to 
those “ A. H. H.” entertains now. I was young, earnest, and enthu¬ 
siastic then, and dreamt about the revolution of fruit culture, and 
of the bountiful harvests that would follow when the improved 
systems became established. My dreams have not been fulfilled. 
Millions of fruit trees have been planted at an enormous cost 
during the last thirty years, but we are more than ever indebted 
to foreign countries for an adequate supply of useful fruit. This 
is a fact, and for such “ improvements ” as have led to it I have 
no affection. I will go further, and boldly state that if the fashion 
is continued of planting collections of Apples and Pears—one tree 
of a sort—on Quince and Paradise stocks, and crippling them by 
pinching and root-pruning, we shall never become, what we might 
become, a fruit-producing nation in the most important respect 
of all—namely, producing an abundant supply of wholesome food 
for thirty-five millions of people. 
This bears directly on the subject on which I first ventured to 
write. I denounced, and I denounce now, the practice of apeing 
the French in endeavouring to cover English garden walls with 
Pears ; and 1 advocated then, what I advocate now, freely grown 
well-trained trees on Pear stocks, from which the fruit is estimated 
by pecks and bushels instead of by pounds and dozens. I have 
no objection whatever to a wall of cordon trees nrovided a 
number of each of the best varieties are planted, as these would 
be equivalent to one good tree grown on the English system in 
affording a serviceable supply of fruit ; but when this is the object 
it will never be attained if a hundred trees represent as many 
varieties ; and, in my opinion, this practice is only advisable for 
experimental purposes. 
But cannot cordon trees be grown on Pear stocks ? A pretty 
firmly established opinion exists that they must be on the Quince. 
This is a fallacy. On many soils they are better, far better, on 
Pears, will cover the wall quicker, and bear as well as trees can 
bear if they are properly managed. In many gardens Pears will 
not succeed on the Quince. I have experienced precisely the same 
results as Mr. Warner narrated on the page above quoted. I 
planted two trees of each variety of a selection of Pears—one on 
the Pear, the other on the Quince—fifteen years ago, and I do not 
hesitate saying, in fact, I am sure I might with truth say more, 
that the trees on Pears have afforded five times the quantity of 
fruit that those on the Quince have afforded, while many of the 
latter are either dead or dying in spite of every endeavour that 
has been made to keep them in health. Far more labour has been 
spent on the trees on the Quince than on those on Pears, yet these 
latter are now fine fruitful specimens, and will continue so for 
fifteen years longer, even for thirty, if they are well managed. 
li But what of the fruit 1 ” “ A. H. H.” may ask. Well some of it 
was staged at one of the largest shows in England this year, and 
had a respectable position there, and it in other respects gives 
complete satisfaction to a family who are not satisfied with 
inferior produce. 
I notice in the excellent letter of “ Wiltshire Rector ” in 
your last issue that the writer has uprooted Beurrd Diel Pear 
because of its worthlessness. With me that Pear was utterly 
worthless on the Quince, but a tree on the Pear not 10 yards 
distant produces splendid fruit both in size and quality, fruit 
which is worthy of a place on any table or in any exhibition. 
This tree, with others, was planted in an old border, a one-horse 
cartload of fresh soil being used at the time, and the border has 
been regularly cropped with vegetables and Strawberries. It has 
been root-pruned once in a manner that may possibly shock 
“ A. H. H.” The soil was removed from near the stem, and two 
strong roots that appeared to go straight down into the subsoil 
were chopped off with a small axe and left. That was all. The 
whole work was done in a quarter of an hour, and if two men 
had spent a day in lifting the roots carefully and replanting the 
tree in fresh soil the results could not have been more satis¬ 
factory. 
On the question of training trees with branches 30 feet long 
and as straight as gunrods, I wish to say a word. When writers 
complain of the time that is spent in training and nailing such 
trees, they always appear to me to publish a certificate of their 
inexperience. Much less time is requisite for managing a well- 
trained tree than one that has been neglected or trained in a 
haphazard manner. Many winters spent in work of this kind 
enables me to speak positively on this point. A badly trained 
tree has nearly always far too many branches, and the majority 
of these are far too crooked ; and if a greater number of crooked 
branches can be pruned and secured to the wall in less time than 
a lesser number of straight branches can, all I can say is that 
those who can accomplish this feat are exceedingly clever, and I 
would go a long distance to see them at the work. 
I do not retract one word I said on page 327, that splendidly 
trained and well-managed specimens of Pears on walls are a 
credit to any garden and gardener, and they will afford more 
fruit with less labour than can be obtained from puny trees on 
Quince stocks that are pinched and root-pruned to accelerate 
their cropping and shorten their lives. 
I am not now writing so much in reply to “ A. H. H.” as on the 
general question of fruit-tree culture and management, and he can 
reply or not as he prefers. I neither invite nor fear criticism. 1 
did not write my first article on Pears for walls without my book, 
and it is not emptied yet. 
On the question of pruning, I cannot refrain from noticing a 
remark of “ A Kitchen Gardener” in your last issue. He says 
on page 491, “ I would never allow thedeading branches of young 
strong-growing trees to remain longer than from 9 inches to a foot 
annually. This will be the means of producing robust well-spurred 
branches.” My remark on this is, that if he does not prune the 
roots in the same proportion the “ spurs ” will not be fruit spurs, 
and if he does so restrict the roots he arrests the extension of the 
trees needlessly. I dissent entirely from your correspondent on 
his teaching as applied to Pears on walls. After almost all sorts 
of experiments, extending over a number of years, I have arrived 
at the conclusion that there is far more root-pruning and far more 
branch-pruning practised than is necessary for Pears on walls, 
and it is because of this that failures are so common and really 
fine fruitful trees so few. 
One word more. If “ A. H. H.” should reply to this communi- 
