JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
72 
Not everyone would have so fearlessly laid themselves so open 
to attack from critics inclined to be adverse and unmerciful. 
It is very easy to prophesy after the event, and even the most 
ignorant could say, “ I could have told you so but those who 
have struck out into “ fresh fields and pastures new ” know 
very well that events not calculated on or even dreamed of 
sometimes occur. Those who keep straight ahead in the beaten 
paths may keep pretty free from blundering, but they will 
hardly make discoveries or leave the world wiser than they 
found it. It is different with the seeker after better methods. 
He will make mistakes, even though endowed with more than 
average intelligence, and be laughed at by those who have less. 
To make no blunder proves nothing ; to make many may prove, 
not that the perpetrator is incapable, but that he is not content, 
and is desirous of marching a step beyond the point reached by 
others. To be sure, blundering is not of itself a sign of a 
groping after truth ; but neither is it always a sign of inca¬ 
pacity, though incapables certainly blunder most, and are most 
ready to lay blame when only praise is deserved. This much 
we have said, not in defence of Mr. Taylor, who needs no such 
defence, but rather for the purpose of exploding an erroneous 
way some people have of judging others. 
That Mr. Taylor did make one or two mistakes is, in fact, 
rather comforting to others, myself among the number, for 
really one is apt to feel incapacitated when mistakes occur in 
his own hands, and when he imagines nobody else would have 
been so stupid. Indeed, I am not sure if greater profit would 
not result if we were all to chronicle our mistakes and say less 
about our successes. Mr. Taylor has combined the good of 
both systems, for he has not only told us when and how he 
failed, but also by what means he secured success. The con¬ 
sequence of this is that a very large number of readers must 
have derived no small amount of benefit from what he has 
written. 
Months ago, just at the outset of Mr. Taylor's description of 
the Vines at Longleat, the printer made one mistake by leaving 
out at the end of a paper “ to be continued," and I made another 
by supposing Mr. Taylor had said all he intended to do, so a 
paper about my method of manuring Vines and the reason why 
was posted to the office as a finisher to what I had before 
written on the subject of Vine culture. I suppose that, now 
Mr. Taylor has really finished, it will see the light when the 
pressure becomes less severe on the space, and perhaps it will 
be found that, to some extent, I have supplemented what has 
appeared. I forget exactly what I wrote, but, if not mistaken, 
there are some analytical tables in it that will, perhaps, help 
even Mr. Taylor, for there cannot be any doubt but that when 
we know just what Vines take up we are guided in our efforts 
to supply those wants. 
Pending the publication of that paper I will in the mean¬ 
time confine myself to making a few remarks in a friendly way 
on what Mr. Taylor has written. To go over a tithe of the 
ground is more than I shall even attempt, but there are a few 
points that may be profitably noticed, and to these attention 
shall now be called. 
The first is the matter of concrete bottoms. Like Mr. Taylor, 
I have come to the conclusion that these are really a mistake 
doubly, unless in such special cases as Longleat for instance. 
I also think with him, that first-rate Grapes could be grown 
on ordinary soil with very little preparation, and decidedly 
think it a mistake in nine cases out of ten to make artificial 
borders, as I believe these are often inferior to the natural 
soil. I am also unable to comprehend how it is impossible 
to give Vines all they need from the surface and to keep 
them in health indefinitely by such means. First-rate culti¬ 
vators maintain the opposite, and their opinions must be 
listened to with respect, but we may be pardoned if we enter¬ 
tain doubts, of which the above is one. 
Mr. Taylor’s preference for applying water by cans in order 
to know exactly the quantity that is applied is scarcely 
justifiable, for it is surely an easy matter to calculate how 
much water will pass through any given pipe at any given 
pressure during any given time, and there is really a great 
difference between allowing water of itself to run where it 
is wanted, and paying gangs of men to apply it. It is to be 
hoped that those who contemplate erecting ranges of glass 
[ July 27, 1882. 
will not be led into thinking that pumping water is better 
than allowing it to run of itself. As one whose arms have 
ached with water-carrying, I would urge upon proprietors to 
save much labour, and consequently money, by having pipes 
and hose and a proper supply of water from a high level if 
possible. 
I cannot say I am enamoured of Mr. Taylor’s waste of 
space by having his Vines so far from the glass. It is a 
mistake not to allow plenty of room between the glass and 
the trellis, but your correspondent has gone to the other ex¬ 
treme. As for the advantage of air-giving, the system of ad¬ 
mitting air at the front only is, I hold, radically wrong ; it is 
much better to admit it at as many small openings as possible. 
Neither do I think Mr. Taylor’s elaborate system generally 
applicable. When it can be carried out as he advises nothing 
can be said against it, but doubtless hundreds of your readers 
are quite unable to adopt any such system of shutting and 
opening, and opening and shutting, to suit every passing cloud. 
Those who make compromises, and on blinking days have 
less ventilation than they would do were the sun to shine 
uninterruptedly, and more than if it were not to appear at all, 
find their system answer very well, and that a little air left 
on all night is a good plan, saving the Vines from being 
scorched if ventilation should be forgotten for an hour or 
two on a light summer morning. When at least one re¬ 
sponsible person is within running distance of the vineries, 
closing when dull and opening when bright, is right enough, 
but another plan has to be adopted under different conditions. 
I fear Mr. Taylor will look upon me as a barbarous Turk " 
when I tell him that the last Vines I raised for planting had 
the points of the strong roots deliberately pinched off, and he 
who was so careful not to trim one will not agree with me 
when I say that such is of decided benefit by causing a 
multitude of fibrous roots to form instead of one long fleshy 
thong ; but if he objects, I will question his consistency, for 
he, too, objects to fleshy roots, and he, too, prefers fibry ones. 
If I err it is in good company, and more than one successful 
man has practised it. 
The question of how far young Vines should be allowed to 
grow in their initial stages should, I think, be kept distinct 
from the one of how much young rod should be left at pruning 
time, although in the discussion which preceded Mr. Taylor’s 
papers, and also in his papers, they were confounded. After 
reading what Mr. Taylor has said and thinking the matter over, 
I am inclined to think that cutting down young canes to within 
a few inches of the ground is a mistake—not for the same 
reasons urged by Mr. Taylor, however—but I am not at all 
convinced of the propriety of restricting their growth to about 
10 feet. Mr. Taylor says, possibly with truth, that growth 
made late in the season or after July cannot be properly 
ripened. No matter what date we fix upon as the proper time 
for stopping—we would probably agree on that point—I sub¬ 
mit it is only a question of dates and not of length of Vine 
rod at all. If I have 10 feet of Vine rod made and stopped by 
the 1st of July I am unable to see that it makes any difference 
whether there is another 10 feet below that of the same or the 
former year’s growth, for each foot will depend on the condi¬ 
tions to which the whole is subjected, be the whole 10 or 
20 feet. The difference consists in the time lost or saved. As 
for cutting down, perhaps the best rule would be to leave as 
much as could be induced to break into enough furnishing 
spurs ; and, but for the supernumeraries in Mr. Taylor’s way, I 
have read him wrongly if this, or something like it, is not what 
he would have practised. 
I am quite at one with Mr. Taylor about the scraping, peel¬ 
ing, and painting with nasty mixtures to which Vines are so 
often subjected, because it has been the custom time out of 
mind to do so. There can be no doubt of his system of stop¬ 
ping and pinching being the right one. Eubbing off growths 
that are not wanted just as they appear, and stopping growths 
by merely picking out the smallest points, is very much to 
be preferred to allowing growths to utilise sap, to half smother 
permanent growths and leaves, and then to be broken off by 
the yard. 
Perhaps the most valuable part of Mr. Taylor’s experiments 
was his attempt to do without lime. Far too many try that. 
