498 
.rOUflNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ June 22, 1893. 
more light on this vexed subject, though I do not think much practical 
information will be gained without experiments in the way of plant 
food on the lines previously suggested by Mr. Tonks. 
There is one point, however, which might be of practical importance. 
Mr. Abbey has given the analysis of a soil near Sittingbourne. What is 
now wanted is the analysis of a good Apple soil in the Weald of Kent. 
We can grow Black Currants and most fruits better than they can be 
grown there, but they beat us for Apples as far as clearness of fruit and 
healthiness of trees. As the soil there is heavy no doubt it contains a 
great deal of potash, which probably has something to do with it; but a 
comparison of the analysis of the two soils—as ours in the main is a 
good soil for fruit—would show in what the difference consists. I would 
undertake to get a sample of the soil for analysis, and would jointly 
bear the expense of analysis with others if it was considered worth while 
analysing it.— Walter Kruse. 
With all respect to Mr. Abbey and other correspondents, I am 
strongly induced to believe that in determining a fungus to be the cause 
of canker in trees, they are putting the cart before the horse. My view 
is that of Mr. Tonks and other earnest inquirers—viz., that canker is a 
product of starvation in respect of the particular varieties affected, or in 
other words, it is a disease caused by the absence in the soil of the 
elements, which are essential to the healthy maturation of the wood. 
How is it that of two varieties of Apples or of Pears (and these two 
fruits suffer more from canker than any other) growing close together, 
under absolutely the same conditions, yet one is healthy beyond all 
question; the other cankers badly, and hardly ever ripens annual 
growths ? The reason is obvious. One sort finds all that it needs in 
the soil, the other does not. Were the canker disease an epidemic 
that was contagious why should not all trees suffer alike ? 
I am not referring to young trees but to old ones, trees growing 
together, side by side, for forty years. Ribston Pippin, Alfriston, 
Wellington, cankering badly; Waltham Abbey Seedling, Cockle’s 
Pippin, and Beauty of Hants doing splendidly. I mention these 
few sorts only. All on Crab stock ; soil a deep, and not very sweet 
clay. Again, of Pears Alexandre Lambr^, Thompson’s, Nouveau Poiteau, 
and Williams’ Bon Chretien do wonderfully well, planted twenty-two 
years on the Pear stock. Beurrb Diel and Beurrb d’Amanlis canker 
very badly, fruit split and spotted, comparatively worthless ; others, 
fruit perfect, clean, and delicious. Why is the canker, if it be a 
contagious fungoid disease, restricted to the latter varieties, and the 
former are perfectly healthy ? We want something more than ideas to 
clear up matters of this kind. Why do contagious diseases attack some 
people and leave others alone ? Because of predisposing causes. So it 
is the case with trees. The predisposing causes to canker are deficiency 
of tree food, the lack of essentials to health ; in other words, of the 
formation of perfectly sound ripened wood. There is hardly any worse 
form of canker than is seen in the annual dying off of the young 
growths due to imperfect maturation. No wonder that stem canker is 
also in evidence all over the tree. Supply the roots with the essential 
food requirements, and the wood will perfectly mature ; then, too, the 
canker in the stems will disappear. 
When trees are old and the roots have gone deep into the soil, feed¬ 
ing them seems to be out of the question. Only the severe root-pruning 
and the renovation of the surface soil by removing the old and replacing 
it with new, also adding suitable manures, can furnish a remedy, except 
where it is determined to take the head of the tree clean off and replace 
it by grafting with scions from a variety that thrives well on the soil. 
Here we see the very same soil, roots, and stem that before could furnish 
for the old head only disease, now producing a perfectly healthy and 
productive head. What in such case becomes of the contagious theory? 
If anything could tend to court disease it certainly would be in the 
doing of all I have indicated. What we want to know in relation to 
this matter, and to enable us to discuss it intelligibly, is what are the 
physical needs or constituents of any variety of fruit that cankers badly, 
as compared with similar needs of sorts that on the same soil are 
healthy. That seems to be the only way to get at this canker trouble 
satisfactorily. In how many cases has it happened that younger trees 
showing signs of canker have been lifted, replanted in same place, and 
yet have been healthy afterwards for years ? Simply because the roots 
were previously in soil that was devoid of wood and fruit constituents, 
and the lifting and replanting, so that the roots were in surface and 
fertile soil, furnished the needful constituents, and the tree was satisfied. 
Later, when the roots were again down in barren soil, the canker 
reappeared. 
In the stiff clay of West Middlesex for many years certain Apples 
did splendidly, carrying healthy heads and fine crops. Then came a 
very cold wet summer, when the sap was crude and the wood unripe. 
A very hard winter followed, and during a period of intense hoar frost, 
wood of King of the Pippins, Lord SufBeld, Wellington, and several 
other varieties was cracked or contracted by the frost in all directions, 
even branches so large as a man’s arm being terribly injured. The trees 
have never recovered from that blow, and apparently never will. Still 
there were many sorts, Cox's Orange Pippin, Mank’s Codlin, Blenheim 
Pippin, Lellow Ingestrie, and others that suffered nothing. The fact 
showed that some sorts had found even in a wet summer and on cold 
clay all their needs, whilst others had found them deficient. Wellington 
Apple has never been worth its salt in the district since ; and in myriads 
of cases heads have been taken off and other good varieties put on, 
esp^ially Warner’s King, which seem to have been quite uninjured. 
Mr, Abbey has treated readers of the Journal of Horticulture to a 
scientific essay, but it will all the same satisfy very few. I prefer to 
follow Mr, Tonks to Mr. Abbey. When it is asked, Why does the 
nurseryman keep his trees free from canker ? the reply obviously is, 
Because he always has young trees, which have had no opportunity 
to send their roots deep into unfertile soil. As to destroying the fungus 
by external applications, does anyone else suppose that in such way 
canker will be eliminated? Very few indeed. The fungus is but an 
ordinary parasite that fastens upon tree crowns and decayed wood or 
bark. We must find means to prevent canker, and then we shall see 
nothing of that parasitical ogre the fungus.—A. D. 
I HAVE read with much interest the articles which have from time 
to time appeared in the Journal of Horticulture on the subject of 
canker in fruit trees. I am only an amateur without scientific 
knowledge, but having had experience of canker in about 100 
Apple and Pear trees planted by myself about fifteen years ago, I gave 
the subject some consideration to try and ascertain the cause and provide 
a remedy. At first I thought it was caused by an insect, and then by 
fungus, but I came to the conclusion that the insects and fungus were 
due to the disease, and not the disease to them. 
Canker may differ on various soils and in different localities. I am 
only speaking of it as it appeared among my own trees. I find it usually 
begins at the base of a twig or on some part where the bark has been 
bruised ; that it begins in a very small way at first, and the sore or 
canker keeps getting larger until the bough is half eaten through and 
the twig wholly or partially dies. Seasons make a difference, a moist 
spring and early summer inducing a rather vigorous growth, succeeded 
by a dry time appears to encourage canker. 
After trying several experiments, such as insecticides and cleansing 
the wound, I came to the conclusion, rightly or wrongly, that it arose 
from an imperfect flow of sap, the obstacle arising from a new twig or 
a bruise ; also that my soil contains some ingredient which leaves at 
the obstacle in its upward or downward flow a minute sediment, getting 
larger during the summer and deviating by degrees the course of the sap 
until the sore or canker is formed. 
As a remedy I cut off all the worst cankered branches, cleaned the 
remainder, pared off the top soil round the stems of the trees to about 
as far as I thought the roots would reach to the depth of nearly a foot, 
and put some strong decayed farmyard manure on the top of the roots, 
covering it with the top soil to induce the trees to find their sustenance 
near the surface instead of striking downwards to the poverty stricken 
and cankerous undersoil. The result was a complete success, and for 
several years canker almost disappeared from my Apple and Pear trees. 
It comes again after a time, but if I cannot quite cure it as the trees get 
older I can at least check it, and with older trees I accompany the 
operations with judicious root-pruning. 
I get canker in Gooseberry and Currant bushes and Laurels (Cau¬ 
casian), but these I leave to their fate, as it is easier and cheaper to 
replace them than try to cure them. I am of opinion that canker 
arises from the soil, and the only way to cure canker is to “cure” 
the soil, and that it is not dependent on outside influences.— Thomas 
Pendered. 
NIGHT-BLOOMING CEREUS. 
My plant of C. Macdonaldise on the 17th inst. opened its seventy- 
second and last bloom. There had been many others which never 
developed. It commenced to flower on May 9th with five blooms, on 
the 12th it had eight, on June 3rd six, and on the 4th five flowers, and 
there were few nights without two or three. I have measured an 
individual bloom 16 inches across.— Edmund Tones. 
Having noticed the remarks regarding the Night-blooming Cereus 
in the Journal (page 478), I enclose a photograph, which was taken by 
the magnesian light between 9 and 10 p.m. Your correspondent asks if 
it is unusual to have so many flowers open at one time. It may be so, 
for one does not often meet with it in private gardens ; but my employer 
told me that where he brought our plant from he saw thirty-three 
flowers open at one time, that being at Ryde. 
I have had my plant about six years, and it flowered last year for the 
first time. This season we had two blooms, and as a novelty the gardens 
were open for anyone who liked to come and see them. The flowers did 
not both open on same night. I think it a pity this plant is not more 
grown ; it requires but little room, and I am sure the flower well repays 
for the fragrance and its size. I tried to get a cross, but was not 
successful, but shall try again another season should it flower.— 
J. Gilbert, Rectory, Merrow, Guildford. 
[We are obliged by the small photograph, which illustrates one 
blossom fully expanded.l _____ 
The under-mentioned particulars may be helpful in convincing 
Mr. R. Hilton, Faversham (page 478), that nine open blooms on a 
plant at one time are not in any way “ unprecedented,” as he has been 
informed. To him, no doubt, the sight may be unusual, but to us 
around this locality such an event passes by almost unnoticed, for in 
the garden of J. Duncan, Esq., Fernlea, Woolton, a fine specimen of 
this remarkable plant is to be seen. Mr. GriflSths, the gardener, has 
kindly placed at my disposal his diary, from which I have made the 
following extracts, omitting dates where the number of open flowers 
for one evening do not exceed six in number, For June, 1888; 23rd 
