November £9, 1S8S. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
487 
There are other circumstances in connection with planting trees 
:and shrubs which it would be worth while to notice, for it is 
astonishing how little attention is given to the subject by a large 
number of gardeners, young ones in particular, who apparently 
consider it a matter scarcely deserving more than a passing thought, 
lumbers of trees are thrust into the soil with torn or bruised roots ; 
others are buried much deeper than they ought to be ; many have 
the soil thrown in solid lumps on the roots, this being often 
♦trampled and trodden until it becomes as hard and solid as it is 
possible to make it, as though planting a tree were an operation 
differing in no respect from setting up a post or scaffold pole. Then, 
again, fresh-planted trees are left all the winter to sway and twist 
about with the force of the wind, which alone would prevent the 
roots taking hold of the soil. These and other shortcomings are not 
at all uncommon, and appear to result from a thoughtlessness that 
in effect is as culpable as wilful carelessness or neglect. The old 
axiom, that “ what is worth doing at all, is worth doing well,” 
applies in all its force to planting trees ; for it is by no means 
pleasing to the owner nor creditable to the operator when, after 
planting a number of trees or shrubs, a large per-centage of them 
die, leaving ugly gaps, which must be, and are, eyesores to all who 
behold them. The neglect of such precautions as are necessary to 
insure success cannot be excused on the score of taking up too much 
time ; for to plant a tree well, and as it should be, does not take a 
minute longer than to plant carelessly, There are, it is true, causes 
of trees dying which are not always under the control of the planter, 
and for which a certain allowance ought to be made ; but, then, it 
is undeniable that careless planting is productive of more failures 
than any other cause that I am aware of, and this must be my 
apology for offering these remarks. 
What I have said refers more particularly to that class of 
gardeners who have no under gardener or other assistance, and 
many of them perform such work as planting in a manner far from 
ereditable to themselves or the vocation which they assume to re¬ 
present. It is not too much to assert that nothing can be of more 
consequence, as a rule, than the success or failure of fresh-planted 
trees, since they are ever before the eye, and afford abundant food 
for criticism. The character of the planter is, consequently, in¬ 
volved, and it would be well for him to give his attention a little, 
or, rather, much, to the art of planting, and not be contented 
simply with relying upon the facts that a hole must be dug, the 
root of the tree placed in it, and the soil returned and trodden over. 
Any labourer knows that much, and can do as much ; and if the 
gardener desires, as lie should, to receive credit for a little more 
understanding, he must show it ia the way he performs his 
work.—C. F. 
ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 
Novembee 13th. 
Scientific Committee. —Present : Dr. M. T. Masters in the chair ; 
Mr. Pascoe, Mr. W. G. Smith, Mr. Michael, Professor Bouiger, Professor 
A. Church, Professor Scott, and Bev. J. Henslow, Hon. Sec. 
Potato Reversion. —Mr. Smith mentioned that eighteen years ago 
Mr. Fenn crossed two long sorts of kidney Potatoes—viz., the Early 
Coldstream and the Early Ashleaf, the result being tubers of a globular 
form, which he called W. G. Smith. After eighteen years, during which 
this had come true, one plant suddenly reverted to the original type, 
being 51, inches long, the round tuber being only about 2j inches in 
diameter. 
Ivy Blossoms Malformed. — Dr. Masters exhibited specimens and 
drawings of a very unusual condition of Ivy, in which the “ disc ” on 
the summit of the ovary had become hypertrophied into a thick ring, 
the style occupying the depression in the centre, the border of the ring 
supported about ten anthers, all being supernumerary, as the normal 
number was present at the outside of the base of the ring. The speci¬ 
mens were sent by Mr. Archer Briggs. 
Oak Timber Defective. —Dr. Masters exhibited specimens of Oak 
wood, which was used for spokes of wheels, which was found to break 
off short. It was referred to Professor Marshall Ward for examination 
and report. 
Pinus Lambertiana. —Dr. Masters exhibited a branch of this species, 
received from Mr. C. Herrin of Dropmore, Maidenhead, with two cones 
about 1 foot long. The size when growing naturally in California is 
Slid to be double that of the present specimen. 
Cleistogamous Lawn Plants. —Mr. Henslow showed specimens of 
several species of plants which are propagated by cleistogamous flower 
buds. By that means, while retaining a dwarf habit, they are able to 
multiply very rapidly, and to extend over considerable areas in a tennis 
lawn. Although none of them are perennials, they remain so reduced 
in size that they are not exterminated by the mowing machine periodi¬ 
cally cutting them down. The result is that each species has more or 
less completely covered certain patches of ground to the almost entire 
exclusion of everything else. The plants in question are Cerastium 
glomeratum, Montia fontana, Trifolium procumbens, Sagina procumbens, 
Alchemilla arvensis, Veronica arvensis, and Poa annua. Mr. Henslow 
lidded that he had observed many years ago a Trifolium flourishing in 
the same way on the close-cut grass in Kew Gardens, on the site of the 
present rockery. 
Rumex erispus gynnmnncecious. —Mr. Henslow exhibited specimens 
of this plant, which bears hermaphrodite flowers on longer, with female 
.flowers on shorter pedicels, thereby forming whorls along the main 
peduncle. It does not appear to have been described in any work as 
being in this condition. 
Cotyledon umbilicus , abnormal. —Mr. Henslow exhibited a specimen 
and leaves of this plant, found growing in a wall at St. Ives, Cornwall, 
the peculiarity being that it bore a flat, expanded, rosulate arrangement 
of leaves exactly like the House Leek, Echeveria, or several sorts of 
Saxifrage. The leaves were spathulate and not peltate at all. Some 
few growing freely were funnel-shaped. 
Raspberry and Blackberry Ih/brid.— Mr. Henslow drew attention 
to the foliage of a supposed hybrid received from Mr. Viccars Collyer of 
Leicester. The plant blossomed, but bore no fruit this season. The 
flowers were exactly like that of the Raspberry, as well as the tomentose 
under surface of the leaves ; but the method of forming the quinate leaf 
out of the ternate agreed with that of the Blackberry as follows The 
simplest form of leaf is a single oval leaflet near the flowers. This 
becomes lobed at the base, and so two leaflets are given off, forming the 
ternate leaf. From the basal pair in the case of the Blackberr 3 r two 
more are given off, and thus form a quinate leaf, the lower four leaflets 
being nearly •“ palmate.” In the Raspberry, however, the second pair of 
leaflets are given off from the terminal leaflet, just as were the primary 
pair. Consequently the five leaflets now form a more decidedly pinnate 
leaf. In the hybrid in question, although in all other features it agrees 
with the Raspberry, yet in this one in particular it resembles the Black¬ 
berry. As no fruit was produced a comparison could not be made 
with them. 
ROSE HOUSES. 
Yotik correspondent, “ S. S.,” recently called attention to an article 
in which I said, If the house was constructed specially for the 
production of blooms for market it would be much lower that is, 
lower than 8 or 9 feet from the floor to the ridge. I intended to. have 
written 9 or 10 feet, but that does not matter materially. I noticed the 
slight error I had made after the figures appeared, but did not think it 
necsssary to make any correction. I think it will have been understood 
that I do not advise an arched trellis on which to train the plants when 
the flowers are grown entirely for market purposes. My reasons for this 
are several, but the main one only need be mentioned. I advised the 
bush method of culture, and for the simple reason that I am of opinion 
that finer flowers are produced than when the plants are trained on a 
trellis. The difference between the two is quantity on the one principle 
and quality by the other, although the system of pruning will influence 
this matter in no small degree. 
I must, however, return to the question submitted by your corre¬ 
spondent. I do not know if “ S. S.” will accept a foot lower from the 
lowest figure given as much lower ” or not. This is a matter, however, 
in which the cultivator must be guided to a very large extent indeed by 
the ground on which he proposes to build, or more particularly by the 
natural soil. If the soil rested on a subsoil that would insure perfect 
drainage, such as sandstone, gravel, or anything of a similar nature, and 
the soil was of a suitable nature in which to grow Roses, or could be 
rendered so without much trouble, I should build the house 7 feet high 
from the doorstep to the ridge (inside). I should try to arrange the 
doorstep to be about 2 inches above the ground level—not more if I 
could help it ; in fact the step, of whatever it might be composed, would 
be arranged on the footing of the outer walls. The best way of aniving 
at this matter is to suppose I was building a house for Niphetos blooms 
for market. It would be 100 feet long (or as near that as I could make 
it) to work in squares of a certain size—namely 18 inches by 1 foot, the 
former being the distance the rafters are apart. The width of the house 
would be is”feet, the side walls would be 2 feet G inches high, the glass 
1 foot 6 inches, making the house 4 foot high at the eaves. Your 
correspondent will say surely this is a flat house, and so it is, but I am 
not called upon to discuss reasons for advocating a flat-roofed structure 
in preference to one with a sharp pitch, such as are built nowadays. 
Some day I may have something to say on this matter. _ 
I have given the height, length, and width of the structure ; it is 
now necessary to divide it. The side beds would be 2 feet 6 inches each, 
the paths the* same size, and the centre bed 8 feet. That would take up 
the whole space calculating the house to be IS feet inside measurement. 
Your correspondent may ask, Am I to stoop when going round this 
house to clo the necessary work and gather the blooms, &c. / Well, 
that depends upon the height of your correspondent; it would nearly 
accommodate me without a hat, but instead of being 5 feet 4 inches 
from the centre of the walk to the glass or thereabouts, I propose 
making it a foot higher by lowering the walks that depth. 1 he house 
would'then afford room enough for all ordinary men. I have a double 
object in this—First, one of economy, because I could dig out the walks 
