August 1, 1S53. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
85 
is likely to be one cause, if not the principal one, of the flower 
sheath proving barren. I also think “ N. G. ” does not allow his 
plant sufficient root space. A 5-inch pan is too small for the size 
plant he describes, as the shortness of the pseudo-bulbs, 5 to 7 
inches, seem to indicate, when they ought to be double that length. 
I have several plants of this Cattleya on blocks and in pots, and 
have always had them flower as well as any others of this section. 
I have generally treated the plants the same as other Cattleyas 
up to the time the flower buds begin to open, when they are 
taken to a cooler house till the flowering i3 over ; afterwards they 
are set on one side and kept rather dry, but not so as to cause 
them to suffer, and have a good rest ; this resting I consider an 
important factor in the successful culture of this plant, for it is 
not difficult to grow and keep in good health. When the plants 
are started into growth a surfacing of fresh peat and sphagnum 
laid up close to the base of the pseudo-bulbs will assist them much, 
as the young rootlets take quickly to it, and it would be wrong 
to allow them to get thoroughly dry while growing.— Thomas 
Record. 
CANKER IN FRUIT TREES. 
Tired as I am of writing on this subject, I cannot leave the dis- 
-cussion as it stands on page 38. To leave it thus would not be fair to 
'iny arguments or the subject itself. Personally I do not care the toss 
•of a button whether “ W.” demolishes my theory to his own satisfaction, 
whatever lookers-on may say. My Goliath with the pen refers to my 
"“capitulation ” as regards insects attacking only such sorts as they like 
best. Writing from memory, this idea occurred at the outset some five 
or six years ago, and it was in reply to a question put at a meeting of 
the Amateur Gardeners’ Society. As it has always been imagined that 
•certain sorts of Apples—Ribston Pippin, Dumelow’s Seedling, and 
Hawthornden for instance—are more subject to canker than others, I 
have purposely experimented upon them. I think any unprejudiced 
readers will agree that if I can keep these sorts free from canker on my 
insect theory, as I have before stated, while other trees of the same 
varieties not operated upon and growing near continue to canker, 
whether the winters are “comparatively mild” or not, the insect theory 
is not quite “ demolished.” 
If my trees should have to succumb to frost-bite when the thermo¬ 
meter goes down to zero, as I have known it here, well and good, I will 
willingly “ capitulate,” but when I remember the beautiful healthy 
appearance of the Canadian trees after 30° below zero I have faith 
that the trees referred to will stand even zero without chilblains. I 
remember how every particle of the trees above ground (I must be 
careful) was enveloped in a sheet of ice for over a week last winter, 
■although the thermometer did not go very low, perhaps not low enough 
to produce canker m all alike. 
“W.” refers to the insects he has seen both on the Impney specimens 
and on mine. Now of course I cannot say which species of insect he 
referred to, because there are at least half a dozen that I am well 
•aware are found in cankered places and decaying wood. A very in¬ 
teresting item respecting the different insects found has just come under 
my observation. When cutting some specimens for examination I 
noticed a large red spider start from a place which was fast recovering 
from a canker wound (No. 1 case enclosed, which is carefully sealed up). 
•On removing a bit of the dead bark with my thumb nail two or three 
insects of a grey colour were disturbed, which are usually found on dead 
wood. One of these the spider immediately seized and demolished. 
Although shaken off it was not going to be deprived of its dinner. It 
■Carried its prey like a cat would a rat, and you can see the specimen. 
Above that wound on the same branch the wood is killed with canker. 
Specimen No. 2. Close examination will reveal the tiny insects I have 
so often referred to. Whether these are what “ W.” refers to or not, 
these I am convinced are the originators of canker, and let the specimens 
■come from where they may, England, Ireland, or the Channel Islands, I 
have never failed to find them. Specimen No. 3, which is killed with 
canker at a certain point where the insects and larvae are in abundance 
under the dead bark. These for some unaccountable reason we are 
asked to believe are the results and not the cause of canker. If I care¬ 
fully get rid of these, and the trees become healthy and free from 
■canker, I must not believe they were the cause, but that frost or half a 
dozen other reasons were at the bottom of the mischief. I have not the 
slightest objection to sending carefully selected specimens containing 
these insects to the Scientific Committee of the Royal Horticultural 
• Society, but considering that I have before seen what a scientific gentle¬ 
man has had to say upon the subject I should expect a repetition of the 
Teason given of canker. If I did not cure the Hawthornden tree before 
referred to I have cured another of the same variety on precisely the 
same kind of stock by “ painting alone,” and some of the fruit from 
the same tree was sent to the Journal of Horticulture some three years 
ago,: with a specimen of Jargonelle Pear on a branch nearly cankered 
through, and after dressing it bore well, although there was not above 
an eighth of an inch of bark to supply the sap. 
“ W.” makes me to say that, with reference to Dr. Hogg’s tree not 
affected, it should be according to my insect theory. This I do not 
admit. These insects do not fly, and if they are well satisfied on the 
other trees there is no need for travelling.—J. Hiam. 
[The specimens sent have been subjected to microscopic examina¬ 
tion, and it was apparent the insects had escaped in transit. V* e 
endeavoured long and anxiously to find the alleged canker-causing 
culprit, but failed. ] 
LONICERA SEMPERYIRENS. 
For training up the rafters of a cool greenhouse few plants are 
better suited than this lovely North American Honeysuckle (Lonicera 
sempervirens), fig. 10 ; its trailing habit is admirably suited for this 
purpose. The terminal clusters of trumpet-shaped flowers, which are 
produced during spring and early summer, hang down in great profusion, 
are very showy, being a brilliant orange-scarlet with yellow inside the 
flowers, and contrast well with the green glaucous leaves. If planted 
out of doors in a sunny situation it flowers freely during summer, but, 
unlike most of our hardy Honeysuckles, it has no scent. There is 
another variety of this delightful species called L. sempervirens minor, 
also useful for a similar purpose.—G. 
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CROPS IN HAMPSHIRE. 
Although Apples and Pears flowered abundantly with few exceptions 
but little fruit can be recorded. Worcester Pearmain never before failed 
to produce a good crop of fruit, but this season it is nearly fruitless. 
There are a few varieties of Apples which carry nearly a full crop, but 
some regarded as “ certain bearers,” have not a quarter of a crop, while 
others, notably of Keswick Codlin, Alfriston, Dumelow’s See Ring, and 
Mere de Manage, have no fruit. Those which have a thin sprinkling are 
Lord Suffield, New Hawthornden, Devonshire Quarrenden, Cox’s Orange 
