19G 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ September 5,1889. 
subject, and only trespass now, as I consider the above throws new 
light.— Harrison Weir, Iddesltigh, Sevenoalis. 
Mr. J. Hiam is about the best example of a tired man I have met 
with, for the more tired he gets the better he works. He compliments 
me on my superiority as a writer. I hope he will not do that, for if he 
had a good case I should evidently have to take a back seat as a con¬ 
troversialist. So long as he confined himself to the statement that 
insects caused canker in his own trees I did not deny the possibility, 
but when he alleges that insects were the originators of the evil at 
Impney and Packwood Grange I suspect it will tax his ingenuity to the 
utmost to prove his allegation. 
He informs us he has seen the insects on the trees in those gardens. 
No doubt. So did I, and brought some of them to London. I suspect 
there never was any canker without insects. The case is similar to flies 
in a sugar basin, but though there visibly enough I do not suppose many 
persons would charge them with being the cause of the sugar. 
No, Mr. Hiam, though I respect your belief, admire your earnest¬ 
ness, sympathise with you on your sore feet, regret your “ soaking ” in 
searching for truth, and almost lament your loss of 6s. and Is. 9d. rail¬ 
way fare, I cannot agree that the insects you “ discovered ” on the 
trees referred to caused the canker amidst which they revelled till you 
prove that flies cause sugar. 
Mr. Hiam asks in all seriousness whence the canker accompanying 
insects come from. He ought to be the best authority on that. I 
cannot even tell him exactly where the flies “ come from,” and they are 
much better to see than his microscopic friends. They are in the basin 
when the sugar is there, and depart when it vanishes. Mr. Hiam’s 
insects come, he tells us, where there is no canker, cause this to appear, 
then travel on to fresh points of attack, and so on from branch to 
branch and tree to tree, eating till they cause great gaping wounds 
and gnarled swellings. But they miss some trees entirely—not, Mr. Hiam 
now says, because they have any dislike to them, for he had to “ give 
up” that theory. What can be the reason, then, that they seize on a 
Bibston Pippin Apple, for instance, and turn up their little noses at a 
Golden Noble, passing it in contempt? Mr. Hiam had a good reply 
once—their preference for certain varieties ; but now he has none, or at 
least none has appeared. Do they not visit one tree because its tissue is 
ruptured and feed on what they find there, leaving the other alone 
because there is no ruptured tissue, nothing on which they can subsist, 
no sugar in the basin ? That is what sensible insects would do, and 
there seems a good deal of intelligence in what we call the lower forms 
of creation when they are searching for food. 
Then we have the singular phenomenon in, we will say, Mr. Tonks’ 
garden of, according to Mr. Hiam’s theory, insects puncturing the trees 
and eating holes in the branches, and the more numerous the insects 
are and the more they eat the greater of necessity become the rugged 
chasms. That all seems logical enough, but here comes the flaw. Mr. 
Hiam says the insects are there yet, eating away as usual, yet the longer 
they graze the smaller the wounds become. We thus arrive at the 
extraordinary result that the insects eat for a few years and enlarge the 
wounds, then go on eating them and reduce them to the healing point, 
for Mr. Hiam cannot deny that for one wound that is growing in 
Mr. Tonks’ garden a thousand are healing, and healing rapidly. 
This healing was contemporaneous with soil improvement and the 
introduction of food elements that were previously lacking, and with¬ 
out which the trees were deficient in minerals that are requisite to their 
wellbeing, and for fortifying them against rupture-destroying agencies, 
the chief of which is frost. Well fed—that is, “ripened”—wood 
escapes, where ill fed or unripened parts succumb, and trees that are 
naturally hardy in constitution escape injury, while those relatively 
tender do not, just the same as Mr. Hiam gets a “soaking,” but I hope 
by his inherent vigour only feels temporary inconvenience, while a 
weaker man might suffer for months. 
When it is suggested that Mr. Tonks “ will not let it enter his head ” 
that insects caused the canker in his trees (which he cured with the 
insects on them), I am bound to suspect that legitimate arguments are 
getting scarce, and am inclined to think that Mr. Hiam’s reveals 
the weakness of his case in that observation more than anything can do 
that I have said. The insects will remain if allowed so long as new 
cortical layers extend and push off the old and decayed, for in that 
matter they find sustenance. 
The presence of insects being admitted, any interchange of cankered 
parts would be obviously useless. It would be more generally useful 
to know precisely what to apply to trees to destroy or prevent insects, 
and thus, according to Mr. Hiam’s theory, banish canker from gardens 
and orchards without interfering with—taking anything from or adding 
anything to—the soil. As I have not much of a name, I will content 
myself with the usual initial.—W. 
P.S, —I have to close somewhat abrubtly to catch the train for 
Impney at a cost of, I fear, much more than (is. railway fare. 
Mr. Hiam informs us he was footsore and weary when he visited 
me. Even if I had known this, my plain duty was to give him every 
facility to attain the object of his visit. Therefore disregarding my own 
comfort, for it was gently raining, I suggested the inspection of my 
trees, to which he assented. 1 led him at once to some of the worst 
cases; trees which three years ago had been marked for destruction. 
The old wounds were full of crevices, in which various insects delight 
to hide, some of them doubtless to feed on the decaying barb, Ac. He 
took no notice of the innumerable instances where the edges of the 
bark were completely healed ; but, after some search, he found two or 
three cases where struggling growth, having contended during three 
seasons with the combined action of canker wounds, drought, cold, wet 
summer, and two attacks of caterpillars, had this season fina.ly suc¬ 
cumbed. He took samples of these, and after examination with a pocket 
lens submitted them to the microscope ; then, amongst other insects, 
pointed out one which he said was the cause of canker. It appears, now, 
that Mr. Hiam believes this to be “ a species of the family of the red 
spider.” Now, the red spider belongs to the order acarina, of the class 
arachnida. The specimen he showed to me is from its configuration a 
true insect, and as the arachnida are not insects, it clearly cannot belong 
to the family of the red spider. If Mr. Hiam can make a mistake or 
such importance, why is his dictum to be accepted, supported as it is 
only by his assertion, and the presence, possibly accidental, of the insect 
in the crevices of canker wounds ? I again venture to advise him to 
search for these insects in the crevices of wounds not caused by canker.. 
and also to send some other specimens of them to the Journal of Horti¬ 
culture for identification. He states that “ W.” led him to believe that 
these insects had all disappeared from my garden. I cannot find in the 
pages of the Journal that “ W.” has ever made a statement which ougu 
to lead anyone to suppose anything of the kind. Neither he nor I knew 
what kind of insect was referred to ; neither of us has ever disputed its 
presence. . - 
Mr. Hiam betrays a want of knowledge as to another specif ot 
insect. I directed his attention to a Plumbago capensis affected by a 
peculiar disease, a marked symptom of which is decay of the roots.. 
This has for many years seriously injured my plants, and as yet 1 have 
found no remedy. He examined some of the leaves, and found, as was 
probable on a diseased plant, they were infested with insects “ of a new 
description” to him. It will scarcely be credited that these insects- 
were the common thrips, unfortunately too well known to every gar— 
" dener. When he assigned them as the cause of the disease, I trust my 
reply was not so rude as “pooh pooh;” it is the less likely, ^ 
expression very rarely if ever is used by me, though it must be admitted 
that the reduplicated word may be a concise paraphrase of what was 
said. Mr. Hiam has taken up the subject of his hobby w T ith a very 
praiseworthy object, and the same hobby might be ridden by others with, 
possible advantage to fruit growers in general; but more evidence is- 
required before he can be admitted to be in a position to feel confident 
that he has “ mastered the principle by observation and experiments, 
notwithstanding it has cost him a considerable amount, of some details- 
of which he favours us with particulars.— Edmund Tonks. 
ORCHID NOTES. 
WOODLICE. 
If left for only a short time these pests increase rapidly and? 
soon do a great amount of damage both to the roots and young: 
tender flower spikes. Where Orchid houses are infested with 
these pests every effort should be made to destroy them. Fortu¬ 
nately they do not give much trouble in the Odontoglossum house p 
it is too moist for them. In the Cattleya and East Indian house r 
however, they will increase astonishingly and are capable, during the- 
period the plants are resting, of devouring nearly every good root 
the plants have made during the growing season. We have tried' 
many methods of destroying these pests, but none is effectual that is- 
not continuous. A considerable time must elapse before they can 
be exterminated when once they have been allowed to become 
numerous. The most effectual method we have tried is to cut 
Potatoes in half, scoop out the centres, and then place them on the 
surface of the soil and about the house. A few Potatoes cut up- 
are useless where the insects are plentiful; a large number should 
be placed about, and it is surprising what a quantity of woodlice- 
can be destroyed in a week. Do not crush them inside the* 
traps, for w r e have found that others will not go under them freely 
afterwards. The best plan is to drop them into a pan or dish,, 
where they can be instantly destroyed. This method takes much 
time, but it is certain to reduce their numbers, and if persisted in 
will result in clearing the house and the plants. It is necessary 
to look over the Potatoes at night and again in the morning. If done 
only once during the day the pests feed and then retire to their 
hiding places. It is important to supply fresh Potatoes when 
the others become hard and dry. With this plan we also place 
empty G-inch pots filled with dry hay about the house containing 
portions of Potatoes. These form capital traps for woodlice, 
although we have never succeeded in catching so many by this 
means as by the use of half Potatoes that have been hollowed out. 
