April 4, 1889. J 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
2.1 
till. The foliage is of the hardiest character, using that expression 
■to indicate its power of bearing extreme treatment; as for instance, 
when fully developed it may be syringed with soffsoap and water 
up to a temperature of 180°, and this will clear off every bit of the 
-coccus tribe touched. Allow five minutes of two men to each plant, 
and twenty plants may be cleansed in one hour—-or allow for con¬ 
tingencies, heating water, &c., and say twelve plants an hour, and 
the difficulty of securing clean Eucharises will be seen to be of a 
nature not very unsurmountable. 
Direct strong sunshine does not agree with Eucharises. A too 
■cool temperature is likewise fatal to health and flowering. I do not 
think that a continued high temperature hurts the plants if other¬ 
wise carefully managed—as for example, taking care to reduce the 
quantity of water as the state of the plant permits. In the winter 
season the plants do well in a somewhat dry soil, and during the 
hotter months of the year, when a crop of leaves has been fully 
developed, a less quantity of water may be allowed—-not only with 
safety, but to the benefit of the plants. Then a difference must 
be made in watering plants in smaller pots, these naturally requir¬ 
ing more than plants in big pots ; also, it should be noted by those 
in charge that if the foliage is regularly syringed there is a danger 
of the soil about the bulbs becoming quite sodden through the 
water trickling down the leafstalk. As to when to pot, I have 
•done this during summer, in spring, and in autumn. Either 
Eebruary or March, and September are perhaps the best periods of 
the year. If this work is done well the plants will thrive for some 
years without repotting, but when the flowers dwindle in size, and 
the number to a truss decreases from six to eight to half the 
number, it is a plain indication that the bulbs are so poorly nourished 
as to require a more liberal treatment. When the flowers are 
wanted to last as long as possible on the plants the latter should 
be kept in a cool stove, not much damped. The flowers, if fresh 
when gathered, keep for a long period placed in water in a cool 
room ; indeed, blooms opened in a hothouse, if cut as soon as opeD, 
will keep at least three weeks at this time of year, and the flowers 
will increase somewhat in size during the first day or two.—B. 
PRUNING FRUIT TREES AFTER PLANTING. 
In reference to the succinct article and trite remarks on the 
•above siabject on page 229 in respect to Mr. Bunyard’s dictum, “ No 
Apples |hould be pruned the first year of planting,” allow me to 
second ijfr. Wright’s proposition to leave out the word “no.” This 
is imperatively necessary to bring Mr. Bunyard’s views into 
accord with my experience ; but I am aware that some persons 
have a decided objection to pruning fruit trees before they have 
made growth after transplanting. Mr. Luckhurst, if I remember 
rightly, was a powerful advocate of the non-pruning doctrine of 
freshly planted fruit trees, on the assumption that unpruned trees 
became profitable sooner than those that are cut after planting. 
My experience is that if the trees are to be pruned at all it is best 
done in the spring following the planting, or before they have made 
■a season’s growth. If the object is to get fruit in the least time, 
then I raise no objection to leaving the trees alone after planting 
except for cutting away any shoots that cross others and are calcu- 
lated to interfere with the formation of an open yet symmetrical 
and well balanced head ; but even in that case it is necessary to 
discriminate between trees with, as your correspondent puts it, 
“fine tops and meagre roots,” and those with close heads— i.e., 
shoots of moderate length and correspondingly fibrous roots, for, as 
a rule, the trees with a vigorous top growth have correspondingly 
few long and bare roots. To leave the tree with the fine top and 
meagre roots unpruned is to court failure if the season should prove 
•dry, as from the greater length or larger area of soft growth ex¬ 
posed the evaporation will be considerable, and the small root 
surface cannot supply sufficient crude material to counterbalance 
it ; consequently there is little leafage, and roots are formed pro¬ 
portionately. The strong unpruned tree may survive the trying 
ordeal of a dry season, but it will not under any circumstances be in 
better condition f'or pruning with a view to recuperation of its 
impaired energies consequent upon the removal at the year’s end 
•than it was at the beginning. Indeed, it will be in a worse plight, 
for the basal buds, as Mr. Wright observes, will not be so suscep¬ 
tible of impression for growth in the second season as in that 
following their formation. They will have become in a degree 
latent, and latent buds never start so freely nor strongly as freshly 
formed ones. In so far, therefore, as the heads are fine and the 
roots meagre so must the pruning after planting before growth is 
made be determined. The equilibrium between root and branch 
arrested by transplantation is most “quickly and certainly re¬ 
stored” by shortening the shoots, so as to make the power of 
elaboration and assimilation accord with the supply of material. 
The fine-top and meagre-rooted tree should, if a serviceable speci¬ 
men is wanted, have the top cut in so as to accord with the loss of 
roots consequent on lifting before growth is made after planting. 
To neglect pruning in such cases may mean failure under adverse 
climatic conditions, and if favourable—that is, if a moist season 
follow planting, the trees from their larger parts will receive so 
little support as only to make a stubby growth, and perhaps form 
spurs and fruit buds, resulting in a stunted dwarfed precocity. 
Pruning a freshly transplanted tree is, then, an absolute neces¬ 
sity when it has a fine top and few roots, of which the practice that 
exists in nurseries with tree? lifted, laid in, and planted after 
remaining unsold is proof. The practice is to cut the top hard-in. 
Why ? To secure a tree by the following autumn with blossom 
buds “ the whole length of the shoots, and at the ends also ? ” Is 
it not to attain without loss of time the fine top—the taking sale¬ 
able tree ? If it answers in nurseries, why not in private gardens ? 
But I have a decided objection to the “ fine top ” tree with few 
roots. I never planted one which did not go back afterwards 
proportionately to its previous vigour. They are the dearest of 
trees, as they must be cut hard-in if they are ever to become 
serviceable, and are, under any circumstances, a sheer waste of 
resource. A crop of shoots that must be shorn off, through the 
roots being unable to support them, is energy wasted. Why are 
such trees in demand ? Because buyers like something big for 
their money. Leaving newly planted trees unpruned for a year 
does not mean a loss of one year only, but two, for to cut back a 
year after planting results in no better head than the tree had when 
planted, and another year’s growth is essential to transform the 
growth made into spurs and fruit buds, and not unfrequently a 
third season is needed. This is not fancy, but fact of a most 
decided character, which I have proved many times, and it holds 
good with every description of fruit trees. The strong Vine is not 
so good for planting as the medium one. The gross Peach, the 
strong-wooded Apricot, Plum, and Cherry left unpruned will make 
but little growth, the loss of roots entailing so severe a check that 
spurs only are formed ; this may result in the early production of 
fruit, but trees so stunted take years to recuperate, and are seldom 
satisfactory. In the case of the Vine, Fig, Peach, Apricot, and Plum 
there is less danger of a stunted growth after planting than with 
Apples on the Crab, and Pears and Cherries on the free stock, as 
the former have more fibrous roots, therefore admit of lifting with 
roots corresponding to the heads. There is also a great difference 
between the roots of Apples and Pears on the free stock and those 
on the Paradise and Quince ; the latter are wiggy rooted, and trans¬ 
plant with greater certainty of success ; hence, assuming them to be 
of equal vigour, pruning after planting is practically unnecessary, if 
not positively injurious, to the object of securing early and remune¬ 
rative crops of fruit. The dwarfing system of fruit culture seems to 
receive more attention than is given to trees intended for orchard, 
as the bush, pyramid, cordon, and other trained trees are sent out 
in a condition requiring next to no use of the knife after planting ; 
in fact, the conditions are reversed—the tops are meagre, whilst the 
roots are a mass of feeders. The propensity of the stock to push 
fresh roots from the rootstock annually renders them safe to trans¬ 
plant without having recourse to a reduction of the head to restore 
the equilibrium destroyed by removal, such as is practised with 
Apples on the Crab, and Pears on the Pear stock. The distinction 
is taken into consideration by Mr. Wright, and correctly, as there 
is a great difference between trees intended for small and those for 
large culture, and their preparation in a measure accounts for the 
success of the one and the failure of the other. Farmers and others 
plant fruit trees extensively, and they neither prune nor take any 
cultural steps whatever, yet wonder why the fruit, when there is 
any, doe 3 not sell so well as that imported. Last year a farmer 
planted a number of trees, with the shoots long and strong ; they 
were not shortened, and the season being wet they grew, and made 
the inevitable stubby shoots alias spurs, the whole length of the 
shoots existing at planting. They are already stunted, and are 
likely to remain so, if my experience is worth anything, to the end 
of their lives 
I have premised that Mr. Wright intended his remarks to apply 
mainly to strong standard trees which have not roots.proportionate 
to the heads at planting, and I entirely concur with him that such 
require pruning to insure their speedy and certain establishment 
and a healthy and free growth, such as will in due season afford the 
quantity and quality of fruit that will oust imported fruit from the 
markets. I do not, however, consider the description of tree usually 
traded in is the type desirable, and I think that when Mr. Bunyard 
made the remark, “ No Apple should be pruned the first year of 
planting,” he had in view a different kind of tree, therefore both 
are right. The standard trees, then, with “ fine tops and meagre 
roots,” come under Mr. Wright’s proposition, and should be pruned 
the first year of planting, whilst the dwarf tree with an open head 
