298 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ April 11, 1889. 
THE GARDENERS’ ROYAL BENEVOLENT 
INSTITUTION. 
As so many kind friends have contributed very liberally towards the 
£3000 required next June, I think gardeners ought to do their very 
best by way of supporting these liberal donors. I think if every 
gardener were to ask the clergymen in their respective districts for their 
kind help on Easter Sunday—if only for a part of the collection—the 
amount might, I think, be considered secured. 1 have made a start 
in that direction myself, in the following way :— 
“ The Gardens, Thornham Hall, Eye. 
Sir, —As gardeners have frequently given their support to the Royal 
Agricultural Benevolent Institution, might I ask, please, if you would 
kindly think of its ‘twin sister,’ on Easter Sunday, for which we shall 
be very much obliged. We think the floral decorations will help the 
cause. Or, if you prefer, a small donation would be thankfully received. 
—I am, &c., &c., J. Perkins. 
The Rev.-” 
FIG. 47.—NARCISSUS PSEUDO-NARCISSUS VARIETIES. 
1, MINIMUS ; 2, MINOR ; AND 3, NANUS. 
PRUNING FRUIT TREES AFTER PLANTING. 
So far I have not much to defend in this discussion ; indeed, I am 
surprised my remarks on page 229 have not called forth more opposition ; 
there may, however, be plenty in store. Mr. A. Young does not advise 
pruning standard Apple trees till the second year after planting, and 
can point to good trees as the result of that practice. It would be a 
pity if it were otherwise. He secures the requisite number of branches 
for forming the “framework ” of a tree in two years. But why wait 
two years if it can be accomplished in one, as it unquestionably can 
be, has been in thousands of instances, and will be again this year ? 
Mr. Young attributes the good growth the trees made the second year 
after the first pruning to the roots that were excited by the struggling 
growths from the non-pruned branches. Believing, as he does, in that 
theory, I will ask if, when he plants Roses or Red Currants with a 
number of straight young shoots 4 feet long, he leaves those shoots for a 
year to incite root action, and if not why not ? 
Does Mr. Young know that if he prunes one young tree in the spring 
after planting, and leaves another of the same size and character unpruned, 
that the weight of the few clean growths which result from pruning is 
equal at the end of the season to the immeasurably greater number of 
stubby shoots that push from the non-pruned tree ? I know, as a fact 
beyond dispute, that the weight of shoots made the first season after 
pruning has exceeded greatly the weight of those from branches that 
were not shortened. Did not the former — stronger, freer, healthier, and 
heavier growths —incite root action, or is this only induced by clusters 
of weak apologies for shoots and leaves ? 
After pointing to the satisfactory growth of his trees at the end of 
two years, Mr. Young naively asks if trees pruned after planting would 
have been in the same condition at the end of one year. It is not much 
to ask—only one year out of two. If the trees had been pruned the 
spring following planting their “ framework ” would have been better 
and fruiting spurs more plentiful than under existing circumstances. 
A year has been lost, hence perhaps the suggestion to miss one in count¬ 
ing to make the balance right from his point of view, or in favour of the 
Abberley trees ; but I think we must not allow a year to slip away in 
that easy manner. Observe, I do not advocate close pruning imme¬ 
diately after planting in the autumn, but only in the spring when the 
sap is rising.—J. Wright. 
I AM, like most of vour correspondents, in favour of pruning fruit 
trees soon after planting. We often have trees with more head than 
roots, and shoots 3 feet long. Does it stand to reason that by leaving 
the shoots that length they will break from the bottom ? As your cor¬ 
respondent, Mr. E. Molyneux, says, Vines planted the first year and left 
the full length do not break from the lower buds, neither do they fruit 
evenly. I think that shortening the long shoots of trees soon after 
planting is the making of the trees. I always shorten them from 
18 inches to a foot, according to the strength of the tree, with the excep¬ 
tion of Peach trees, which I disbud. I believe in early planting, and if I 
planted standard fruit trees later than the end of November I would 
prune them even shorter than I have stated. Many roots must be 
broken, even with the greatest care, in digging up a tree, and with less 
roots can it sustain all its former branches and make good growth in 
addition ? I say, No ; what say others ?—W. J., Dorset. 
The question of pruning fruit trees after planting is one of un¬ 
doubted importance, and Mr. Wright has no doubt set many gardeners’ 
thoughts in motion over the topic, and has already received corroboration 
at the hands of able men. Perhaps it may be considered a bold venture 
fora young gardener to express an opposite view ; but, if my opinion is 
wrong, I am somewhat tempted to place it on record. 
Mr. Molyneux says, “ When the growths are left their full length the 
basal eyes do not start into growth, as what little is made is generally at 
the tips of the shoots.” My experience differs somewhat in this matter, 
for I have repeatedly noticed that when healthy well balanced trees 
(root and branch) are received, they will push every bud from tip to the 
base if left unpruned after planting ; whereas, if pruning is resorted to, 
the shoots need shortening rather severely to ensure their breaking well 
back at the base. Of necessity there are exceptions to this rule, as, like 
Mr. Molyneux, I have seen Raspberries after removal pruned with the 
view of securing a crop, if not a full, at any rate a partial one, with the 
result that three seasons were necessary in securing good fruiting canes, 
in consequence of exhaustion the first year. Gooseberries and Currants, 
also Vines, are benefited by moderate pruning, but I am inclined to 
attach importance to the condition of the roots as a guidance in the 
matter of pruning. 
I have planted Apples, Pears, Plums, and Cherries, both for walls and 
pyramid trees, from several leading nurserymen at different times, and 
have adopted both practices, but the unpruned trees generally gave the 
greater satisfaction. Morello and dessert Cherries have always done 
well with me under this treatment, and some that were planted last 
October are swelling their buds quite as evenly at the base of the branches 
as at the tips, and Plums are equally satisfactory. My formerexperience 
prompts me to leave the branches unpruned, where they arrive in a 
healthy condition and unbruised. 
The results of early pruning with a healthy tree oftentimes ends in 
the production of growth so vigorous that thorough ripening cannot 
always be ensured, and without this condition fruit in quality and 
quantity cannot be obtained. Growths 2 to 3 feet long, with only the 
extreme point removed, would cause the upper poition of the branch to 
push strongly, while the lower buds would most likely remain dormant. 
Where there is sufficient vigour in an established tree to produce shoots 
of this measurement, they will form fruit buds the whole length if left 
unpruned, and fruit of the best quality is produced in this manner, 
while it also tends to keep trees that have a tendency to over-luxuriance 
in good bearing condition. The whole character of fruit trees depends 
in a large degree on local circumstances, soils varying considerably. 
Aspect also greatly affects them. 
Peaches and Nectarines are excepted in the question under discussion, 
but why ? presumably because they are more susceptible to barrenness 
when overstrong, not because they will not produce fruit buds, but that 
after they are formed plentifully they will drop them to such an extent 
as to leave the trees almost bare of blossom buds at the time when the 
new sap becomes active in winter and early spring, this arising almost 
or solely from the fact of unripened wood. This question of pruning 
the first spring after planting, so ably brought forward by Mr. Wright, 
has awakened an interest undoubtedly among fruit growers, and its 
effects will presumably be more closely observed during the present 
season than otherwise would have been done without his timely 
intimation.— W. Strugnell. 
Since writing my last note on this subject, which was for standard 
fruit trees generally, and which I understood Mr. Bunyard referred to 
only, I have seen the article by Mr. E. Molyneux. I cannot agree with 
what he states as to shortening the tips of the shoots the next year or 
subsequent years after being pruned boldly back, as according to my 
experience it is best not to take the tips off ; but if there are not enough 
shoots to form a framework, to shorten all or any that are unduly taking 
the lead the same as before, and so form a good evenly balanced head. 
The illustration he gives of the Lime trees confirms this view. For my 
own part, unless I shortened well back I would not have taken the tips 
off at all. Merely shortening the tips tends to cause the shoots so 
operated upon to break at the ends only. I have had some experience 
with cordon fruit trees, and have practised shortening back, but never 
