! 1875. 
THE GA RD EWER'S MONTHL F. 
218 
I 
oufe impression that we . were almost alone ^>f cone - one described as pointed, and the other 
in ir*rticultural literature in maintaining thatJ retuse, and also differing in their bracts and 
the juices of plants, commonly hardy, cannof scales. One of these cones had fallen to pieces 
whol&freesse, and yet the plant or the paps on its journey, Iherefore we are not able to speak 
frozen ^tain its life. f on that point; but so far as the bracts and scales 
But w^see that the Gardener's Chronicle , ed|led are concerned we must confess ourselves as being 
by one oMhe foremost of vegetable physiologists, unable to distinguish between them. With re- 
Dr. M. Tk Masters, is evidently of the ^me 
>r _ | opinion. In an “editorial article on the subject 
of injury by %ost to wholly hardy plants, in that 
paper of May 5th, it explains that plants , usu- 
ut I ally hardy, “ rfiny have its sap crude,” Ihough 
eg | we do not quitelunderstand what is njlant by 
rg | this ; but at all events when this is thtpiase, the 
r i Ba P -tow not thepomr to exclude the from, and the 
n . § result it is “ frost Mtten ” and dies. /This is the 
>g |j [ same doctrine we teach. 
es [ New Plants of^Utah —Dr./C. C. Parry 
ne j spent last season in %>uthern |pah, exploring 
ge | the botanical features of that cjpntry, and find- 
ar in g some twenty speciek whidS were before un- 
ey "known, and which haveljbeejf named according- 
r ly. An amusing critifeisSamppears in a western 
:e _ I agricultural paper. The edMor thinksYucca brevi¬ 
ty folia must be wrong. jfe%“ cannot find it in 
| Loudon,—and it is prdbablk Yucca superba.” 
k Yucca baccata, he says, “ is| not described by 
;er the old standard auj/nors, andys probably Yucca 
angustifolia ” 1m thinks ilk Parry utterly 
mistaken in his glassification of the Larrea Mexi- 
j n | cana, which in jlis opinion, “ should be placed 
among theLau^us tribe. ” Malvastrimcoccineum, 
a( j he thinks, “Jhust certainly belonglb the Malva 
to L Hj^uoes not feel sure abouf&he Lyciutu, 
jH^but quotejfwhat Clusius says ” af|)ut them, 
an | and so might go on, and cover j^ quire of 
u |. I foolscap’’ In physiological botany,we often find 
r ^_ matters questioned because ‘ Senebier ’ ok T. A. 
Kmgh^br some o|her one hundreds of yea% ago 
he knew nothing of them,—but it is something new 
3C - | 'ArftTffofssms^in this depm®% 
ue m^^Conifers fbAk Colorado.—S ome good 
)le l cones and foliage of an interesting Conifer (Abies 
y. concolor) have recently been received at the 
V ; | Kew Museum. Its history has been given by 
\ Mr. Andrew Murray at p. 105 of the present 
oi ! volume of the Gardener's Chronicle , and Mr. 
Murray’s opiuion%s to its close resemblance to 
P. grandis we readily endorse. The cones re¬ 
ferred to above were sent by Dr. Englemann, 
some from the gorges in the foot-hills of the 
mountains in Southern Colorado, and the others 
from Southern Utah. Of these Dr. Englemann 
thinks there are two forms, differing in shape 
gard to the “question of which is Douglas’ 
Abies grandis and which amabilis?’’ quoting 
from Dr. Engelmann’s letter to Dr. Hooker, he 
says, “I should like to know whether any of 
the different forms have yet borne fruit in Eng¬ 
land ; and he states that a tree with very dense, 
dark green foliage, white on the lower side, 
which he saw in the Edinburg Garden under the 
name of amabilis, and another at Dropmore, 
where it was called grandis, are undoubtedly 
the true amabilis. It is singular, Dr. Engel- 
mann says, that none of the forms of grandis 
should have fruited in England, while in Colora¬ 
do it fruits at the age of twenty-five years. 
The following list of Colorado Conifers, with 
the altitude of each species, from the pen of such 
an authority as Dr. Englemann may be valuable 
to some readers of the Gardener's Chronicle :— iff f 
Abies (fa$fys. —Altitude from 8500 feet to the JtJbrtA A 
tree limit. / 
A. concolor .—Between the waters of the Platte 
and Arkansas ; between 6000 and 7000 feet. 
Tsuga Douglasii.— 6000 to 10,000 feet; 
Pice a Mttoziesii.— In valleys near mountain \ 
streams; 6000 to 8500 feet; never forming ' / 
forests. 
P. Engelmanni.— In valleys, and especially on 
mountain slopes* scattered, oifin extensive tracts; 
8500 feet, to timber line 11,500 feet. 
Pinus contorta.— Extensive forests on moun¬ 
tain slopes ; 9000 to 10,50ff%r 11,000 feet; in 
valleys running down, scattered as low as P, 
Engelmanni. 
P. Ponderosa— Lower down at the base of the 
mountains than any other Pine ; at an elevation 
of about 5000 to 9000 feet. 
P. aristata. — 9000 and* more especially, 10,000 
feet to timber line, and in scraggy bushes even 
above it, up to 11,500 or 11.800 feet. 
P. edulis.— Only in Southern Colorado, from 
Pike’s Peak southward to between 6000 and 
7000 feet. 
P. flexilis. —9000 to 10,500 feet, probably not 
up to 11,000 feet, in valleys coming down to 8500 
feet. 
Juniperus communis.— Up to 93J0 or 10,000 
feet elevation. 
J 
