QUERIES AND REMARKS. 
407 
Register, Vol. 1, page 805, was first used by us when a boy, and 
therefore merits no notice as an original invention ; we noticed it in 
our Horticultural Register as being manufactured at Messrs. Warner’s, 
and sold to the trade at a moderate price. This notice of it we 
gathered from the Gardener’s Magazine, see our acknowledgement, 
Vol. 1, page 805. 
In page 36, Mag. Bot. are two figures on propagating Camellias; 
on these we shall merely remark that they were cut for the purpose, 
from original drawings, and that there are no figures of the kind given 
in the Gardener’s Magazine. 
In page 47, Mag. Bot., and Hort. Reg., Vol. 1, page 760, is (he 
figure and description of Jesse’s mode of planting large trees. Now 
this figure could not possibly be a fac-simile of the one in the Gar¬ 
dener’s Magazine, for no such figure appeared in the latter work until 
two months after we had inserted it in ours. It appeared in our 
number for October 1832, and in Mr. Loudon’s number for the follow¬ 
ing December. See Gard. Mag. Vol 8, page 732. Now with this plain 
fact before him, which no person could easily overlook, this Editor 
publicly assures his readers, that we copied the figure from his work !! 
Whilst on this subject, it may be well to remind this Editor of 
another little mistake made by him awhile ago. Possibly he may 
not have forgotten, that we inserted an annular pan in Vol. 1, page 
151. of our Hort. Reg. which was named “The Bygrave Plant 
Preserver.” This identical pan (modified, of course, to pass for an 
original article) appeared in the Gard. Mag. three months afterwards 
with Cond. at the end of it. We need scarcely say, that nothing 
like this has ever occurred in reference to our work. And when we 
have omitted the acknowledgement of any article, it has been an 
inadvertency, for which we publicly apologized in our preface to the 
second Volume of the Register. 
We have now given about 400 figures, and there are but very few 
instances in which we have either directly or indirectly borrowed any 
from the Gardener’s Magazine. The articles placed under the head 
u Original Communications,” page 165-70, bear evident marks of 
mistake on the face of them, each being acknowledged as copied 
from the Gardener’s Magazine. The mistake originated with the 
printer, and was not noticed by us until too late in the month to be 
remedied. 
But enough for the present, and perhaps it is only a waste of time 
and space to notice the subject at all, for whoever refers to the article 
in question will at once perceive the jealous, vindictive spirit in 
which it is written. 
