Queries:, Ansivers, Remarks, 
42 {) 
arlicle is a very misleading' article, and ought not to be called original communi¬ 
cation j it is little else than-extracts, which I have read and criticised long ago. 
Neither Mr. Withers nor his friends are at all friends of mine. They are not the 
friends of science. So far as concerns forest timber, they can, according to their 
own language, “believe and assert anything.” They believe that the frothy 
Fir, &,c., grown on the rich fields of Essex, &c., is as good as the Highland or 
Norway Pine. They believe and assert, that pruning a tree deteriorates the 
growth of the limber!—as well may they say that the pruning of fruit trees 
checks the swelling of ihe fruit. 
Your correspondents, Rusticus, article 2ad, and a Practical Gardener, article 
3rd, are veiy good, and the 4th article, by an Arborist, is capital ; he speaks my 
sentiments the same as if I had written the article myself. I shall say nothing of 
article 6th ; but the propagating pot is not to my mind—a slit from the rim down 
the side of the pot is ranch more convenient for laying in branches full of leaves. 
Arthur Fitz-Arthur is a beautiful writer, and speaks a deal of good sense ; he can 
write well, I think, on any subject. 
The Letters from the Swan River, are not very interesting to me, having made 
up my mind never to travel so far, and if possible never again to leave my own 
dear little Island of Britain. Your Reviews and Extracts are very good. (Pray 
have you heard whether my old friend, Robert Sweet, has recovered from his 
malady?) Your Spider and your Mole are both poor simple creatures, and poor 
simple articles. Geology, by Mc.Gillavray, is pretty well, but he does not go so 
far us I could wish him. The best article on geology was published in the Maga¬ 
zine of Natural History, by Sir J. Byerly, a few months back. With respect to 
insects, 1 take no notice of them. ‘ I sh-all endeavour to answer most of your queries 
in my next letter. 
The Yorkshire Scientific Meeting is worth its weight in gold. Such meetings 
are just what are wanted to make England wise. Public meetings and the pub¬ 
lic press are the only tl\ang.s to raise a man or a nation from obscurity. 
But to return to Mr. Withers and y^ur correspondent, G. I.T. I should like 
to give them another and also a top-dressing, or may be, a trenching 
about their roots. They are advocates for trenching the land for forest timber, 
which 1 think is not only useless, but prejudicial. Does any of our good timber 
come from land that has been previously trenched ? What should we think of 
trenching the Highlands of Scotland, or the mountains of Norway, Russia, or 
America? The whole of the Pine, or Fir tribe, if planted on trenched or ma¬ 
nured land, would not only be worthless timber, but wt)uld actually be rotten 
before it attained its proper size. Three inches of poor soil is better than three 
feet of good soil, for the fir tree ;—I appeal to facts: I have had many men for 
the last six weeks, stoking up trees for roads, &c., through the plantations. The 
healthiest and largest of these trees are those whose roots do not run into the soil 
at all, but creep upon the surface almost like the ivy, only covered with moss and 
leaves of their own dropj»ing. Such as were planted deep, are nothing but under¬ 
lings, and chiefly dead. Again, some years ago I laid a quantity of soil about 
some Larch trees, for the purpose of leveling the ground. The trees lived till this 
year, but made no progress. W^ien they were grubbed up they had made some 
fresh roots near the surface, but the former roots were all rotten, as was also a 
great way up the hearts of the trees. 
I shall speak about pruning* in my next letter. Believe me. Gentlemen, with 
great respect, yours, , 
John Hovvdbn. 
