PINETUM BRITANNICUM. 
20 
40 ft 9 in., and 43 ft.; while two others, planted in 1841, are refpedlively 32 ft. and 33 ft. In Scotland, 
the largeft or rather the oldeft trees, as mentioned previoufly (p. 13), are thofe introduced by the Hon. W. 
Lellie Melville at Melville Houfe in Fife, where they exift in quantity. Thofe at Hopetoun Houfe, near 
Queensferry, and in the Edinburgh Botanic Garden, are of the fame age. The height of the latter at the 
prefent date (1865) is 31 feet, with a ftem 5 feet 6 inches in circumference at 3 feet from the bafe. Mr 
Spiers at Culcreuch has a tree, planted in 1833, which at fame date was 30 feet 9 inches high, and its girth 
at bafe 4 feet 1 inch, and at 3 feet from ground 2 feet 11 inches. We need fcarcely occupy the time of the 
reader in enumerating the fize of fmaller fpecimens. 
While the plant was yet rare, it fometimes fuffered from much cherilhing. It was thought that its 
drooping leader would be flrengthened by cutting in the fide branches, or that the plants might be made 
more fhapely by tying them up. Both are evil practices, oppofed to the plaineft principles of phyhology. 
All that fort of foftering is impofhble in large plantations; and we fee in them how much better the tree 
profpers when Nature is left to herfelf. The principle may be correct enough, that if we prune the lower 
and lateral branches, more vigour will be thrown into the leader. In our own race, we know that if a man 
has been deprived of one fenfe, his other fenfes become flrengthened at its expenfe. The fenfe of hearing 
in the blind man is preternaturally acute; but who would dream of putting out a man’s eyes to improve his 
hearing ? On the fame principle of reafoning, why fhould he fpoil the lower part of the tree to improve 
its upper part ? There may be, and are in horticulture, many cafes where it is defirable to invite 
Nature to improve upon herfelf, but this is not of them. Let us take the tree as it is given to us, and 
allow it fair fcope to develop its own properties, and not attempt to give it a form or a charadter which 
does not belong to it. 
One fimple expedient for improving the growth of the tree may be noticed. It is to keep the turf cut 
away round the tree, fo that plenty of moifture may reach the roots, and no injury be done by the foil being 
bound. Mr Hollingworth, of Turkey Mill, near Maidftone, in Kent, has fome remarkable inftances of 
the fuccefs of this treatment; and as it affimilates the 
condition of the tree to its ftate in its native condition, 
there can be no doubt that it is right in principle as 
well as in pradtice. 
The Deodar is not difficult to propagate by cut¬ 
tings, and it can be readily inarched or grafted upon 
the Cedar. Grafting the Deodar on the Larch was at ' 
one time largely pradtifed, and with its varieties this is 
ftill fometimes done. The young plants get fickly or 
die off, however, in a few years, unlefs the graft is made 
fo low as to allow of its rooting above its union with the 
Larch. At Kingfton Hall, in Nottinghamshire, many 
plants were killed in the winter of i860, and among 
them were all the grafted plants. The large fupply of 
feeds fo liberally diftributed by the Eaft India Company 
has, however, made plants fo common in this country, 
and the example they fet of importing feed has been fo 
well followed by private fpeculators, that there is no need 
to have recourfe to multiplying plants artificially. We 
fhall foon alfo have a fufficient fupply of feed from the 
young trees growing in this country. Already they 
have begun to bear fruit, and every year will add to the 
number of thofe doing fo. The firfi: fpecimen in Europe which we have heard of as bearing fruit was a fine 
tree at Mr Kett Barclay’s, at Bury Hill, near Dorking. It fruited in 1852, when the tree was 28 feet high. 
The 
