January 5. 
THE COTTAGE GARDENER. 
259 
realise by art wliat was found desirablo in trees under 
natural conditions. Let us take a subject by way of 
illustration. Here is an old Thorn-tree which has,stood 
for a series of years; we have seldom known it fail ot a 
crop of haws. Besido it is a recently-planted quickset 
hedge, every plant in which claims to be a relative 
of yon old Thorn-tree. But these rogueish young 
Thorns do not bear berries! The soil is good, and they 
have been regularly clipped, whilst the old lhorn has 
been neglected: it needs no shear's. Now, I know, of 
course, that a Thorn is not a Pear; but I do know, 
also, that in the eyes of first-rate men, who combine 
science with practice, it will furnish as apt an illus¬ 
tration as they would desire. 
Admitting this for the sake of argument, the inge¬ 
nious young reader will naturally ask, what then can 
be done to make these young Thorns hasten their 
bearing? 1 will toll you, my young friends. Stay your 
hand with the shears, and apply the samo amount ot 
cutting-off to the root; but, nevertheless, thin out the 
branches instead of dubbing them; lor even a ihorn- 
tree requires a certain amount of light during an English 
summer, to enable it to maturo blossom lor tho next 
year. 
To return from this digression;—I found that three- 
parts of the fruit-trees in our gardens were in a similar 
condition to the young Thorns in tho hedge, and that 
no system of pruning could alone place these trees in 
a fruit-bearing condition. It appeared evident that the 
root was too active, or too highly fed lor the exceedingly 
limited amount of branches and foliage; and that in 
such cases, either the branches must be allowed to 
develope themselves with more freedom, or the supplies 
must be, in part, cut away. This led, ot course, to 
root-pruning, which I have, indeed, practised for twenty- 
four years, although it is the fashion with some to make 
a fuss about it now, as if it were a tolerably fresh idea. 
But this root-pruning, although a preventive measure, 
requires to be repeated in many cases; and it occurred 
to me that something of a more remedial character 
might be adopted. Hence the idea of Stations oc¬ 
curred ; or, in other words, the so placing a tree, as 
that its roots could, at any time, bo placed in a com¬ 
pletely isolated position, and its supplies ot lood appor¬ 
tioned to its real needs with the utmost precision. 
Those who are interested in this part ol the question 
will find that this view ol allairs originated entirely 
with myself; but the first time I made them public, I 
believe, was in “ Maund’s Botanist and 1* ruitist, about 
a dozen years since. 
As years have rolled on, I have had ample opportuni¬ 
ties of testing the soundness of these views ; aud I spoak 
emphatically, albeit, such must of necessity appear some¬ 
what egotistic; however, there is little use in mincing 
over the matter; aud I will endeavour occasionally to 
show our young readers how to proceed in such affairs. 
Could I long since have fully carried out my views in 
hardy fruit-culture, I think 1 could have shown such a 
case in practice by this time as would have settled the 
question; and, as it is, our success has certainly been 
very great, especially in seasons notorious lor failures, 
aud that, too, iu places considered models in the world 
of gardening. Our Pears were, indeed, worth looking 
at; and as for out-door Peaches, as 1 have said betore, 
wo have not missed a full crop for yoars; but we have 
no heated walls 
The worst question wo country gardeners have to 
deal with is that of economising labour so as to meet 
all demands; this is by far more difficult than anything 
in the nature of gardening; so the world must not 
judge us as we are entirely, but as we hope to bo. 
R. Errinoton. 
PRUNING. 
An intimate friend of mine was once engaging himself 
to a great country gentleman; and whon he told me 
about the bargain they made, and tho conversation that 
passed between them at tho time, I was so struck with 
ono of the qualifications which the gentleman hoped his 
new gardener would have, in the absence ol another 
qualification, on which he did not seem to put much 
stress, that I shall never forget it. “I know your cha¬ 
racter stands high, and you have tho credit of being 
what is called a scientific gardener; but, for my own 
part, I do not much value that quality; it is apt to 
make some men think more of themselves than they 
ought to do ; and, besides, if I can get plenty of flowers 
and fruit all the year round, and the place is kept as 
I wish it, I think we could dispense with science, thus 
far in the country, or, at least, we need not put much 
stress on it.” Another gentleman, who reads The 
Cottage Gardener, made another remark, in a letter 
to myself, sixteen years since, which I shall never forget. 
“ Not only a gardener, but every cook and groom, ought 
to know, or bo informed iu tho science which bears on 
their departments, before they are admitted into large 
establishments, where the health of the family, and most 
valuable property are entrusted to their care. I quite 
agreed with this correspondent, although, previously, I 
did not look upon cooking and grooming in that light; 
for I was a man-cook iu three establishments, without 
considering that it was necessary to catch a hare before 
cooking it; and 1 could ride the wild-cat colt up or 
down a steep brae, or plunge into the stream without a 
saddle, and swim across, without being aware that any 
science at all was necessary in the matter; but 1 never 
yet believed that a man ought to be allowed to prune a 
gooseberry bush until such time as he could give a 
good sound reason for every cut he made; and if ho 
could do that, I would call it scientific indeed, although 
he might call it only practical knowledge—sound prac¬ 
tical knowledge being the only sure foundation for 
practical science, after all. 
If you stand before a young tree, not higher 
than your head, and see one or more of the sido- 
brauchos so much stronger than the rest, with their 
ends more upright—showing plainly that they, too, 
would be leaders iu time, as much so as the centro aud 
true leader—science teaches that if the top, or tops, are 
merely cut off or stopped, the ascending force is divided, 
and the leading character is lost, from that hour, to 
those shoots. But science may be at fault for all that; 
and practice alone must guide the pruner as to which of 
four buds to cut to. If you take the point of a shoot, 
and bend it to you, there arc eyes, or buds, on tho upper 
side of it, also on the under side, and on tbo right and 
left sides as well. Now, the question is, to which ot 
these buds is the shoot to be cut to; and to that scienco 
cannot direct you, at least not to three of them, science 
being based on fundamental rules. If you understand 
it, you will never cut a side-branch, iu any tree oi bush, 
to a bud directly on the upper side of it; because it is 
natural, or fundamental, that the top bud left on the 
upper side will either take the lead, or, by growing in¬ 
wards, crowd the distance between it and tho stem or 
trunk of tho treo. A pruner may work to get more 
flowers, more fruit, or timber, or he may only want a 
more regular disposition of tho branches; but none of 
these can be had by crowding them: still there aro 
three more chances in tho three buds lett out of the 
four; but as science does not go by chance, it cannot 
tell which of the three buds is the right one to cut to. 
If you cut to a bud on the under-side of the shoot, that 
bud will make a shoot that will grow outwards; and if 
thero is room in that direction, that is the best way for 
it to grow : but, suppose there is another shoot which 
