THE COTTAGE GARDENER. 
December 25. 
190 
a given branch have been made the most of; thinning 
out all over the tree has been performed, so that no two 
shoots lie together; now, then, a shortening, where 
requisite, may take place. We would here beg our readers 
to divest themselves of the idea that shortening is im¬ 
perative : there is no act of parliament for this operation. 
There are three reasons for shortening back; two 
founded on principle, and one on expediency. The first 
and chief—as to the peach and nectarine—to get rid of 
immature portions which, if anywhere, are situate at the 
extremities of the shoots. The second is to excite the 
tree to produce more shoots lower down ; and the third 
expedient, is when the trees are near the edge of the 
wall, to prevent their growing above it. 
As to immaturity, we have before adverted to short 
joints as a criterion, in the general character of the 
shoot; but the inexperienced will need to know how 
much of the points may he considered immature. It 
will be generally found, that in shoots possessing inter¬ 
nodes of more than three-quarters-of-an-inch, that 
about one-fourtli of their length is somewhat more 
spongy than the base of the same ; in other words, wood 
which has elongated since the beginning of August, will 
be of this character. The buds, moreover, upon imma¬ 
ture wood, are not so plump, and they sometimes stand 
singly, instead of in threes, which latter is a pretty good 
criterion of sound and fruitful wood. All wood then, if 
pale and soft, may be removed, and this will sometimes 
be nearly a third part; more generally about a fourth. 
It may here be named that where three buds are 
clustered together, the middle is generally a wood bud, 
and the two exterior, blossom buds. When in pairs, 
they are generally both blossom buds, and where singly, 
generally a wood hud. Now it is bad policy to shorten 
back to a point composed of blossom buds only. How 
often have we seen peach shoots in June laden with 
fruit, without a growing shoot beyond them. And why ? 
simply because they are formed injudiciously. It is not 
uncommon to find trees producing principally wood of 
this character. When such is the case, it argues an 
early breaking-up of the tree’s constitution, if indeed it 
be not already gone. Abundance of wood-buds, on the 
contrary, are sure signs of vigour, if not of immaturity. 
Shortening to excite the tree to produce more shoots 
next year—where wood-buds prevail, this practice is 
often resorted to, and that it has this tendency cannot be 
doubted. Where, however, trees have been properly 
managed from the first, there is little occasion for this, 
except in the lower portion of the “forks.” We seldom 
or ever practice it, for our trees are as uniformly clothed 
as if they were measured out with the compasses. 
Those who have unluckily what are termed naked 
shoots, must occasionally resort to this practice, and it 
may suffice to know, that the closer they are pruned 
(leaving four or five good buds) the better. Shortening 
back as an expedient needs no explanation. It often 
happens thatyoung trees make very unequal wood. Some 
half dozen rods will take the lead in summer, pinch how 
we will. We have a case in point in the gardens here. 
The fact is the root action is so keen, that the tree 
becomes uncontrollable for a while. The only remedy is 
root-pruning, or if you will, transplanting. Many gar¬ 
deners prune back these coarse rods very close, in order 
to strengthen the other portion of the tree. This we 
hold to be bad practice, and almost sure to sow the seeds 
of premature decay in the system. R. Errington. 
THE FLOWER-GARDEN. 
Pillar Roses. —From many letters which I have seen 
on the subject of pillar roses, I am led to believe that 
the subject is not understood by the great bulk of our 
amateur readers. What is a true pillar rose ? is a very 
common question; and I believe that if it were ad¬ 
dressed to ten gardeners, and as many nurserymen, 
there would have been, at least, twenty different answers 
returned. If you stick the handle of the house-broom, 
or mop, in the middle of the first flower-bed you come 
to, and plant an old moss rose against it, and after¬ 
wards use the knife sparingly, in three years, or, at any 
rate, in four years, you have a pillar rose. I once saw 
a common moss rose, fifteen feet high, against a stable 
wall, and I have no doubt the moss roses called Selina 
and Laneii, two of the best new mosses, would soon 
reach that height in very good rose soil, and against a 
wall; and if so with the old moss and its seedlings, why 
not with the old cabbage rose itself and its progeny ? On 
the other hand, should you go to the young plantations 
and root up a young larch tree twenty or five-and-twenty 
feet high, and plant it in a hole in a corner of the lawn, 
after the manner of a post, not intending it to grow, and 
then plant the Felicite Perpetuelle or Bennett's Seedling 
against it, either of which would soon overtop your 
larch pole, if you give them good stuff to grow in, still 
you would only have a pillar rose. Now, any height 
between that of the said broomstick and this larch tree 
will do for a pillar rose, and it will be within the law to 
call it so, provided, at every pruning time you cut away 
all shoots which overtop the pole; but if you will allow 
the Dundee Rambler, or any other of the rambling roses, 
to grow beyond your twenty-feet-high pole or pillar, 
such shoots will assuredly grow on, and in time will 
bend over and come down to the very ground in many 
streams of living beauty, then, instead of a pillar rose, 
you have a rose fountain. A “fountain of roses,” how¬ 
ever, is not of my manufacture ; I was never so extrava¬ 
gant. Mr. Rivers is the architect who first planned and 
named this style of furnishing. The true origin of 
pillar roses, however, dates farther back than that of 
these fountains; it was on the first appearance of the 
hybrid Chinas and hybrid Bourbons that the foundation 
lor pillar roses commenced, although it was some years 
afterwards before the idea of using them that way forced 
itself on the rose fancier. It was found impossible to 
keep these hybrids so dwarf as the old Provence and 
French roses. If they were pruned so close as was the 
fashion lor dwarf roses, the hybrid ones would flower 
but very sparingly, and to this day some good growers 
are of opinion that we have not yet hit on the best way of 
pruning them, or on the proper season of pruning, even 
if we do know the right way. That question I intend to 
examine and discuss before I have done with the roses. 
1 well remember the disappointments we experienced, 
some twenty years back, in flowering the first good 
hybrid China rose that was sold—7s. (id. and even 10s. (id. 
was freely given for it, but after two or three years no 
gardener out of ten could flower it to his satisfaction. 
The more we pruned the more it would not flower ; and 
the upshot of the thing was that a great prejudice 
against the new hybrids spread all over the country, 
caused by the first sample, which was, and is now, 
called George IV., a splendid dark rose, and such a 
grower! A true pillar rose, the parent plant of which 
is now a quarter of a century old, and still in good 
health, as our biographer will tell us, very likely, some 
of these days, unless, indeed, the newer race of hybrid 
perpetuals drive all other hybrids out of the market, 
as nine-tenths of our best gardeners have already driven 
them from their borders to high standards and rows of 
stately pillars, the only two forms in which thev can 
ever shine to the best advantage. 
If I could reconcile myself to bush roses of the strong 
hybrid Chinas or hybrid Bourbons, it would be on this 
wise: I would choose a wide border that would hold 
four or five rows of them,—I would then plant them 
five feet apart each way, and never allow the knife 
to touch them in winter pruning. Every shoot would 
