THE COTTAGE GARDENER AND COUNTRY 
frequently observe great mistakes in the arrangement of 
what ought to he permanent ornamental trees in the vicinity 
! °f the mansion. In order, therefore, to prevent a recurrence 
of these hy indiscriminate planters, I will make a few re¬ 
marks, and mention some existing specimens hy way of 
illustration. 
It is not at all uncommon in old places to find magnificent 
trees so situated, that, instead of being objects of beauty and 
interest, they are just the reverse—objects of regret. For 
example, at Bierly Hall, Yorkshire, where I was making altera¬ 
tions some twenty years ago, I found a splendid Cedar of 
Lebanon, the trunk of which measured upwards of four feet 
in diameter, growing so close to the front door of the edifice 
as to lash the windows with its branches. This, though 
exceedingly troublesome, I have no doubt still remains a 
mark of censure upon the hand that planted it. Had this 
tree been judiciously placed some thirty yards from the 
building, instead of being offensively troublesome it would 
have been highly interesting, and an admiration to every one. 
At Weston Hall, also (a line old place in Yorkshire), there 
is a handsome, thriving tree of the same kind, standing as 
near the house as the one above-mentioned, and surrounded 
by the carriage drive at the entrance-front. Every visit I 
made to this place this unfortunate tree was the subject of 
considerable discussion, and, although its spreading limbs 
greatly obstructed the light, and interfered with the view 
from the windows, yet its great beauty induced me to take 
the lady’s part, who pleaded hard in its favour against the 
wish of the owner. 
Only the other day, at Gisburne Park, the seat of Lord 
Ribblesdale, I ordered some fine Larches to be cut down, 
which were much too near the edifice; but here some finer 
trees of the same kind fortunately stood at a proper distance. 
They were the finest I ever saw—upwards of three feet in 
diameter. At this place were also two Cedars of Lebanon, 
one standing thirty feet from the house, and the other only 
twenty-four feet from the dining-room windows. The latter, 
not being a large tree, I advised his Lordship to have trans¬ 
planted. 
Again, at Park-hill House, near London, my proceedings 
were interrupted by a fine, thriving Cedar growing close to 
the terrace, with its branches stretching nearly to the windows; 
yet it was too handsome a tree to be destroyed. And I well 
remember, many years ago, seeing on the estate of Lord 
Middleton, Wollerton Park, two gigantic evergreen Oaks 
(Quercus ilex), the stems of which were upwards of four 
feet in diameter, standing close to the angle of the edifice; 
but I must here confess that up to this time I had classed 
it amongst low-growing trees, and it is still planted by many 
gardeners as a large shrub; and, strange to say, even at this 
day, many lawn trees are planted without any regard to the 
size to which they afterwards attain. 
Not long ago, at Sibton Park, in Suffolk, I had to remove 
some nice specimens of Araucaria imbricata, Oedrus deodara, 
and other large-growing Conifers, because they were placed 
on the lawn too near the residence. 
I might enumerate many other examples of this bad 
system of planting in places where we ought to expect better 
things; but enough, I think, has been said to suggest to land¬ 
scape gardeners, as well as gardeners and planters generally, 
the desirableness of considering, before planting, the habit 
and growth of plants, as well as the height to which they 
attain, in order to avoid the glaring mistakes I have 
here enumerated. 
In conclusion, it must always be borne in mind that, 
although some of the rarer and more recently introduced 
plants may be pretty little things in pots when first received, 
they will in future years become gigantic trees, and, there¬ 
fore, ought to be planted accordingly, and then future 
generations will not have to deplore their removal as a 
nuisance when arrived at their greatest beauty. 
The following are a few fashionable lawn plants which 
attain to a very great size, and, on that account, ought never 
to be planted nearer the house than sixty feet; but I would 
rather say twice that distance :— 
Abies Morinda, Finns Douglasii, F. insignis, F. cxcelsa, 
F. Lambertiana, Picea nobilis, Taxodium distichum, T. sem - 
pervirens, Araucaria imbricata, Cedar of Lebanon, Ccdrus 
deodara, Cryptomeria Japonica, Cupressus Lambertiana, Wcl- 
linglonia giyantca, <fcc.—J oshua Major,K nosthorpe, near Leeds. 
GENTLEMAN’S COMPANION.— October 28, 1850. 01 
PLUNGING THE POTS OF ORCHARD-HOUSE 
TREES. 
Mr. Errxngton, whose opinion is always of consequence, 
in page 4 of The Cottage Gardener, recommends 
potted trees always to be plunged. For Flams and Cherries 
out of doors in a preparatory state this is not amiss, but 
for Peaches and Nectarines grown in pots under glass, which 
they always should be, I say, speaking from no small ex¬ 
perience, do not plunge. The roots of the trees seem to me 
to enjoy the warm temperature of the house, and to become 
ripe, if I may use the expression, like the shoots, so that 
the tree, both root and branch, is in a healthy, mature state. 
When the pots are plunged the trees make most vigorous 
shoots, which are often not sufficiently ripened. I have not 
plunged a Peach-tree in a pot these last six or seven years, 
and I fully believe that I shall not again, and for this reason 
—my trees unplunged give fine crops, and are now in the 
finest possible state of health. 
Mr. Ferguson says, in the same number, “ Peach-trees in 
pots ought to be shifted annually,” and, “ It is a bad system 
to allow the roots of bearing trees to grow through the 
pots.” I say to the first, decidedly do not; to the latter, 
as decidedly do. Shifting trees in large pots is troublesome 
and laborious. In spring I take out the soil from the side 
of the pot (so as not to injure the roots from the crown of 
the tree), to one-third or often one-half the depth of the 
pot, and replace it with unctuous loam and rotten manure 
equal quantities, ramming the compost down firmly. I do 
not allow my trees to root into the border too early in the 
season, but tilt up the pots, and break off the young roots 
till the fruit commences swelling ; I then suffer them to root 
into the border till the fruit is gathered. I have not given 
any liquid-manure these four or five years, and find there is 
no occasion for it, owing, I think, to the loam I use being 
rich and tenacious. My success is quite perfect; and so, in 
spite of the doctors recommending their specifics, I am 
more than ever inclined to “ leave weU alone.” — Thos. 
Rivers. 
NAMING FLORISTS’ FLOWERS. 
With regard to giving new names to flowers, I recollect 
hearing, as a child, of a gardener who, on finding a pretty 
flower growing by the road-side, took it home, cultivated it, 
and sold it as a novelty, by the name of Bhodim sidum 
aureum. 
Now, we should not have been surprised if some “ H. 
C. K.” of that date had raised an objection to this name, 
and hazarded a conjecture that the name must bo Rhodium 
sidus aureum, “ the Golden Star of Rhodes,” or something 
similar; nor that he should have been answered by thelearned 
nomenclator, “ O no ! I named it myself, and its meaning 
is a yellow flower by the road-side.” 
So says Mr. Beaton in reference to Diadematum (atum 
or atum, qu. which is it?) regium—its meaning is Royal 
Diadem. 
Is there, then, in the. Latin language, such a word as 
Diadematum, i, 2. dec. n, “a diadem?” which there must 
be if the words will bear Mr. B.’s meaning. Let him, 
therefore, only quote the author who uses the word, chapter 
and verse, and the matter is settled. I will at once confess 
my ignorance, and thank him for telling me something I 
did not know before. 
The only substantive I know of is Diadcma-tis, a Latinized 
Greek word, meaning the white band that was bound round 
the head of kings in early times. “ Diadema quirini” 
occurs in Juvenal. Of this word, Diadematum would be the 
genitivo plural, and, with the adjective regium, would, accord¬ 
ing to school rules, neither construe nor parse. 
I believe the name intended is Geranium diadematum 
regium, “ the royal crowned or diademed Geranium.” I 
have not by mo books to which I could refer for the word 
diademdtus, a, um, as an adjective or participle; but I believe 
it does exist, and shall be glad to know where. 
I think it would have been as well if it had been called 
“ Royal Diadem ” at once in the “ vulgar tongue ; ” and there 
ought to be some regularly constituted authority to whom 
new names, when given, should be referred.— Sylvester. 
