attributes to the circumstance of its being planted by the side of a little rill of water. He remarks farther, that the cedar appears not to have been planted in Scotland until after the year 1730. Coming, as it does, from a warm country, he says, it has always been placed in gardens in a dry soil and warm exposure. This, however, is quite a mistaken situation for the cedar, which is properly an Alpine tree. The country in Syria, adjacent to Lebanon, is indeed warm, but the mountain itself is of a great height, and of a very different climate. The cedars of Lebanon grow in a wet mountain soil, and are exposed to as much frost and snow as occurs in most parts of Scotland. We therefore never find that the cedar is hurt by frosts in this country. But being placed in gardens, and in a dry situation, both with regard to soil and climate, it turns out to be a mere bush, compared to that lofty tree which it naturally ought to be. The four cedars in Chelsea garden were planted, each at the corner of a square pond, in a very wet situation. In the low parts of Scotland, the cedar can scarcely be placed too wet; and will succeed better in a wet mountain soil in a Highland wood, than in the best garden in the country.

We felt some desire to know the present state of these cedars at Hopetoun House, and therefore we applied to Mr Smith, gardener to the Earl of Hopetoun, well known as an intelligent contributor to the Caledonian Horticultural Transactions. He writes to us as follows: "The three cedar trees mentioned by Dr Walker, are still growing vigorously at Hopetoun House. The one near the rill of water, is now less than the other two. This proceeds from its being planted in gravel. The other two are planted at the bottom of a gently sloping bank, and are probably penetrating into a rich damp soil. These trees are growing more rapidly than any other trees at Hopetoun House. They were brought here by John, Duke of Argyle, and planted in 1748. Dr Walker has certainly made a mistake in making the date of his measurement 1797, for we know that the tree was ten feet in circumference in 1801, and it is quite impossible that it could have increased four feet eleven inches in four years. Perhaps the year ought to have been 1779. The following is a table of the measurement of the three cedars, at four different periods :

A chestnut, measured at the same periods, only increased

2 7

"The first cedar is measured at eighteen inches from the ground, as limbs strike out immediately above that height. The other two are measured at three feet from the ground. The cedar of Lebanon swells faster in girth than any other tree about this place. I have not the least doubt of the correctness of Dr Walker's observations on the cedar; and I am persuaded the tree will grow well in Scotland, if planted in proper soils and situations. I have been informed by Sir Alexander Hope, when on a visit to the Earl of Pembroke, that he found several of his Lordship's cedars eighteen feet in circumference, and that they were growing only two feet above the level of a neighbouring pond. Allow me to add, that I think it a shame to the cultivators of trees in Scotland, that the cedar of Lebanon has been so long neglected; and I beg to entreat of you to try and bring it more into notice, and to wipe away the disgrace which poor old Scotland labours under, with regard to these trees. How great the contrast presented by a Captain Edward, in Ireland, who has planted two acres of the cedar of Lebanon, which are said to be growing like larches.”

We must say, that we enter most keenly into the patriotic feelings here expressed by Mr Smith. Our own experience tells us, that a cedar of Lebanon which was planted in a shrubbery at Relugas in Morayshire, and in a spot very far from favourable, for its roots are on a dry gravel, has wonderfully kept pace with a larch, which chose to sow itself within a few yards of it. But as the dry soil is quite suited to the larch, and by no means so to the cedar, it is probable that the latter will very speedily be left far behind. We learn from Mr Lawson, of the Golden Acre Nursery at Edinburgh, a gentleman well known for his judgment and science in arboriculture, that in July, 1832, Mr Cruikshanks, the Duke of Hamilton's forester, pointed out to him a cedar of Lebanon growing by the side of a rivulet near Hamilton, in a common plantation, amongst larch and other trees, by the closeness of which it had evidently

been drawn up with much fewer branches than it would have otherwise exhibited, if standing singly. No attention had been paid to it, as it had been planted originally, by mistake, as a larch. So far as Mr Lawson could judge, it appeared to be about thirty years old, and it considerably exceeded the neighbouring larches in height and girth. Mr Cruikshanks was of opinion, that cedars ought to be planted generally in the same manner as larches; and Mr Lawson says, that when planted for timber, they should be planted in groves, so as to draw each other up with few branches. It appears to us that the cedar has all along been mistaken, precisely as the larch was at first, and that it should be planted extensively and hardily. But the great difficulty at present is to get plants. He, therefore, who should be the means of bringing into the country large quantities of the seed gathered from proper parent trees in Libanus, or elsewhere, would, in our opinion, be a very great benefactor to these islands, and to Scotland in particular. There are, however, a good number of pet cedars in Scotland as well as in England, so that, notwithstanding the indolence of British planters with respect to this tree, we believe that the celebrated forests of Lebanon cannot now boast of so many cedars as our own island can do. Solomon's forty score thousand Jewish hewers produced considerable havoc, and time has done the rest of the work of destruction; for Maundrell, in his journey from Aleppo to Jerusalem, in 1696, could find only sixteen large trees, though there were many small ones. One of the largest measured twelve yards and six inches in girth, and was yet sound.

After the cedar, the Stone Pine deserves our notice. It is not indigenous to our soil, but, like the cedar, it is in some degree naturalized; though in England it is rarely more than a puny, half-formed resemblance of the Italian pine. The soft clime of Italy alone gives birth to the true picturesque pine. There it always suggests ideas of broken porticos, Ionic pillars, triumphal arches, fragments of old temples, and a variety of classic ruins, which in Italian landscape it commonly adorns.

The stone pine promises little in its infancy in point of picturesque beauty. It does not, like most of the fir species, give an early indication of its future form. In its youth it is dwarfish and round headed, with a short stem, and has rather the shape of a full-grown bush

than of an increasing tree. As it grows older, it does not soon deposit its formal shape. It is long a bush, though somewhat more irregular, and with a longer stem. But as it attains maturity, its picturesque form increases fast. Its lengthening stem assumes commonly an easy sweep. It seldom indeed deviates much from a straight line, but that gentle deviation is very graceful, and above all other lines difficult to imitate. If accidentally either the stem or any of the larger branches take a larger sweep than usual, that sweep seldom fails to be graceful. It is also among the beauties of the stone pine, that, as the lateral branches decay, they leave generally stumps, which, standing out in various parts of the stem, break the continuity of its lines.

The bark is smoother than that of any other tree of the pine kind, except the Weymouth; though we do not esteem this among its picturesque beauties. Its hue, however, which is warm and reddish, has a good effect; and it obtains a kind of roughness by peeling off in patches. The foliage of the stone pine is as beautiful as the stem. Its colour is a deep warm green; and its form, instead of breaking into acute angles, like many of the pine race, is moulded into a flowing line by an assemblage of small masses.

As age comes on, its round clump head becomes more flat, spreading itself into a canopy, which is a form equally becoming. And yet I doubt whether any resinous tree ever attains that picturesque beauty in age, which we admire so much in the oak. The oak continues long vigorous in his branches, though his trunk decays; but the resinous tree, I believe, decays more equally through all its parts, and in age, oftener presents the idea of vegetable decrepitude, than of the stout remains of a vigorous constitution. And yet, in many circumstances, even in this state, it may be an object of picturesque notice.

Thus we see, in the form of the stone pine, what beauty may result from a tree with a round head, and without lateral branches, which requires indeed a good example to prove. When we look at an ash or an elm, from which the lateral branches have been stripped, as

THE PINASTER, AND CLUSTER PINE.

169 is the practice in some countries, we are apt to think, that no tree with a head placed on a long stem can be beautiful; yet in Nature's hands, which can mould so many forms of beauty, it may easily be effected. Nature herself, however, does not follow the rules of picturesque beauty in the production of this kind of object. The cabbage tree, I suppose, is as ugly as the stone pine is picturesque. The best specimen of the stone pine I ever saw, grows in the botanical garden at Oxford.

We quite agree with our author as to the picturesque beauty of the Stone Pine, Pinus pinea. We frequently find it introduced into the landscapes of Claude; the artist availing himself of its heavy deep-toned mass of foliage to give effect to the brilliancy of his sky and distance. It is quite associated in our minds with Italy and her magnificent remains.

The most beautiful succedaneum of the stone pine which these climates afford, is the Pinaster. The sweep of its stem is similar, its broken branches likewise, and its clump head. Both trees also are equally irregular in their growth, but the pinaster is perhaps more picturesque in the roughness of its dark gray bark. On no trees have I seen broader and better varied masses of light and shade; but the closeness of the pinaster's foliage makes its head sometimes too heavy.

I

The Cluster Pine also is a beautiful tree, and approaches perhaps as near the stone pine as the pinaster does. But I scarce recollect ever to have seen it in a state of full maturity and perfection. If we may judge, however, from a growth of thirty or forty years, (at which age have often seen it,) it shoots in so wild and irregular a manner, so thick, rich, and bushy, that we may easily conceive how picturesque a plant it must be in a state of full perfection. Its cones, too, which it bears in clusters, from whence it derives its name, are a great ornament to it. In composition, indeed, such minutiæ are of little value; but we are now considering trees as individuals.

So far as we know, there is no real distinction between the Pinaster and the Cluster Pine. The tree is called the Pinus pinaster. It is a forest tree of considerable size, especially on