which, as fairly as to any other pear, may be applied the praise which he lavished on the Queen of the Low Countries, a far inferior variety, is not improbably a seedling of his; nor that the Urbaniste was gained by one of his friends and disciples. Nor would I overlook the faith and zeal with which he persevered in an experiment occupying a period of time that would have appalled an ordinary man, and encountered difficulties and obstacles that might well have discouraged him. Still more do we owe him for the effect which his attempt - the first ever made to produce new varieties upon scientific principles — has had in stimulating inquiry into those principles, and causing the production by others of many of our most valuable fruits.

BOSTON-MARKET CELERY.

By C. N. BRACKETT, Chairman Vegetable Committee of Mass. Hort. Soc.

THIS is considered one of the finest varieties of this highly-esteemed vegetable grown, and is the established favorite with the celery-growers in this vicinity, where large quantities are grown for the supply of the Boston market.

The specimen from which our illustration was drawn was grown by Mr. Andrew F. Allen of Arlington, Mass., taken from his celery-pit Jan. 16; and, for this season of the year, a finer specimen is rarely seen; each separate stalk perfectly blanched, with the leaves at the extremities as fresh and green as from a plant taken from the ground in September.

This variety is of medium size, remarkably hardy, with the offsets or side-shoots more numerous than in most varieties; blanches very easily and quickly, and, when well grown and properly blanched, is of a pure white color, crisp, brittle, solid, and entirely free from the least sponginess or hollowness; of a mild, pleasant flavor, unsurpassed in this particular by any other variety.

It is recommended as one of the best sorts in cultivation, either for the

kitchen-garden, for family use, or for more extensive culture for the market.

DRAINING FLOWER-POTS.

By A. VEITCH, New Haven, Conn.

COVERING the holes in the bottom of flower-pots with crocks, charcoal, or other material, has been long in use amongst gardeners; and the advantages resulting therefrom have been believed to be so evident, that the practice is not likely to be abandoned for some time to come. No doubt, intelligent and reasonable men would listen with deference to any one who might claim to have discovered a more excellent way, or who might even insist that the practice, in some instances, might be discontinued; but we claim that reasons clear and strong must first be given, before the belief becomes general, that "the system is utterly wrong in theory, and perfectly useless in practice." Let us see, if we can, what amount of truth there is in the statement that it is wrong in theory to place any drainage material whatever over the holes of pots in which plants are grown. Is it because such drainage is unnecessary that it is wrong so to do?

Admitting the want of necessity, we have only a practice which might be dispensed with; but the wrong will not appear until it can be shown that injury results to plants by being so treated. Now, we can ascertain whether this will be the case or not, by treating some plants with drainage, others without, and by managing them in all other respects the same.

If the advantages as regards the ends for which they were grown proved not to be on the side of the undrained pots, it would appear their neighbors had not been wronged by the extra labor bestowed on them. If no difference could be observed on either side, the ends gained by the two systems. would equally balance each other. But if, on either side, there was a difference as regards healthy and luxuriant growth, or in the number and quality of the flowers, on that side should be the preference. The practice spoken against is based upon the universally-acknowledged fact, that stagnant water at the roots of plants is hurtful to their growth and general well-being, and therefore should, by all possible means, be prevented from lodging there. The belief has been, that, by efficiently draining pots, greater facilities are afforded the surplus water to escape than when no such means are employed: indeed, so evident does this appear, that discussion seems

unnecessary. We only need to be cognizant of the effects resulting from the want of drainage, to guard against the evils inseparable therefrom. The roots of a plant grown in an imperfectly-drained pot would indicate that those at the bottom had suffered more than those above and by the edge of the vessel; which difference would be referable to the fact that the water had not been equally distributed, and greatest in excess at the point where it would most naturally collect. But it is argued that covering the holes of pots cannot affect the state of things either way, as but little water at any time escapes through these, and that little with equal readiness, whether protected or not. The quantity which escapes will, of course, depend upon how much is given; and there can be but one opinion as to the propriety of its having a ready exit, whether much or little.

This is the more needful, as percolation through the sides of pots, and evaporation from the surface of the mould and from the leaves, cannot be depended upon at all seasons of the year, in all states of the weather, and in every circumstance contingent upon artificial culture, to maintain that medium degree of moisture throughout the entire balls so conducive to the health of plants.

How, then, can there be any violation of principle or rule of good practice, in at least doubling the chances to preserve this state of things, as we can do by careful attention to bottom drainage? I take it, that mould in a flower-pot, like mould anywhere else, is capable of absorbing and holding a given quantity of water, which it parts with only by evaporation, and as taken up by the roots of the plant; but, if more be given than can thus be stored and appropriated, all beyond is superfluous, and should not be allowed to remain any length of time in the pot. How to get rid of this overplus is a primary consideration in all thorough draining, whether it be a few cubic inches of mould in a flower-pot operated upon, or all the acres of a farm. And, when provision is made sufficiently ample to do this, those conditions so necessary to the development and protection of working roots are also provided for.

The mould so treated "obtains a greater capacity for moisture and manure, and imparts to plants greater capabilities for economically working up the materials which they find in both the soil and atmosphere." We grant, when pots are not larger than pints, the same care is not necessary

as for larger ones; and for the very obvious reason, that, as the mould in pots becomes dry, as regards time, somewhat in proportion to their size, much in the same ratio does the necessity for drainage increase. According to this rule, then, and more especially when fine, large specimens are the objects sought, too much care cannot be exercised in draining well, and at the same time guarding against their ever being choked. For, should this happen, all expectation and hope will be frustrated by the conversion of the mould into mud; thereby rendering it utterly unfit for the maintenance of plants in good health. But, in the case of small pots, the system might be dispensed with without incurring any such risk. Hence, florists whose stock in trade consists chiefly of small plants, potted in fall or winter to be planted out at the return of spring, seldom use drainage; some not at all, others only in special cases.

It seems to me, then, that if it is wrong in theory, and useless in practice, to drain flower-pots, it is a theory and practice on the side of safety, and has, withal, received the sanction and support of, by all odds, the most intelligent and capable plant-growers in modern times.

IMPROVED PEAS.

LOOKING Over the catalogues of our seedsmen, we find several new peas, which appear to be deserving of notice. Some of these we have already tested; while others are unknown to us except by description, and have probably never been grown in this country. Two or three kinds originated by Mr. Thomas Laxton, an English grower, who seems to have been signally successful in his efforts for the improvement of this vegetable, are peculiarly fine and promising.

Laxton's Early Prolific Long-Pod, introduced two or three years since, is a valuable accession to our list of half-early or intermediate kinds. We have rarely seen plants more healthy or productive; and we know of few varieties the pods of which are longer, or that fill out more completely. It is recommended for cultivation, and will probably become a standard sort. Laxton's Supreme, a more recent pea, will be found included in our seedmen's lists of new vegetables. In England, it appears to be univer