fluids, from being of an acid nature, had resisted the congelation. With regard to trees, we have heard that intense frost often splits the trunks of some of our indigenous kinds by congelation[56]; but these trees retain vitality, and only suffer from the consequences which may ensue from the fissures. We have seen evergreens, plants from milder climates, and trees which had not thoroughly ripened their {277} wood (that is, retained the vessels full of moisture), injured in the extremities, and even killed throughout by cold. But this does not prove that these had any vegetable heat, any more than those which suffered no injury from the same degree of cold, prove that they had vegetable heat. The juices of some kinds of plants do not congeal at the same point of temperature as others. The vessels of some in winter are not so much distended with fluids as others; and probably the vital principle of some is less susceptible of injury from cold than others. These facts may account for the endurance of intense cold by some kinds of trees, independent of vegetable heat. Our author, speaking of the transplanting of fruit trees, states, that “any gardener could have predicted the probability of fruit during the first season, together with the certainty during the second of its not taking place.” Our gardeners will be moonstruck at having the gift of prophecy attributed to them, at least to predict in such a way. We have thought Sir Henry sufficiently ready to impute ignorance to gardeners before we came to this remark; but to represent a useful and intelligent class of men in so ludicrous a light, is certainly using a very improper liberty. {278}