I need not pursue the subject farther here, having, I trust, succeeded in opening to the reader a general view of the plan which should be pursued. But there are other woods where a larger portion, both of oak and of underwood, will be found, and where, consequently, it will be more the object of the woodman to improve by _less extensive measures_ than would be adopted in such a case as the one just referred to. It will mostly be best to do this by pruning, stubbing, and planting—always supposing that an effectual drainage has been secured—and here I would remark, that whenever planting is done in a wood, it should be as well done as circumstances will possibly allow. Instead of the “nick” system, or any similar plan, the woodman should dig holes for the underwood in the Autumn, and plant in February, or early in March. For oak, he should dig a larger hole, in the Autumn, give it a Summer fallow, and put in a vigorous, stiff plant, the Autumn following, or in the February next but one. If some such plan as this were pursued, there is not much fear but the plants would grow, and in this way woods may be gradually brought into a prosperous state, instead of their being, as they now are, in the aggregate, a _comparatively_ valueless property to their owners. I may here illustrate my view by a reference to a particular case, which came under my professional notice. It was a wood held on lease by a gentleman, under an ecclesiastical body, the lease being for a certain number of years, renewable upon the payment of a fine every seven years. Some dissatisfaction was felt by the lessee at the amount of the fines demanded, and the lease was permitted to _lapse_, at which time the intrinsic value of the stock, whether of timber or _underwood_, was literally nothing. The oak was all gone, as it was quite natural that, with a lease so framed, it should be, and the underwood, instead of being usefully and beneficially occupying the ground, of which it then had _entire possession_, was not worth the trouble of cutting! How different would have been the position of the lessors in this instance, I need not say, if, during the two last cycles, when the oaks were becoming very thinly scattered, the underwood had been cherished, as it most undoubtedly ought to have been. The neighbourhood was one where there was plenty of demand for the produce of woods; the particular wood referred to, would have been, on every account, as good a cover, and all parties would have been alike interested in the continuance of the lease. But as I must now very shortly bring such of my “Remarks” as refer to “Ancient Woods,” to a close, it may be as well just to run over the whole subject in a recapitulary form, so as to present it to the reader in a sort of bird’s-eye view.