vineyards had always been much less productive, propagated a story that he had procured such unusual crops by the arts of magic and sorcery.*

It likewise appears from a variety of testimony, that the ancients were equally ignorant of the methods of rearing shrubs, herbs, and plants. Such of these as were cultivated, were preserved merely for the purposes of medicine; and though the medical professors had this stimulus, their knowledge of varieties seems to have been very limited. Theophrastus, a writer of great credit, who carefully collected plants as well as minerals, and who collected not only those of Greece, but travelled in Egypt, Ethiopia, and Arabia, for the improvement of science, was able to obtain only 600 species. M. Rollin, however, tells us, that when, by order of Pope Nicholas V. in the middle of the 14th century, a translation of the work of Theophrastus was printed, the physicians of that day, perhaps the only class of men who attended to the orders of plants, were so dissatisfied with the narrow limits of botanical knowledge, that resolutions were taken to go in quest of it to the very places whence Theophras tus and others of the ancients had written. He adds, that in consequence of these decisions, voyages were made to the islands of the Archipelago, to Palestine, to Arabia, and to' Egypt; and these expeditions were attended with so much success, that in the beginning of the 16th century, the learned were in possession of the description, not of 600 only, but of more than 6,000 plants, with engraved figures of each.t

It seems, however, that botany did not obtain much of the appearance of a science until the beginning of the last century, when Louis XIV, with the munificence becoming a great prince, commissioned Mons. Tournefort to make a bo tanical excursion through many of the provinces of Asia and

* Pliny, lib. xiv. c. 3.

Rollin's History of Arts and Sciences of the ancients, vol. iii.

Africa, to collect plants, and to make observations upon natural history in general. This great man received the king's order in the year 1700, and although he was driven home in 1702, by the fear of the plague which then raged in Egypt, he brought home so many new plants, that he could enumerate 1,356 distinct species, without including any on those which he had collected in his former travels.

The learned throughout Europe were proud of these achievements, and Tournefort was considered to be one of the greatest ornaments of France. In England, however, we had the excellent and eminent John Ray, a man whom we had equal reason to value and admire, who indeed rather preceded Tournefort, and was equally assiduous in his endeavours to promote the knowledge of plants. In consequence of the exertions of this great man, and of the methodical arrangements which he had formed of the vegetable kingdom, together with the subsequent labours of Boerhaave, Linnæus, Hudson, and others, botany, about the middle of the last century, assumed a distinguished rank among the sciences of Europe.

Such are the fruits of industry, when directed by taste and by the energies of an enlarged mind; but the discovery and arrangement of new plants were not the only benefits that were achieved by the exertions of a succession of great men, all directed to the attainment of one important object; for with the knowledge of plants, the want of gardens increased;* and as these became more common, the public gradually ac

* I am aware that there were gardens in Great Britain before the Nor man conquest, belonging to the monks, but the inhabitants in general had not this useful luxury. There were also large vineyards here in the 12th century. William of Malmesbury says, that the grapes produced in the vale of Gloucester were of the sweetest taste, and made most excellent wines, but these were likewise the property of the great barons, the monks, and abbots: for the general inhabitants of the country participated neither in the credit nor profit which was attached to these establishments.

quired a taste for planting, until the desire of possessing a garden became general throughout Europe.

The changes which this produced in society were many and important; and, I have no doubt that, a person now travelling through Europe, and making this one of the objects of his inquiry, would find the character of each people more or less favourable, according to the degree in which a taste for gardening prevails among them. Were I asked to enumerate the causes which produced that increase of civilization, which has gradually taken place during the last two or three centuries, I should most certainly place the introduction of gardening next to the invention of printing. The possession of a garden has a natural tendency to soften the character of the most ferocious; it attaches a man to home, and doubles the value of his habitation; and whenever its cultivation is engaged in with ardour, it not only affords an innocent means of occupying leisure hours, but it has also the important› effect of diverting the attention from all low and unworthy pursuits.

Buffon, the celebrated French naturalist, was so enamoured of his garden, that he erected a pavilion within it, in which he could study with convenience. There he usually retired at five o'clock in the morning, and was then inaccessible. Prince Henry of Prussia named this sylvan retreat the 'cradle of natural history.' The illustrious lord Bacon has pronounced gardening to be the 'purest of human pleasures, and the greatest refreshment to the spirit of man.'

The dissemination of a taste for gardening is, in my opinion, one of the most valuable effects of the establishment of all horticultural societies; and I have no doubt but that, in this way, the Caledonian Horticultural Society will be found to be eminently useful. While addressing the members of this respectable association, I hope I may be allowed to say, that I feel proud of having been enrolled among those whose efforts tend not only to the improvement of natural history,

and rural economy, but also to the promotion of moral habits and propensities. Penetrated with these feelings, I shall greatly rejoice if the following observations and collection of facts, upon a subject in which the public seem now to take considerable interest, should in any degree excite a general desire in others to further the important objects of the Society.

The subject which I have now chosen for discussion and investigation, is the application of Common Salt to the purposes of Horticulture, the several branches of which I propose to consider in the following order:

1st. That common salt, when applied in due proportion, has the effect of promoting the health and growth of vege

tables.

2dly. That it has the property of rendering fruit trees and esculent plants unfit for the food or the habitation of worms and insects.

3dly. That common salt is one of the most efficacious substances that can be employed in a garden for the destruction of worms and insects; and,

4thly. That common salt may, with material advantage, be likewise used for the destruction of weeds, or other noxious vegetables.

Under the first division of our subject, it is to be observed, that the celebrated Dr. Darwin, when treating of common salt as a manure for land, asserts, that this substance is a stimulus which excites the vegetable absorbent vessels into greater action than usual, and that in a certain quantity, it increases their growth, by enabling them to take up more nourishment in a given time; and consequently, to perform their circulations and secretions with greater energy.' Sir Humphry Davy, from what he says in his Agricultural Chymistry, seems, on the other hand, to think it also probable, *that common salt acts as a manure, by entering into the

composition of the plants, somewhat in the same manner as gypsum, phosphate of lime, and the alkalies? due a ad aver

These opinions will be thought to have great weight; but as few persons, comparatively speaking, will be able to confirm them by their own experience, in consequence of the very limited attention that has hitherto been bestowed on the use of salt in horticulture, the more useful way, perhaps of treating this subject, will be to lay before the society the evidence of those practical men, who have already published the results of their experiments, and then to draw such con clusions as their communications may seem to justify.

Dr. Brownrigg, who, in the year 1748, published a valuable work' On the Art of making Common Salt,' makes the following statement

'Salt,' says he,' contributes greatly to fructify the earth, and when properly used as a manure, affords ample nourish ment to corn and other vegetables, and renders kingdoms rich and fertile, where it happens to abound in the soil.' p. 158.

Mr. Hollingshead, a gentleman of considerable fortune, who resided near Chorley in Lancashire, and spent many years in making experiments on the application of common salt as a manure, and who also made powerful efforts to obtain a repeal of the salt laws, published a few years before his death, a very interesting pamphlet on the subject. In this work, to which I am greatly indebted for much useful information, he relates, that when foul salt was permitted to the farmers duty-free, a person near Middlewich in Cheshire trenched his garden in autumn, mixing with the soil a quantity of foul salt. The following spring, it was dug or delv ed in the usual method, and planted with potatoes. The crop produced therefrom was such as far exceeded his most sanguine expectations. Twenty of the potatoes were produced, which weighed sixty pounds.'

Several other testimonies to the beneficial effects of common salt in the culture of the potate might be produced, but