The natural anxiety which every right-minded man feels for his own accuracy in words written or spoken, and in justice to those of your readers who peruse the "Calendar of Operations" communicated by me to your pages, renders it an imperative duty, on my part, to notice the animadversions on these articles by "Gincinnatus" in the March number of the Horticulturist, He accuses me of negligence and carelessness in their preparation, and that, in consequence, there are frequently errors in my advice. On this point I at once admit my sensitiveness, as I would consider it an insult both to yourself and readers, were I to advocate a mode of practice that a lengthened experience had not satisfied me to be correct, or advance statements that I had not proved and weighed by every available means in my power before making them.

In my opening number (January, 1856), I alluded to a difficulty that I had before experienced in writing calendars, viz: " That calendars, in general, are either too brief to be valuable, or too lengthy and minute for the limited space of a monthly periodical." I further signified my intention of attempting to steer a middle course, and it has therefore been my constant aim not only to avoid useless repetitions, but to make my remarks as comprehensive as possible, consistent with clearness. How far I may have been successful in doing so, I of course cannot be a competent judge. It may be that I have, "In laboring to be brief, become obscure".

But I well know, that if my desire had been merely to fill a certain amount of pages, I could, "With far more ease, have told a longer story".

Your correspondent seems anxious that his remarks should not be considered as being made in any carping spirit/ I would have been less inclined to think so if he had not misquoted my remarks, and attempted to falsify my meaning by disconnecting sentences, with a view of obscuring any clearness or accuracy of expression which they contained. With regard to the advice which your correspondent deems objectionable, I do not, on again perusing it, wish to make any alterations. It is true, that, by extending the paragraph, it might be rendered so as to be more readily understood; but I submit that, taken in connection with the general tenor of my calendars, there is no room for doubt as to the meaning intended to be conveyed.

In the " Calendar" for October last, I remarked that" the relative advantages of fall and spring planting is open to much discussion. So much depends upon local circumstances, that diversity of opinion is of all things most likely. One man will plant in October, another in December, and, in both oases, it will be considered fall planting." I mentioned the circumstanoe as one reason for diversity of opinion on the practice, as I find many people consider planting in October, November, and December, equally, as fall planting. Is it necessary for me to add that I do not look upon December planting as coming under the appellation of fall planting? In the October "Calendar" for 1856,1 remark that "in the fall the soil is warmer than the air; the formation of roots proceeds while the branches are dormant." Further on: "But to insure these good results, planting should be proceeded with immediately after the leaves have fallen; if delayed beyond October, success will be less certain".

To come more particularly to the objections of your correspondent; in the " Calendar" for last November I remark: "In sheltered situations, trees may yet be planted; do not, however, plant in a hurry, but let the ground be thoroughly prepared, and in good condition." My meaning is surely obvious enough, which is: that rather than plant in a hurry, or before the ground is thoroughly prepared, to defer it until spring. This meaning cannot for a moment be doubted by reading out the paragraph. "If you find it more convenient to get your trees now than in the spring, or if your orders have to come from a more northern locality than your own, by all means secure them at once; and when they arrive, have a deep trench prepared, and lay them in closely, covering well, at least half up their stems; they will then be ready to plant at the earliest fitting moment in spring." Is this not sufficiently explicit? or is it necessary for me to admit " that waiting for the frost to mellow the soil, is an ill method of effecting early fall planting?"

I have strongly and frequently urged, whenever occasion offered, the primary importance of draining, more especially in clayey soils, and their exposure to the ameliorating influence of the atmosphere, in order to bring them into a condition fitted for cultivation. In the paragraph from which your correspondent has taken his text, I remark: " It is a commendable practice to prepare the holes now, throwing out the soil, and leaving it exposed, to be acted upon by frost; by this means it will acquire a friability not otherwise easily obtained." This amelioration of soil by frost your correspondent considers "all moonshine," and goes on to observe that " summer fallowing and winter freezing," so far as they relate to a system, "belong to the barbaric age of agriculture;" that "fall ploughing of light soils is universally considered by our most scientifically practical agriculturists as positively injurious; that " wet or stiff soils, when ploughed in the fall, are heavier in summer," and this because " the frost decomposes the vegetable fibres, roots of weeds, and past crops;" that " the more modern," and, as he thinks, "the more accurate conclusion is, that all such treatment of soils is mere cobbling, unworthy of our age." And "if gentlemen wish to render soils friable, they now do it by draining, and adding silicious and vegetable substances;" that "it is better not to plant a tree than plant it in a soil upon which frost will have a beneficial effect in rendering it friable." But if it is "first drained, then get a barrow of decayed leaves from the woods, and a barrow of well-washed sand from the public road, and mix them with the stiff soil, we may go ahead without hesitation." "Turning it up to freeze is a temporary affair, unworthy of being considered a commendable practice."Such is a fair epitome of your correspondent's "confession of faith." It exhibits such total ignorance both of the science and practice of agriculture, that if the writer alone were concerned, I would throw down my pen; for, although I have no particular aversion against entering into the arena of controversy with a well matched opponent, there is no honor in taking the easy advantage of one who, like the Chinese soldiers I have heard of, rushes forward with two or three swords at a time, and that, too, with the hilts of the weapons presented to my hands, and the points sticking in his own.