Mr. Editor: - We have no desire to annihilate Mr. Eaton, nor any other gentleman, especially one who has the power and faculty, of contributing one jot or tittle to the great cause of Horticulture.

In discussing any matter or topic in this journal, we have nothing to do with personalities, or individual, personal, good or bad qualifications, and I am always sorry when writers so much forget themselves as to fall into this great error.

Mr. Eaton has not fallen under our great displeasure; the only thing he seems to have fallen into is a great mistake, and this is nothing more than all humanity is liable to. Do not let us mistake a man's experience, his practice, his system of doing things, for the individual man, because it is the former we have to do with, and the latter, nothing.

Do not let us be misunderstood on this point. We have nothing to do with Mr. Eaton; but we have to do with his works, his practice, his experience, and his theory. So from this time out, Mr. Eaton, let us say less of self, less of that which flows from the back of the head, where the animal seems to reign triumphant, and cultivate more of that which dwells, or ought to dwell, in the front and upper region of this same brain. It will have a much better influence on the minds of those readers who are, perhaps, younger than you or I, and a more salutary influence on the spirit of the horticultural profession generally.

Now, friend Eaton, let us reason together. In your reply of last month you say, "but still it is a Blight comfort to be informed that I have no particular objection to your plan," etc. Why did you not, as an honest man, finish out that sentence, and not stop short just at a place in the sentence where it suited your own convenience? You may as well have given the whole of it, for be assured those interested in this question will be sure to read it, and read it very carefully too. The remaining portion of the sentence that you wilfully left out, reads thus: "Still, to commercial growers, who, from necessity, ought to obtain the very perfection of fruit, I should by no means recommend it." Now you see, friend Eaton, this sentence, read consecutively as it stands in print, really means just what I intended it to mean, and not that which you would have it understood to mean. The exception I made to this (in my opinion) badly-arranged plan was, where a gentleman may fancy a whim, or hobby-horse, and has plenty of money that is his own, why of course he has a right to carry out any hobby he pleases. It was, and is, distinctly stated, that in this case I had no particular objection to this so-called plan; but in every other case, great objections.

You say, "I will endeavor to show that I am not so entirely wrong in every particular as he endeavors to prove".

I have studied your answer very carefully in every particular in question, but honestly I do not see that you have shown or substantiated any one point in connection with the right or wrong of your plan. The only thing you have distinctly shown is, how to ask a lot of questions: wanting to know what kind of sheds I grow grapes in; whether I grow vines on the back walls or not; if the wood ripens on the back-wall vines; and have I ever. ever, ever grown grapes or vines in a span-roofed or curvilinear house.

Now what on earth has all this nonsense to do with the question at issue? Suppose I never, never, never grew a grape in my life, or that I never, never saw a vine, and could show you by sound common sense and reasoning that the plan you proposed for a man to get his living by in growing forced grapes for market was a miserably poor one; would that invalidate my suggestions if they were truthful and correct? This plan is intended for the man who knows not how to build; the man who knows not whether a house should stand east, west, north, or south; whether it is best to have all glass, or half glass, bricks, and mortar; whether for money making, or profitable and advantageous, it is better to have his glass houses all abate ground, or half under ground; which of these arrangements will take less fuel, and in the end cost less. Plans are not intended for those that understand this business, but for those that know comparatively nothing about it.

The man who understands this subject does not require either your advice of mine, so that your plan is, in reality, got up for the novice; and it is your bounden duty to tell him where, and in what are the "many advantages that more than counterbalance" even houses erected on the old lean-to shed principle.

Here comes this novice with a few hundred dollars in his hand; he has been informed that growing forced grapes for market is a good, profitable business (poor fellow !); he wishes to launch this hard-earned money in the speculation; he knows not how to build; he is told that the earlier he can get his fruit into the market, the higher is the price. How shall I build? asks he. Which is the best plan? Now for this man Mr. Eaton proposes a plan which we were naughty enough to call the "cross-stick," On -this plan the early forcing-house is placed at the north. This said man wants to know if that (north) is the best position for said early house, and if so, why? and if a flow and return pipe in a house twenty feet wide, twenty feet high, and forty feet long, with glass on all sides, will radiate heat sufficient to have a crop of grapes ripen early in June? being given to understand that the said crop takes nearly six months to fully mature, consequently would have to commence forcing said house early in December. Further, said man wishes to know, previous to erecting this plan, what possible means there are of retarding the house marked D more than that of C. Said man wants to know, as C and D face the south, what on earth there is to prevent these two houses breaking together? and also where is the pecuniary advantage of having this succession? admitting the possibility of having a succession.