Sir: Permit me as a subscriber to the Horticulturist, to make a few inquiries.

I wrote to you for this purpose in November, but the letter may have shared the fate of many more valuable documents destroyed by the fire.

I am building a cold vinery, 55 by 13 1/2 feet; front wall 1 foot, and back 12 feet; exposure, 30 deg. east of south. Could I use the back wall for Figs or Peaches? or, if I should decide to use it for Grapes instead, would I not find it more profitable to plant the Isabella or Catawba, (instead of the foreign varieties,) neither of which will ripen oftener than once in three or four years in our garden, and then not quite as thoroughly as they do elsewhere?

To avoid the attacks of the grub upon the Peach and the Apricot near the surface of the ground, and under the bifurcation, I have thought of working these trees upon the Canada Plum, or the Almond. The soil is a good gravelly loam, with both sand and clay for ingredients. For garden culture, would not the Peach thrive as well upon the Plum or Almond as upon its own roots, even if the grub did not exist?

The fruit-garden which I am about to plant, 300 feet by 100, is much exposed to severe winter winds. To shelter it, I wish to plant suitable trees, so as not to occupy a wider strip of ground than ten or twelve feet, the branches extending each way five or six, or less if it can be done, and permit a height of twenty-five or thirty.

What distance apart should the trees be planted? and is there any more rapid-growing tree than the Norway Fir, which would, by a reasonable amount of shearing, secure a tolerable exclusion of the wind? and how much of a task would such shearing be?

In making this application, I hope I do not trespass on your time and patience.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, John Pumpelly.

Omego, Feb. 5, 1861.

[We do not quite like the form of your house, but we suppose it is " done " now. Figs would do better than Peaches on your back wall, but you can not grow the best fruit of any kind there. If you grow any thing there, let it be the Sweetwater or the White Chasselas, We think the Delaware, Diana, Hartford Prolific, and Creveling would all ripen with you in the open air. Try them. The Peach will grow well on either the Plum or Almond, and the former would relieve you of much trouble with the borer. To prevent the borer from attacking your Peaches, paint your trees with common tar reduced to a liquid state by hot water; apply it beneath the surface a couple of inches, and six or eight above, early in the spring. Any refuse grease laid on thick will answer as well as the tar. When cut off below, we have known the borer enter the tree two and three feet above the ground. The above remedy, however, timely applied, will answer the purpose. Where the borer is already in the tree, it must be cut out. - Either the Hemlock or Norway Spruce would make a beautiful hedge, and answer your purpose fully. We can think of nothing better. The shearing would be a comparatively small matter. Plant the trees about four feet apart, and take out the leader.

It will come in again, but must be removed from year to year, to keep the bottom well filled. The Norway Spruce will make a hedge sooner than the Hemlock, but not such a pretty one. - Your former article was consumed, and we are obliged to you for repeating the questions. - Ed].

Mr. Editor:- I have noticed an article in the March number of the Horticulturist, under the heading of " Imported Roses," by Mr. Andrew S. Fuller, of Brooklyn, L. I., in which he makes assertions and uses phrases that seem to require a little more ventilation or elucidation, in order to make them fully intelligible to your numerous readers.

It is not my purpose to dissent from the conclusion sought to be derived, but to question the method and statements by which that end is attained. I may therefore be excused for propounding, through you, a few questions, with the intent of bringing forth more light on the subject.

In the first place, permit mo to ask what Florist or Nurseryman neglects to produce Roses himself, and thus "allows his simple vanity to get the better of his judgment?"or what is there particularly simple or vain in choosing to grow Roses, or not to grow them?

Again, have not new American Roses of decided merit been sold in this country at as good prices, and with as ready sale, as new French Roses are in France? Among my own importations, I have received the new Roses every year in limited quantities, without extra charge, but very much doubt whether they could be obtained here from the producer, under like circumstances, without paying a considerable advance.

For the sake of argument, we will admit that the Rose Madame Trudeau was sent to France to be propagated, and afterwards sold to our people as a French Rose: was the discovery, by those who purchased it, that so good a Rose as this was an American production, a just cause for the least chagrin? Why, sir, I should judge, with my feeble perceptions of human nature, and of American human nature particularly, that " a peep behind the scenes," resulting in such a discovery, would be very gratifying to every lover of progress in this country.

Respecting French Roses grafted on the briar, we have not so much fault to find with the root as the disposition to hedge around their stock with innumerable smaller ones, that draw the sap from the stock for their own sustenance, treating the foreigner on the top of the stock as an intruder. No doubt the disposition to sucker is promoted by the dryness of the main stock, but even the most vigorous will produce them, and if not frequently looked after and pruned out, they will deprive the stock of nourishment, and thus cause it to die.

Passing over the next three paragraphs, we come to a statement showing what Roses can be bought for here, and also what it will cost to import them from France.

This showing implies that we have a choice in the mode of procuring them. Suppose we were to make out a list embracing fifty varieties of the best Hybrid Perpetual Roses, either on their own roots or on Manetti stock - say, from 25 to 200 of each - where is the Florist in this country that will undertake to furnish them? I venture to assert, without fear of contradiction, that there is not a Rose-grower in this country that could furnish one half of them, and those he did furnish would probably not be the most desirable kinds, but those only that are the most easily propagated. And this is not the case because growers here are not alive to the importance of it. There are those who have been engaged in the business for years, who have not managed to grow, of the most popular kinds, more than they require to supply the demand in their immediate vicinity. The cause of this deficiency may be, that they prefer the ready cash produced by the sale of them, to having a good stock in the ground to get up a stock upon.

The statement respecting the cost of importing Roses must be based on Mr. Fuller's experience, or he would not have thus given it as a positive result. On the faith of this, may I be excused in seeking to be informed where Roses corresponding, or even approaching, to "first-class, large, two-year-old plants," can be purchased at the rate of seven cents apiece by the thousand? Why, Mr. Editor, many that I could mention, as well as your humble servant, have been silly enough to pay thirteen cents each for very small Roses on their own roots; and the information that will enable us to get Roses any way approaching to first-class, large two-year-old plants at a price so greatly reduced, would merit and shall receive our unqualified and heartfelt thanks.

I have before me the invoices, for years back, of Roses which I have imported, and by them I find that every plant, large and small, good, bad, and indifferent, including expenses, cost me, on an average, upwards of 17 cents each; and if the proportion of loss were to be added to each, (without including near two thousand on their own roots,imported by us last year, which were almost a total loss,) they would stand me in not less than 25 cents each; so that, instead of the difference being six cents in favor of importing, it is five cents each against importing, provided they could be purchased here, of the kinds desired, and at the price stated, besides the advantage of having better plants.

I am curious to know what is meant by "Angers being the Rochester of America." Is it that they produce a great many Roses, or a very few Roses? or are we to infer that Angers is the place where we can buy Roses so cheap, and that Rochester is similar to it in that respect? or does it not apply to Roses at all, but to something else yet unrevealed?

Not having seen Mr. Fuller's production till yesterday, and having been engaged revising proofs of a catalogue of now Bedding Plants until this morning, I have not had the time to give the subject as much consideration as I would wish. Awaiting answers to my queries, and with the assurance of their grateful reception, I leave the subject for the present.

Very respectfully, Andrew Bridgeeman.

[We have only time to say, in reference to this whole subject, that we shall be glad to have all the facts brought out. - Ed].