1S69. ] FLORICULTURAL MILLINERY. 99 



nearly equal weight, the "skill" in production being of far more importance 

 than the " taste and lightness of finger " in the arrangement or dressing. Yet 

 our experience, derived from observation, compels us to say that we think the 

 '•finish and symmetry," which are due in great measure to " taste and light- 

 ness of finger," often exert an undue influence. The eye is pleased by it, and 

 the judgment does not travel back so far as to inquire concerning the whence 

 and whither. 



In making the above comparison we are well aware that a cap or a bonnet 

 has to be made by hand — it cannot be grown, it is the work of an hour. On the 

 contrary, a plant or flower must be grown by a long and thoughtful process. 

 Produce, we say, by the best means of growth in your power the finest plants 

 and flowers you can, but having clone this, rest satisfied ; do not supplement the 

 efforts of a year's thought and labour, by the transient arts of millinery. 



We are free to admit that a plant must be tied up, and this is better done 

 neatly and with taste, than in a careless or bungling manner. Flowers, too, 

 should be so placed in their stands that they may be well seen, and the colours 

 should be so assorted and arranged that each may enhance rather than detract 

 from the beauty and effect of its neighbour. Thus far we concede — nay, consider 

 necessary and commendable. But the little tricks resorted to, to make a plant 

 or flower look other or better than it really is, find no sympathy in our nature. 

 The flattening of Pansies, by pressure, to meet the florist's canon that Pansies 

 should be flat ; the gumming and brushing of the petals of Pelargoniums ; the 

 artificial packing of the petals of Carnations ; the building-up of Dahlias ; the 

 pinning of Hyacinths — all these practices are, in our judgment, of questionable 

 taste, and of even more questionable honesty. By the use of them we may 

 approach more nearly to the florist's ideal, but we are reaching that ideal by 

 trickery and deception, rather than by horticultural skill and honest labour. 



Do not let us be misunderstood. "We are not here questioning the florist's 

 canons, most of which we admit to be founded on common sense and correct 

 taste ; it is the means often adopted to reach them, that we take up the pen to do 

 battle with. Is this " millinery " desirable ? We think not, and on other 

 grounds than those we have already advanced. It has always appeared to us 

 that the decline in the cultivation of Florists' flowers, or in what used to be 

 popularly so called, is due in some measure to this floricultural millinery. A 

 judge may be hoodwinked, a competitor may be jockeyed by it. But the public 

 — how does it affect them ? They view, admire, and purchase from these highly- 

 dressed flowers ; but in their hands, even under the most skilful cultivation, 

 the antecedents are never realized. Hence disappointment ensues, a suspicion 

 of deception is awakened, discouragement is the result, and the flowers them- 

 selves go out of fashion. 



We cannot but think, then, that in justice to the public, and in the interests 

 of exhibitors themselves, this is a state of things which it is most desirable to 



F 2 



