20 



TEE GARDENER'S MONTHLY 



[January, 



continent if there is room for only a single 

 horticultural magazine, and that a monthly one. 

 It is because we know that this view is deceptive 

 that we offer these remarks now. We have been 

 abundantly satisfied with our own success. No- 

 thing was more surprising to every one than the 

 immense circulation, for a purely horticultural 

 paper, achieved by the Gardener's Monthly before 

 the war. Though not equalling its original 

 strength, the course has been steadily onward 

 since the end of the great struggle. The intelli- 

 gent and the refined, to whom horticulture was 

 among the highest pleasures, were the chief 

 sufferers by the war ; and an entirely new class 

 came to the surface, with whom the taste for 

 horticulture was in a measure no more enjoyable 

 than an unknown tongue. Tliis has been, how- 

 ever, annually improving; and we have been 

 quite satisfied with our share in the good work. 

 AVe know the taste will continue to increase, and 

 we firmly believe there was no reason why any 

 of the horticultural magazines that have disap- 

 peared from the field should cease to be. 



Let us review for an instant our own course. 

 Hovey's magazine had the field in the writer's 

 younger days. In some departments of gardening 

 it did immense service, especially in fruit culture, 

 and Pomology generally. Tlie present high po- 

 sition of Pear growing in this country is mainly 

 due to its labors. The Horticulturist followed. 

 It chose a higher field. It was the embodiment 

 of the best intellectual culture in this beautiful 

 department of art. Its sphere was all its own. 

 There was still room for another in a different 

 line, and the Florist appeared. The young editor 

 was abundantly fitted for the work. It was a 

 brave and worthy effort; but what could be done 

 by one without a dollar in the world? With its 

 departure the field was still open. The highest 

 taste and pomological gardening were fully 

 ministered to; but there was nothing for the 

 thousands with slender purses and small yards and 

 grounds, and others who, in numberless ways,could 

 be benefitted by little hints of a practical caste. 

 Tliis was our time. Unfortunately our good neigh- 

 bor, " The Horticulturist," came down from the po- 

 sition it was so ably filling, working in a measure 

 in our own line. We are satisfied it lost a great ad- 

 vantage by the change. The Hearth and Home folks 

 saw the opportunity, and it was indeed a grand 

 one. Why they failed was perfectly clear to those 

 who understood the needs of horticulture in this 

 country. It might have been to-day the expo- 

 nent of the highest culture in our beautiful art — 



a leader equal to some of the best in the old 

 world — and a good paying investment instead of 

 the hea\-j' sinking fund it was to the projectors. 

 As for the American Gardener's Chronicle, the 

 American Journal of Horticulture, and Xhe American 

 Garden, the very fact of the adoption of these 

 names betrayed a want of originality, and invited 

 a comparison so unfortunate for themselves that 

 no one acquainted with bvisiness, in its relation 

 to horticultural literature, ever had the slightest 

 hojDe of their success. 



The Gardener's Monthly is left the sole survivor, 

 but indeed it is not because there is no room for 

 more. The work which so many have tried to 

 do is really better done by the numerous excel- 

 lent agricultural papers of which our country nmay 

 well be proud. There is one agricultural phase 

 of gardening which, while not ignoring icsthetics 

 wholly, yet looks mainly to profit ; and there is 

 one which places the mental and the beautiful 

 a long way before the monetary and the material, 

 though still bordering on the mere agricultural, 

 and this is the work which we have to do. It 

 commences just where their "s ends. No attempt to 

 build u]) a paper which is simply in comijetition 

 with the horticultural departments of our excel- 

 lent agricultural serials can possibly succeed. 

 They ought not. Tliere is no need of them. But 

 those who can comprehend what true horticul. 

 ture is, and what it needs witli us, need not fear 

 to find abundant patronage. 



Truly we had no ilesire to involve our elder 

 brother. Earnestly do we desire to see more of 

 our family keeping house for themselves, and it 

 is because we sincerely wish to have them do so, 

 and because we believe there is plenty of resison 

 why they should, that we have candidly given 

 our views on the situation. 



In the meantime, we bespeak sympathy for the 

 Gardene)-'s Monthly and Horticulturist in its lonely 

 condition. If we make any new friends by the 

 change we shall try to treat them well, while we 

 trust our old friends shall have no cause to feel 

 jealous of any attention we may give to the new- 

 comers in our household. 



We cannot close these remarks without thanking 

 our Weekly Agricultural, and other exchanges, for 

 their kindly notices of our new situation, for many 

 are coming to hand while we are writing this. 

 Our relations with them have always been kind 

 and cordial, and we do not know of one that we 

 may not call our friend. We are, indeed, co-op- 

 erative in the same task, and no one can appre- 

 ciate their good will as well as we. 



