THE GARDENERS' CHRONICLE OF AMERICA. 



143 



Editor Gardeneks' Cuuonki.e: 



Will you allow me the usu ol a poiliou uf your space to offer 

 a few words of comment upon some of the statements of ^Mr. 

 Prederick Liston in your last issue V 



It appears to ine that Mr. Listoii must have been singularh 

 unfortunate in his experiences, but if he luis had to live in au 

 unsanitary damp old shack, infested with vermin, etc., etc., him- 

 self that does not seem to be a sniliiieut reason for sayiu<; that 

 these and other conditions he nu'iitious "are prevalent in this 

 country."' Certainly J have yet to learn that "a larjie number of 

 t'mploycrs merely monkey with competent men" because a really 

 competent man would not take a position without kuowini; some- 

 thinjf about it Ijeforehand. 



The state ol things mentioned by ^Mr. Liston were never paral- 

 leled in tlie South before the Civil War. and I must admit tliat 

 I find it difficult to believe any estate owner would ask a colored, 

 much less a wliite. man to live under such. 



ily experience in tliis country has been fairly wide. l)oth in 

 connection with employers for whom I have worked and hundreds 

 of others in all ]iarts of the country who have come under my 

 observation, and I have never known one case where the gardener 

 did not have at least comfortable quarters, some, of course, witli 

 more modern improvements than others. 



If the conditions enumerated by your correspondent exist any- 

 where in this country then it is entirely tlie fault of those Avho 

 •work under them. Any nurn with an ounce of work or spunk in 

 him would do something else rather than live like that. There 

 are plenty of jobs going on farms where man can get good 

 quarters, good food and pay wliich is worth having in addition. 

 Failing better a man could do worse. 



As regards conditions in (Jreat Britain, it is true that a good 

 deal of land has gone out of cultivation (as it has in the Eastern 

 States here), but not for the reasons stated. It has been caused 

 more by the difficulty in getting labor than anything else, and 

 there has been no ■'inllux of farm hands to invade the ranks of 

 gardeners." The employment market as a whole is not more 

 congested than here, ami there are not half the number of un- 

 employed in London as there are in Xew York. The fact is that 

 a numljcr of men come to tliis country with the idea that it is 

 an El Dorado, and that it is easy to get a soft job with good 

 pay and little work: when they find tliemselves mistaken they 

 blame the country instead of themselves. The dift'erence in pay 

 between the two countries is only about enough to compensate 

 for the difi'erence in the cost of living. The highest paid head 

 gardeners in England receive a larger amount than do the high- 

 est paid ones here, and the former frequently supplement their 

 incomes by the premiums they receive from yoiuig man who wish 

 to learn their profession under them. 



Up to a recent date any man from the old country calling 

 himself a gardener, wlio had some smattering of the profession. 

 could easily get a job here who would not be looked at at home, 

 as there the standard of competency is verj' much higher than 

 here because employers there are mostly experts themselves, and 

 this latter fact is another reason which would prevent any influx 

 of cheap farm labor having any effect upon the real gardeners' 



pay- 



The statement that a ganU'inu's wife's services as cook, etc., 

 are very often included in a .'(i.'iO salary appears on tlie face of it 

 to be inc'omplete. tor in that case board for both as well as ac- 

 commodation would necessarily be included, and the salary would 

 in that case be nearly all profit. 



The political and plutocratic oppression mentioned as existing 

 in England must be merely a figment of Mr. Listou's imagina- 

 tion because they do not e.xist there. 



T must not trespass further upon your space, and will con- 

 clude by expressing the hope that 5Ir. Liston has by tliis time 

 obtained a jinsition uiiilcr iiuue favorable conditions and can 

 therefore take a more n|dinii~tir \icw of the situation. 



ARTHUR SJIITIL 



Editor (i.VRDENEHS" f 'llIiONIrLE : 



Having read the articles on pages 86 and 87. July issue of 

 The (i.vRiiENERS" Chroxiile. headed "Gardeners' Grievances." by 

 Frederick Listor. there is one point in the second letter that T 

 have had in my mind some time past. 



In my opinion, it would be a benefit to the gardener to have 

 an advertising column for positions wanted. Not exactly free, but 

 at a minimum rate to cover expenses of same. I think it would 

 be well circulated and give the gardeners more chance of securing 

 suitable positions. 



Hoping you will give tlii~ your consideration. HROXXITE. 



From "Horticulture." 

 In reading the essay on "The Reason for Cheap Gardeners." 

 written by an assistant, one can't help but realize that the author 

 seems to think that even after fifteen years' experience an assist- 

 ant isn't necessarily competent. Would that man ever be com- 



petent? We realize that in all branches of work there are men 

 who never prove themselves a credit to their avocation. Where 

 is the man who has spent a lifetime at gardening that can sit 

 back and say— 1 know it all'? There is the moiioloiiy that dulls 

 and deadens, and to start something is the only relief. 



Surely after serving a fifteen years' apprenticesliip an assistant 

 must be worthy enough to strike out for himself. The only w^ay 

 to lest the matter is to make a beginning; to start. An extract 

 from Stevenson that may fire our worthy friend with a little 

 more ambition is this: "For God's sake give me the young man 

 with brains enough to make a fool of himself." He'wanted to 

 see ill the world young men with brains enough to start sonu'- 

 thiiig. to make an essay of their powers. Most of our great 

 men ha\c made false starts and have been derided for their 

 pains, but in every case they have had sense enough to see 

 their mistakes and profit by them. Rather than blame the as- 

 sistants for the existing conditions why not look the matter 

 straight in the face and lay the blame in its proper quarters — 

 namely, your competent gardeners and your so-called horticul- 

 tnial societies? 



We hear men shout, "have the interest of your profession 

 at heart." They seem to lose sight of the fact that for an em- 

 ployer to have the interest of anything at heart, he must ;i1mi 

 have the interest of his employees somewhere in that neighbor- 

 hood. Who but your discredited assistant is to carry on the 

 work of your comi)etent gardeners of the present day after they 

 have added their little page to history? For some" of our so- 

 called horticultural societies a more fitting name would be a 

 monthly smoker. On visiting a few of them the fact is forced 

 upon one tliat they arc little more than a mere meeting place 

 for the cxcliange of the latest stories, and the same nre not 

 always pertaining to gardening. On most occasions there are a 

 few exliiliits. Mr. So-and-Sc is au;wded a culture certificate for 

 such a plant. On being asked to tell the members what he has 

 done to raise the plant to that stage of perfection, he will give 

 you a heart-breaker like this: "Oh, I don't know that I have given 

 it any special treatment, watered when it needed it. gave it a bit 

 of fertilizer now and again, etc." A lot of encouragement to the 

 assistant who lias been looking after that plant with all tlie 

 care and attention he possessed, very often ifi his own time, with 

 the hope of getting something worth looking at. If your present 

 day gardeners have gained success in this slip-shod manner what 

 is to hinder the assistant from accomplishing the same ends? 

 Arnold Bennett spoke wisely when he said "You cannot gain any- 

 thing by merely thinking about it, for after the necessary period 

 of considi>r;ition. of iiuaibation. as it were, a start must lie made." 



ANOTHER ASS I ST.\ XT. 



From "IIorti<^ultuie." 



Summed up, the contention of "Another .Assistant," in your 

 issue of ,1'uly IS. is that after fifteen years' experience a gar- 

 dener should be qualified to assume the full responsibilities of 

 his |irofession. Few will disagree w-ith him on that j)oint, and I 

 believe tliat "'An Assistant" who wrote in the |n-evious issue 

 will concur that if a man has had the opportunity of fifteen 

 years of thorough training and is then incompetent, his compet- 

 ency ys a gardener is never likely to prove of much. I infer 

 from "An Assistant's" remarks that he had in mind a class of 

 so-called assistants which exists within the profession, just as 

 does the class of so-called gardeners, and that his grievance is 

 directed against this class and not towards assistants that pos- 

 sess the ability that is manifested by tlie contributors in the 

 arguments they present. 



Assistants are no more to blame for the existing unfavorable 

 condition than these gardeners who profess to be competent but 

 who arc no more so than the assistants who menace the pro- 

 fession by seeking to assume tlie charge of an establishment with 

 no more knowledge of gardening than what was acquired throush 

 two or three years' service in greenhouses, and who will bid for 

 a head gardener's position at a salary so low that no able gar- 

 dener c;iii compete; and whose action invariably results in an- 

 other si'ore against the profession by some inconsiderate estate 

 owner wlio knows so little about horticulture himself that he 

 cannot distinguish between a competent and an incompetent gar- 

 dener when it comes to selecting one. 



This is the age of young men. and opportunity awaits the as- 

 sistants wlio are thoroughly proficient in their profession, which 

 must include executive ability as well as ability to produce; and 

 such young men should not permit themselves to be held in the 

 background, for if they do how is the good in them to be un- 

 covered? We have an illusfratiini right at hand in your two cor- 

 respondents. Their articles have elicited favorable comment, but 

 they conceal their identiay behind nom-de-plnmes. Able Tnen 

 are continuously sought, and there is no teling what their signa- 

 tures, disclosing the authors, might have brought to them. 



What ''Another Assistant" states reg.arding the horticultural 

 societies is unfortunately true to a considerable extent: but there 

 is a growing tendency to make the meetings of local societies 



