December 11, 1373. ] 



JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



461 



one, far surpasses those effects. The graceful ontlines of 

 growth, loaded with crimson bead-like berries, is the standard 

 of perfection for a weeping tree. 



Now if more is wanted to make it an everybody's shrub, 

 and to be planted by thousands, it is in the easy and quick 

 way in which it can be increased by seed, which grows as freely 

 as Ash seed. I find that if large strong plants are planted-out 

 rabbits seem to meddle with it but little ; but of course, if 

 planted where there is little else for them to eat, it, hke almost 

 all other shrubs, will be attacked. — John Taylor, Maesgicynnc. 



PASSIFLOKA QUADRANGULAEIS. 

 This is one of the most beautiful climbers I have ever seen, 

 and a fit companion for Thunbergia Hamsii, to which re- 

 ference has been made lately in your Journal. Like it the 

 PassiUora requires to be planted-out, and to be allowed to 

 groA- freely; by frequently stopping it the plant may be had 

 in bloom throughout the autumn months. It requires a warm 

 house, say 60' by day and 50° by night. I have a plant treated 

 in this way with hundreds of flowers just about to open, and 

 yet it has been dowering for the last two months, and I should 

 say will continue to flower another month. I planted it at 

 the back of a lean-to house, and allowed it to run over the 

 roof on wires a foot from the glass, where it answers the pur- 

 pose of shading the more tender plants during the summer. 

 As the leaves are of a beautiful green they may be used for 

 many purposes in winter, especially for garnishing the dessert, 

 and like Thunbergia Harrisii, which I have in the same house, 

 it is very free from insects. I keep it well syringed in summer. 

 It is easily propagated by cuttings. — 0. Obpet. 



feOTAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



Cam anyone inform the Fellows of the Royal Horticultural 

 Society what its true position is ? A few days since I received 

 the circular signed by Sir D. Cooper and others, by which it 

 appears the Society is on its last legs, and going the wrong way 

 as fast as possible. I now receive a notice from the present 

 Council, stating in effect that all the statements contained in 

 the former circular are false, and that the Society is now in a 

 much better state both financially and otherwise than it was 

 in February last. This statement of the CouucU agrees 

 exactly with the position of the Society so clearly set forth by 

 Sir -Mfred Slade and others during the stormy meetings held 

 at the beginning of this year. It seems unless something 

 can be done to lay before the Fellows, in a manner the truth 

 of which cannot be disputed, the real state of the Society, 

 that all we can look for is a repetition of the same stormy 

 meetings which were a disgrace to any body of gentlemen, 

 and the ultimate collapse of the Society. Could not some 

 three or four entirely disinterested persons be found who 

 would thoroughly go into the question, and tell us plainly 

 whether the statement set forth by Sir Daniel Cooper and 

 others, or that of the present Council, is the truth? Both 

 cannot be, and the Fellows have a right to have the truth. 



If the statement of the Council is right, then the Society is 

 now in a much more flourishing condition than it was in Feb- 

 ruary last, and in that case had we not better go on with our 

 present Council another year, and trust that they will be able 

 to pull us through the muddles bequeathed them, and believe 

 all will turn out for the best? It is true the Council is rather 

 strong in the Kensingtonian element, but they are gentlemen 

 who would be above injuring the Society for their own ad- 

 vantage ; and we must remember that a large proportion of 

 our funds come from those living in the neighbourhood of the 

 gardens, and that therefore something is due to them. — 

 Philip Cbowuei, F.R.H.S., Wnddon Hoxise, Croydon. 



I WILL not presume on your time and patience to turn back 

 a quarter of a century or so of pages of "our Journal" to 

 find where I expressed myself in regard to horticulture and 

 the general public in much about the same spirit as that 

 which now animates our worthy counsellor, G. F. Wilson, Esq., 

 in regard to the pnbhc and South Kensington Garden. Why 

 the garden has drifted over for the especial delectation of 

 surrounding cUenthle and the mere dilettante of horticnlturc, 

 80 to speak, I have for a long time been wanting to know ; 

 but I do know that I helped to purcliase the ground with my 

 " sbillingB," and in my especial walk I have done my best, with- 

 out fear or favour, to maintain horticulture at South Kensing- 

 ton simply for the benefit of all. It is the million we must 



encourage. So if a clique wants to keep the South Kensing- 

 ton Garden to themselves, let them strU;e the bargain with 

 H.M. Commissioners, an^l let the Royal Horticultural Society 

 come to an amicable arrangement, if possible, with Her 

 Majesty's Commissioners to hold their shows and meetings 

 there, but to return in name and deed to its natural home at 

 Chiswick, or anywhere in fact, rather than be obliged to wear 

 the trammels, or be subject to the secondary position now 

 awai-ded. I have a " guinea Fellow subscription " ready 

 any minute for the preservation of the Royal Horticultui-rd 

 Society, and more if need be, to insure its future maintenance 

 and to reheve us from our present obligations. I also hope, 

 if I am allowed the opportunity, to be worth at least ten 

 guineas annually, though indirectly, to the Society. Depend 

 upon it, horticulture can take care of itself, and the sooner 

 the members and Fellows, good and true, in the acceptation 

 of the term, render themselves free and independent for the 

 sake of horticulture the better. — Kobebt Fenn, licctory, 

 Woodstock, 



At South Kensington, on the 3rd, the appeal to the Fellows 

 was much discussed. On the moruiug that the Council's 

 answer came out I was at a Lily sale. A shrewd countryman 

 of mine said, "Have you seen the answer? It hits you hard." 

 I said, " It seems to me a clever piece of special pleading." 

 He assented, and we went back to the Lilies. At the Wednes- 

 day Show I was attacked by a Fellow. My answer to him 

 was, " You know that the new Council was not elected by a 

 fair representation of the Society, but by a hard whip-up of 

 the resident Fellows, and of those they influenced, who wanted 

 to keep the garden private. You know that the state of hor- 

 ticulture in connection with the Society is exciting great dis- 

 satisfaction ; therefore if the head and taU of the answer are 

 unsound, you may judge of the body." Dr. Denny repudiates 

 the appeal. I thought he read it through before signing ; he 

 most certainly signed it with the utmost willingness ; he ap- 

 pears to have changed his mind. Mr. Turner I was most 

 sorry for when I heard him regret having signed, as I think he 

 did so much on the behef of those who signed before. I did 

 not draw up the appeal. I need hardly say I believed its facts, 

 or I would not have signed. I believe them stUl, though the 

 Chancery suit may now be less near than I then expected. 



Not all the legal talent in the CouncU, and I admit it to be 

 great, can explain away the great fact that, whUe the South 

 Kensington Garden land, bought out of the surplus of the 

 1851 Exhibition, mainly out of the people's shillings, worth, 

 at a low computation, £12,000 a-year, pays rent (when it does 

 pay it) only £2,400 a-year, the rest of the consideration is 

 supposed to be made-up by the garden serving the great public 

 object of promoting horticultural science. Put the value of 

 this last to the proof. At this moment, if I were to suggest 

 to my brother horticulturists who are engaged in the task of 

 reconstituting the Society — or, if fate so wills, of making a 

 new one in preparation fur the old one falling, as it must 

 assuredly fall before long, into our hands — if I were to suggest 

 that we should pay Her Majesty's Commissioners £500 a-year 

 for the privilege of holding our committee meetings and shows 

 at South Kensington — in fact, for its use for horticultural ob- 

 jects — the idea would be scouted, and I should be told that they 

 must pay us for showing.; they must at least give some prizes, 

 and charge us nothing. Therefore it surely follows that land 

 worth at least £12,000 a-year, for which a rent of £2,400 

 a-year is paid, and that only once in five years, is being mainly 

 used by a rich neighbourhood, which can afford to pay its value, 

 as recreation ground for their families ; is not this too groat an 

 abuse to be long tolerated in these days ? I could hardly help 

 laughing when told of the Kensingtonian Council having been 

 most polite to horticulturists. I thought when people had 

 used the cat's paw to gain their object, pussy was likely to be 

 treated most affectionately as long as there was a chance of 

 the paw being wanted again. Personally (with one exception), 

 I have no reason to find fault with the present Council (if it 

 be a Council), except in one particular. I was not on the 

 Council which they caused to resigu, having gone out under 

 the bye-law for extreme length of service, or, considering the 

 number and length of the later Council and Council-committee 

 meeting, I might say servitude, before the I'mcute came. The 

 fault I have to find is that, as I am told, the surplus money 

 yielded by the country shows has been applied to the general 

 purposes of the Society. I was on the Council when the 

 country shows were first considered ; they were new, and there 

 was risk. It was suggested by tha proper authority that, as 



