Noveirbei- 3, 1863. ] 



JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



34S 



WEEKLY CALENDAR- 



NOVEMBER 3-9, ]8 



Lilac leafleRs. 



Laburnum leafless. 



Gimpowder Flo(, 1C0.5. 



C imerarius born, 1534. Eot. 



Cherry leafless. 



23 SOKDAY AFTER TkINITT. 



Prince of Wales Eors, 1841. 



Average Temperature i "^a" t '° 

 near Loiidon. 36 years. 



Day. 

 .53.2 

 51. S 

 63.1 

 63.1 

 52.6 

 51.1 

 6D.C 



Kight. 

 S6.S 

 3G.6 

 SR.4 

 3S.4 

 37.5 

 34.8 

 34.7 



Mean. 

 44.8 

 44.0 

 45.7 

 45.8 

 46.0 

 43.0 

 42.7 



Davs. 

 18 

 19 

 17 

 !S 

 17 

 16 

 14 



Sun 

 Rises. 



m. h. 

 58af 6 



VII. 



Sun 

 Sets. 



h, 

 29af4 



.Moon 

 Rises. 



m. h. 

 16 11 

 morn. 



Moon 

 Sets. 



m „-.. Clock 

 «"°M after 

 ^S^- , Sun. 



( 



23 

 24 

 25 

 26 

 27 

 28 



m. s. 



* 16 18 



16 18 



16 16 



Day of 

 Year. 



16 14 

 16 11 



16 



1 16 



307 

 3CS 

 309 

 310 

 311 

 31^ 

 31.3 



From observations taken near London during the last thirtv-six years, tbe average day temperatnre of the week is 62.1°, and its nicht 

 temperature Se.l". The. greatest heat was 63^ on the 5th and 6th, 1834 ; and the lowest cold, 18°, on the 9th, 184S. The greatest fall 

 of rain was 1.02 inch. 



GAEDENEES' BENEFIT SOCIETY. 



J LLOW me to tliank the Editors for 

 the interest taken, and the labour 

 bestowed, in perfecting some part 

 of the scheme which I so san- 

 guinely propounded in the spring 

 of the year. Permit mo also to 

 congratulate my brother gar- 

 deners on the fact, that the 

 Editors were placed in a position 

 to announce " that steps were 

 taken to form the Society." I 

 would also thank those that haTe already 

 given their support to the measure, more 

 especially Mr. F. Chitty, for it was he 

 only that had any critical remarks to 

 oifer upon it. Whilst doing so I cannot forbear noticing 

 the reserve with which the members of the profession 

 have treated the question, nor can I help expressing 

 my astonishment at the little interest we gardeners take 

 in all measures proposed or estabhshed to further our 

 advancement. We seem as if wo had no Saxon blood 

 within us, nor any of that brotherly sentiment which 

 strives to mitigate those infii'mities and calamities that 

 befall humanity in one shape or other. Other members 

 of special occupations have had their unions, and other 

 working men (I would like gardeners to feel that they are 

 dependant on theii' own endeavours), have been banded 

 together as one man to mitigate and relieve each other's 

 infirmities, and to bear each other's burdens. This is, 

 indeed, charity, a brotherly feeling, and something more. 

 They have periodical meetings, when all meet together, 

 congratulating each other on their general well-being, or 

 sympathising with their sick brethren, to whom they 

 administer relief according to their regulations. What 

 a gap is there between us and them ! We have long 

 had a society for our disabled men and disconsolate 

 widows, but what support have we given it ? Some have 

 given a mite ; others, and by far the greater number, 

 could not spare a yearly contribution of £1 to provide 

 against those infirmities that disable them or their bre- 

 thren. They woidd do nothing to benefit others, nor 

 have anything in store for themselves against the day 

 when it is needed, nor feel the pleasure of giving others 

 what they are blessed in not neecbng. 



The gi-eatest drawback, however, to gardeners sub- 

 scribing to the Gardeners' Benevolent Society, is the cir- 

 siimstance of non-subscribers beingplaced on the pension 

 list in preference to the subscribers to its funds. That 

 this admirable institution has done much good m.ust be 

 patent to all, and that it is worthy of every gardener's 

 support few will deny ; but that it contains anything in 

 the way of gardeners supporting their own sick, or even 

 the majority of the " worn-out," is not presumed : there- 

 fore, the Society newly proposed is not framed out of 

 antagonism to it, but to supply a want it docs not deal 

 with_. I think it prudent to state this, for after the new 

 Society was proposed, it was said in my hearing, that the 

 No. 136.— Vol. v., New Series. 



new one was got up in opposition to the " Gardeners'" 

 Eoyal Benevolent Society." Since that the scheme 1 pro- 

 posed has been framed on, what I may term, an amended 

 and morepopular basis. Instead of bein^ an improvement, 

 annuity, and benefit society, it is to be a benefit orfticncEIy 

 society only ; and as in matters of this kind when a bill 

 is brought in by a private member, and the government 

 offer a' counter proposition, or take the question into 

 their hands, the member gives up aU care of it. So with 

 the question now before us. When the Editors took the 

 matter in hand, I fell into my private position. I was 

 glad to do tliis, for it must be evident to aU that the 

 matter could not have fallen into better hands. 



Although thankful for the small slice of the reform, 

 they (the Editors) think we are at present entitled to, I 

 am not the less convinced that the whole scheme as pro- • 

 pounded by me wiU ultimately be carried out, nor the 

 less certain that what I then said will hereafter be said' 

 with the unanimous voice of the gardening community. 

 Men have been more sanguine than I am over many 

 greater things, and I could name in proof at least a thou- 

 sand. 



It would appear pretty certain, from what I learn, that 

 we are to have a Friendly Society : therefore, the foHow- 

 ing information relating to such societies may not be un- 

 interesting to the general reader, whilst acting as a sort 

 of preliminaiy to the discussion of the proposed Society. 



Daniel Defoe, author of "Eobinson Crusoe," in & 

 " Book of Projects," published in 16'JG, was tbe first to 

 propound the scheme which has resulted in the formatioB- 

 of friendly societies. Some writers, however, were of 

 the opinion that the ancient guilds of our Sason and 

 jSTonnan ancestors were identical with our friendly so- 

 cieties. This, nevertheless, could not be the case, for it 

 was only after the extinction of serfdom that working- 

 men became dependant upon their own eflorts. There 

 certainly was no such society in Defoe's time, for in Ms 

 '■ Book of Projects ; or things desirable to be done," was 

 a scheme for tbe formation of societies, the contributions 

 from the members of which would provide for relief in 

 sickness and old age, and not only for the members but 

 their widows and orphans. He stated that " if such 

 societies were formed, it would do away with pauperism,- 

 shut up poor-houses, and close the jails." 



Nine years after, or in 1705, the first society was formed. 

 Two years prior to this, or in 1703, the first bill was in- 

 troduced into the House of Commons. It passed the 

 Commons, but was thrown out in the House of Lord's. 

 Another bUl was introduced afterwards : and the re-' 

 nowned Mr. Pitt, with his customary forethought, cOuJd ; 

 so far see the benefits likely to accrue to the country by 

 the formation of friendly societies, that he gave his 

 support to a bill brought in by Mr. George Eose. The 

 bdl passed both Houses of Parliament, and became law 

 in 1793. 



After the passing of the bUl, friendly societies became 



general ; but owing to the careless manner in which the 



early societies were conducted, and there being no sound 



data to found them upon, some of them collapsed at th« ■ 



No. 788.— Vol. XXX., Old Series. . . 



