112 



JOURNAL OF HOBTICULTUBE AND COTTAGE QABDENEB. 



I Febraai-j 10, 1876. 



" At this period of its existence the Society paid the modest 

 bnm ol twenty-five guiaeas a-year to the Liunteau Society for 

 a share of their accommodation in Gerrard Street, thus com- 

 mencing a friendship between the two bodies which has always 

 continued to subsist." 



From this we learn the composite form of the new Council 

 — a form which it has been too much the practice in later 

 times to ignore. In the original charter Jame3 Dickson, 

 Thomas Hoy, and William Smith are styled " gardeners." 

 Aiton (not Acton) was the gardener at Kew, Miller was the 

 son of old Philip MUler of the Botanic Garden at Chelsea, 

 Smith was gardener to Lord Liverpool, and Hoy was gardener 

 to the Duke of Northumberland at Syon. Now the effort is to 

 keep practical men off the Council, and we have no doubt that 

 this is one element in the failure of the Society's endeavours 

 to advance horticulture at the present time. 



Mr. Lindsay proceeds — 



" In 1811 Mr. Knight succeeded, on the death of the Earl of 

 Dartmouth, to the presidentship. He retained the post until 

 his own decease twenty-seven years later. A large portion of 

 the Society's more valuable work ^vas thus performed under his 

 guidance, and is now bound up with his memory. But in 1811 

 and foUowiug years the causes which impeded the early pro- 

 gress of the Society increased in force. Europe was the scene 

 of universal war, and England continued to be the principal 

 European power in arms against France. At such a time, and 

 amid the popular excitement in which all classes of society were 

 involved, little progress could be looked for in such an enter- 

 prise. Elections were few, but a careful Council kept the ex- 

 penditure within the income, and each year added a small sum 

 to the Society's balance. This amounted to i''2.58 in 1815, when 

 the return of peace restored the thoughts of the people to legiti- 

 mate channels. The labours of the Horticultural Society had 

 entitled it to be considered as one of the moat useful institu- 

 tions, and all things thus tended to the approach of prosperity. 

 In May, 1816, there were invested in the Three per Cents. 

 jEIOOO. Elections took place with greater frequency, and in 1818 

 the income was ±'1,791 and the expenditure X'1,719, while the 

 funded property was iil.lOO, and the value of the stock £3,000 

 iu excess of all debts. An experimental garden was nov? esta- 

 blished at Kensington and a nursery at Ealing. A house in 

 Regent Street was bought in 1820 for £4,200, and although the 

 subscriptions were raised from two to three guineas, new Fellows 

 poured in at the rate of two or three hundred a-year." 



A long run of prosperity followed, and the Society was 

 enabled to send out collectors whose names shed a lustre upon 

 it which even yet remains. Forbes, Parks, Don, Douglas, 

 Hartweg (whom Mr. Lindsay omits), and Fortune are names 

 that will live as long as horticulture exists. Mr. Lindsay is 

 in error in placing Mr. Reeves among the Society's collectors 

 and the predecessor of George Don. Mr. Reeves was a gentle- 

 man who held an appointment under the old East India Com- 

 pany and merely acted as the Society's correspondent ; but to 

 him the country ia indebted for some of the most popular and 

 ornamental of its garden plants. The Glycine sinensis and 

 the Chinese Primrose are alone sufficient to keep his memory 

 fresh in the minds of all lovers of the beautiful. To his son, 

 Mr. John Russell Beeves, who was lately a member of the 

 Council, the Society and the country are equally indebted 

 for many valuable introductions. But evil days began to 

 dawn, and, says Mr. Lindsay, " the Society now began to 

 experience reverses." 



" An officer absconded with a large sum of money, and a feel- 

 ing of distrust for the management re.sulted. A further cause 

 of dissatisfaction was the abandonment of an annual dinner and 

 the substitution of public breakfasts, thus inviting fashionable 

 support rather than attempting to maintain and stimulate that 

 esprit de corps which is so essential to all public bodies. The 

 breakfasts were abandoned iu 1831, and were succeeded on the 

 suggestion of Dr. Lindley — the Assistant Secretary and well- 

 known botanist — by garden exhibitions. These became exceed- 

 ingly popular, and retained public favour for a long period of 

 time. Nevertheless the financial position was most critical. 

 A committee of inquiry was appointed in 1830, which reported 

 that the debts amounted to £20,243 and that the value of the 

 property was but i'lfi,500. The cost of the garden works had 

 exceeded the sum subscribed for them by ±29,000. The manage- 

 ment was condemned, and in consequence Mr. Sabine resigned 

 tho secretaryship, to be succeeded by Mr. Bentham. A deter- 

 mined attempt was made to retrieve the Society's position, but 

 it was considered of paramount importance to maintain the scien- 

 tific work. Between 1830 and 18.55, in addition to the money 

 allotted to the payment of debt, ill,000 was spent on the garden, 

 and X'V.OOO on foreign importations. 



" Notwithstanding the enthusiasm which all these labours and 



successes must have stimulated, the Society was much ham- 

 pered as aU such bodies are by the non-payment of subscrip- 

 tions. No less a sum than i'12,879 had to be abandoned as irre- 

 coverable between 1824 and 1855. Had it not been for this 

 unhandsome conduct, it may be doubted whether any serions 

 debt would ever have been incurred. At no time since 1828 had 

 the liabilities exceeded ±14,331, and at the period of which we 

 are speaking the total debt had been reduced to ±9,986." 



The exhibitions now began to fail through competition of 

 rival societies nearer town; the house in Regent Street and 

 the valuable library were sold to pay liabilities, and — 



"an office was then acquired in St. Martin's Place, Trafalgar 

 Square, at a rental of ±80 a-year. The effect of these changes 

 was not merely to reduce the annual expenditure, but to bring 

 down tho liabilities to ±'4,694, as against a floating property 

 valued in 1857 at ±14,674." 



The Society was, therefore, not in the straits which some 

 are so fond of representing it to have been. A debt of £4,694 

 as compared with the £55,000 it now owes is but a small 

 affair, and we commend this to the attention of gentlemen 

 who at the annual meetings find great delight in telling the 

 Fellows of the abject state of the Society when the Royal 

 Commissioners so benevolently took it by the hand. 



Since that period the career of the Society has been one of 

 signal failure, notwithstanding every attempt to place it on a 

 prosperous basis. How has this arisen '? 'The answer is not 

 far to seek. It is simply because a grand scheme to supply 

 entertainment to the residents of a fashionable suburb of 

 London is incompatible with the placid pursuits of horticul- 

 ture. To maintain an establishment permanently, such as 

 that which it has been sought to set up at South Kensington, 

 subject to the influence of the caprice of fashion, is an im- 

 poBsibnity. It must have its vicissitudes, as all such places 

 have, and its fortunes must follow those of every place where 

 the cost of their construction has been so enormous that no 

 reasonable amount of income can possibly make them financially 

 successful. 



The Society is now passing through a crisis, whether it is for 

 the better or the worse only time can tell ; but of this we are 

 perfectly certain, that so long as this state of things continues 

 it is a misnomer to call it a Horticultural Society, and a fallacy 

 to suppose that any good can arise to horticulture by main- 

 taining it in its present deplorable condition. ' 



■We commend Mr. Lindsay's paper to the carefal attention 

 of all who are interested in the Society's welfare. 



OUB BOEDER FLOWEES— MONKEY 

 FLOWEE. 



Musk is a universal favourite. It is a plant that will exist 

 almost under any cu'cumstances, provided it can have light, 

 air, and moisture. Especially among our humble friends Musk 

 is enjoyed, and to hear what enjoyment their little floral pets 

 afford them is a great satisfaction, and who would desire their 

 pleasure to be less'/ Musk, in addition to its perfume, is an 

 obliging subject — at home alike in garret, cell, or palace. It 

 flourishes in sunshine and shade, and is not over-particular 

 as to soil. We will now leave Mimulus moschatus, and glance 

 at some others of the family, which embrace colours that no 

 other flowers can approach. 



Tho Mimulus cardinalis section require a good rich soil to 

 develope themselves. They are moisture-loving plants, yet 

 should be provided with efficient drainage, and then water can- 

 not be too freely given them. They may be increased by seed 

 and division at any time. M. cardinalis was at one time 

 looked upon with favour as a pot plant. M. atrosanguineus 

 is a grand acquisition to our border flowers, and is a useful 

 plant when well-grown for indoor decoration. It is well 

 adapted for exhibition purposes as an herbaceous plant, and 

 continues in bloom a very long time. M. cupreus should be in 

 every garden. It is of very dwarf habit, producing its flowers 

 in great abundance ; though the individual blooms are short- 

 lived the plant gives a continuous sucoeseion of flowers for a 

 long time. 



M. Moodii, M. maculosu.i, M. Youngii, M. tigrioides, to say 

 nothing of M. inimitabilis flore-pleno,are all very desirable for 

 winter and spring decoration indoors, and for borders in 

 summer. By liberal treatment the plants may be grown to a 

 large size, and when coming into bloom they should be placed 

 in pans of water an inch deep. They are all the better for 

 having weak liquid manure occasionally, for if they are not 



