APPENDIX. 



CONTROVERSY 



ON THE 



"GOLD OF PLEASURE/' 



SIR, 



I observe that several of your correspondents mistake the plant 

 called Camelina sativa, or Gold of Pleasure ; and particularly Mr. 

 Kimberly, in a paper read before the Royal Agricultural Society, mis- 

 takes it for a kind of flax seed. This seed is too well known to pur- 

 chasers of Petersburg linseed as a noxious weed, which greatly 

 diminishes the weight and value of those samples in which it appears ; 

 and I much regret to see English farmers wasting their energies upon 

 anything so worthless. If any person doubt this assertion, let him make 

 inquiry amongst the linseed brokers at Mark Lane. 



Your obedient Servant, 



A LOOKER-ON. 



SIR, 



I am very much surprised at the reasoning of a correspondent 

 (signing himself " A Looker-on ") in attempting to denounce the value 

 of the Gold of Pleasure. He states that the linseed brokers of Mark 

 Lane consider it a " noxious weed." I can readily suppose that the 

 dealers in linseed would object to its appearance in the linseed, as ren- 

 dering the samples imperfect but this circumstance no more proves 

 the " worthlessness of the Gold of Pleasure," than the mixture of rye 

 in a sample of wheat (a frequent occurrence in this rye-growing dis- 

 trict) would prove rye worthless ; each is good in itself, rye inferior 

 to wheat in value : but a little more experience, I confidently predict, 

 will prove the Gold of Pleasure to be superior to flax, in the opinion 

 of the practical agriculturist. 



Yours, &c., 



DANIEL GWILT. 



Icklingham, December 14th, 1843. 



