The Winning Designs 



garden. Few people living in such a house would be 

 content to give such a large portion of the ground to 

 flowers at the expense of early and home-grown 

 vegetables and salads. 



The third-prize design for this site allots about 

 one-third of the total area to kitchen garden, and that 

 is probably what would happen in nine out of ten cases. 

 Beyond the concentration of the flower garden within 

 the greater length of the area at his disposal, and the 

 seclusion of the kitchen garden therefrom, it does not 

 depart far from the elementary lines provided by the 

 plan of the ground, and therefore the design may be 

 said to lack imagination. This design also received 

 notice in The Garden in the following words : 



" In the case of Site No. 2 the third prize was won 

 by Mr. Hugh Dixon. The design is simple and 

 straightforward, and its chief defect is that the treat- 

 ment of the lawn bears no very direct relation to the 

 house. In a garden of this size, moreover, it is very 

 desirable that the area to be treated should be sub- 

 divided somewhat by walls, trellises, or hedges, so that 

 che eye may not take in the whole scheme at one sweep. 

 There is no more valuable quality in garden designing 

 than a touch of surprise. The visitor should be led 

 from one point to another with a sense of expectancy, 

 but that feeling would not be aroused in the garden 

 which Mr. Dixon has designed. Criticism may also be 

 directed to the position of the pergola. This feature 

 has achieved an immense popularity in English gar- 

 dens, but its purpose and character are not always well 

 conceived. It should ideally be used as a connecting- 

 link between two or more definite points in house or 

 54 



