215 



to expose the substitution of the Gold of Pleasure for flax, till 

 called upon by many influential parties who were desirous of 

 ascertaining whether the glowing accounts of the " new flax- 

 seed" might be implicitly relied upon. Some, indeed, pre- 

 vious to their application to me, hastened to purchase the seed 

 of a plant that, "ere long, was to take that place in the agri- 

 cultural world, to which by its high merits it was so justly en- 

 titled ;" and that, " when the price of corn was very low and 

 cheerless, would never fail to produce gold with pleasure and 

 abundance ;" a plant, they were further told, that " was pro- 

 videntially sent to assist the farmer in a lucky moment." 



My first letter on * the Gold of Pleasure versus Linseed ' 

 appeared in the Farmers Journal of the 26th Dec. 1843, in 

 which I briefly recounted my experience as a grower of the 

 Camelina sativa, and my conviction of its utter worthlessness 

 in comparison to the inestimable flax-plant. I also subjoined 

 the following passage from Sir James Smith's English Flora, 

 Vol. iii., page 164 : — "The ridiculous pompous English name 

 seems a satire on the articles of which it is composed, as yielding 

 nothing but disappointment." To the Editor I observed, and 

 now repeat, that " It was far from my object unnecessarily to 

 cxix)se individuals to ridicule, because, intermixed with artful 

 and designing men were many who, from want of experience 

 of those things which they advocate, unintentionally lead the 

 anxious inquirer into the adoption of fruitless schemes. To 

 this number, your correspondent, Mr. Gwilt, appears to belong ; 

 for in his letter of the i 4th inst. he observes, ' a little more 

 experience, I confidently predict, will prove the Gold of Plea- 

 sure to be superior to flax, in the opinion of the practical agricul- 

 turist." So far, therefore, from bringing any accusation against 

 Mr. Gwilt, I exonerated him from all intentional participation in 

 the fraud that was being practised of palming upon the pub- 

 lic, as superior to flax, a noxious weed, the stalks of which were 

 as destitute of fibre as the straw of wheat or of peas. I say 

 fraud, because the original promoters, according to their own 

 account of 40 to 50 bushels of seed per acre, and to the charge 

 of four shillings per pound, aimed at the exorbitant profit of 

 560/. per acre. It is true, the price was afterwards reduced to 

 eighteen pence per pound — the fibrous properties of the plant 



