March 28, 186S. ] 



JOUENAL OP HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



245 



and so the /all came. Chiswick at this moment ouffht to 

 be the one fashionable flower show near London ; its dis- 

 tance is an advantage, for whereas the Regent's Park Gar- 

 dens would take off the groat crowd of London sight-seers, 

 Chiswick, with the price of tickets wisely arranged, ought to 

 be the resort of the t'lite of society, not probably to see the 

 exhibitions, but to meet the pure cnme de Ja cr<'ine, and I 

 have not the least doubt but that the "Chiswick Shows" 

 might have been kept up to the present day if an active and 

 wise Council had taken proper measures ; but as far as I 

 remember there was some adverse influence hanging over 

 the Society for many years. The Council seemed inert, 

 active men were kept out, and those that by some mistake 

 were admitted were always outvoted ; and so the Society 

 kept "mooning" along till debt overwhelmed it, then came 

 that ever-to-be-lamented sale of the library, and ruin, so 

 far as the objects of the " Horticultural Society of London " 

 extended. AH that Mr. Bateraan states about the decline 

 of the exhibitions at Chiswick, and their being left " in con- 

 sequence of rivalry" to the genuine votaries of horticulture, 

 too few to " make them pay," is a mistake. 



With regard to "another respect in which the garden was 

 eminently useful — as an arboretum." I can only state from 

 my knowledge of hardy trees and shrubs, which with, perhaps, 

 some little presumption, I am inclined to place nearly on a 

 level with that of Mr. Bateman, that if I were a nurseryman 

 and wiched for a site near London, on which to cultivate 

 Coniferte, Rhododendrons, shrubs of the order of Ericaceae 

 with a little assistance, and all the evergreen shrubs and 

 trees and fruit trees known in our gardens, I shordd select 

 Chiswick. The fertility of the soil is remarkable, and the 

 slight assistance it requires to make hardy trees and shrubs 

 flourish, has been to me for these thirty or forty years past 

 a marvel. We have only to look at the coniferous trees in Mr. 

 Glendinning's nursery, at Chiswick, in the immediate neigh- 

 bourhood of the Gardens, to see at once how mistaken Mr. 

 Bateman has been in his consideration of the present state 

 of the Chiswick Garden. It is true that some few of the 

 trees suffered severely in 1860, from which they have Bcaccely 

 recovered ; but no iniury to the trees from the smoke of 

 London can be discovered. With regard to the rivalry of 

 Kew, that is par excellence, the people's garden ; but Chis- 

 wick should be our arboretum, full of arboricultural beauty, 

 and, above all, quiet, owing to its visitors being select and 

 lovers of the science. As to the soil which Mr. Bateman 

 abuses, I have always found the loam, spreading over the 

 thirty acres (not twenty), reckoned deep and fertile. Where 

 can be found a finer border of Peach trees, or trees managed 

 more perfectly ? Where do Pear trees flourish better ? And 

 where do kitchen garden crops succeed better? All these 

 crops show plainly that the soil is not a "poor gravelly soil." 



In my opinion, in which I am not solitary, it is not 

 " childish to talk about reviving the horticultural interest of 

 Cliiswick." Far from it, for with only a small portion of the 

 extravagant sums of money spent at South Kensington, 

 well-spent at Chiswick, it might be, and ought to be, at this 

 moment the pride of the horticultural woi-ld. 



We now come to the third point discussed by Mr. Bate- 

 man, the introduction of new plants and trees. What valu- 

 able opportunities have been lost within the last twenty 

 years ! While our northern neighbours were or^'anising 

 societies for exploring the north-wcot coasts of America, 

 whence they introduced so many valuable trees, and while 

 collectors were gathering seeds for private persons of that 

 grandest of all coniferous trees, the Wellingtonia, which 

 alone would have redeemed the failing prospects of the Horti- 

 cultural Society of London, the Council, apparently effete 

 and lifeless, calmly looked on. Then within these few years 

 came Japan with its invaluable stores of trees and shrubs, 

 brought to us by private enterprise, without the least at- 

 tempt on the part of the Society to be first in the field. 

 When one considers these lost opportunities, one can scarcely 

 believe that a horticultural society in this rich country could 

 have been in existence at the time. With energj' and money 

 properly applied, what an arboretum might have been formed 

 at Chiswick, not only in the open an- but under glass ; for if 

 light roomy structures had been built — not such massive ex- 

 travagant houses as the "gi-eat conservatory," but light, 

 strongly-built, reasonably-priced, unheated glass structures 

 — many Himalayan trees and shrubs, and aU those from 



Japan, might have been now in full luxuriance, and a pattern 

 to the whole gardening world, which at present is little aware 

 of the extreme beauty of what are called half-hardy trees and 

 shrubs when grown in unheated houses, and even of many 

 that are hardy enough to stand our winters, but requiring 

 more heat in summer to fully develope their beauties, and 

 this they can only have under glass. Now, experiments of 

 this kind, of the highest interest to all who have a culti- 

 vated taste, should have been carried out by the Society at 

 the Chiswick Garden, making it the pride of the country. 



With respect to the fourth point in Mr. Bateman's address, 

 I am most willing to acknowledge that a fail- collection of 

 vai'ieties of fruit exists there, but not beyond that in the 

 hands of others in this country. The distribution of scions 

 for grafting, which that experienced horticulturist Mr. Cole 

 says, " was never more fruitful than it is at this moment," 

 and which the intelligent audience greeted with " hear, 

 hear," is a small redeeming point in the doings of the 

 Society. But how small, how insignificant, how odd, that 

 only one little " ha'porth of bread " should be found worthy 

 of a cheer in a very long apologetic address ! Yes, there 

 was another "hear, hear" when Mr. Bateman alluded to 

 the Chiswick of the present and the past. A few words will 

 correct the sophism uttered. The Chiswick of the past was 

 before its day ; the Chiswick of the present is behind its 

 day. 



As to the lapsus lingvce respecting the dearth of " eminent 

 practical horticulturists," it was of course only a slip for 

 which Mr. Bateman is doubtless very sorry, and he will of 

 course in due time apologise. The next slip is so full of 

 burlesque and so ironical, that no wonder it was received in 

 deep silence. La voila, "If any gentleman has any horti- 

 culturist in his mind more profoundly versed in the mys- 

 teries of the science than any members of the present Council, 

 he has only to mention his name, and he will be elected by 

 an overwhelming majority." Now just imagine one or two 

 of the old PeUows selecting half a dozen good sound prac- 

 tical gardeners and men of business, and recommending 

 them to the CouncU for election ! What a mustering would 

 there have been of Fellows and Fellowesses to assist in 

 keeping them out. Mr. Bateman should not have made 

 the assertion. Why, I could have pointed out a dozen or a 

 score of good and true men, " more profoundly versed in 

 the mysteries of the science of gardening," than any member 

 of the Council, not forgetting one who has been a good 

 practical gardener. 



I regret to find that Mr. Bateman in his apology for Chis- 

 wick has omitted to mention the education of gardeners, 

 which ought to be now in progress. Several eminent men 

 last year lent their aid to concoct a scheme by which Chis- 

 wick would have been a centre of education and regis- 

 tration for gardeners, so that any gentleman requii-ing a 

 gardener could at once go to the centre of gardening 

 for one. Instead of this being promptly and fully carried 

 out, it seems that " arrangements are being made " for 

 gardeners to undergo an examination in botany by the So- 

 ciety of Arts. How unworthy of an old-established Society ! 

 This seems a sort of " shifty " policy that one cannot under- 

 stand. Just imagine the Geographical Society, for instance, 

 making arrangements for their neophytes, if they had any, 

 to undergo an examination by the Linnaean. A powerful 

 Society like the Royal Horticultural ought to do its own 

 work. 



As regards botany it is very agreeable, although not 

 essential, for one's gardener to know the rudiments of this 

 rather loose science. Surely it must to a certain extent de- 

 serve the name, for its professors have hitherto made it a 

 point to agree to disagree ; still, arrangement and classifica- 

 tion are necessaiy, and a gardener with an intuitive taste 

 for it, after knowing its rudiments, may make himself a 

 proficient, but as a general rule a good gardener does not 

 make a good botanist, nor a good botanist a good gardener ; 

 they are distinct species of the genus homo, and both good 

 and useful, the former a man of active energy, the latter a 

 man of quiet persevering research. 



I have now gone over Mr. Bateman's apology for Chis- 

 wick, I can give his earnest speech no other designation, 

 and, in common with most of the old Fellows of the Society, 

 regi'et there being any occasion for it. Allow me now to 

 state how our old favourite garden should be managed. 



