•\ 



Our British gardeners, on the contrary, instead 

 of humouring nature, love to deviate from it as much 

 as possible. Our trees rise in cones, globes, and pyr- 

 amids. We see the marks of the scissors upon every 

 plant and bush. I do not know whether I am singu- 

 lar in my opinion, but for my own part, I would 

 rather look upon a tree in all its luxuriancy and dif- 

 fusion of boughs and branches, than when it is thus 

 cut and trimmed into a mathematical figure, and can- 

 not but fancy that an orchard in flower looks infi- 

 nitely more delightful than all the little labyrinths of 

 the most finished parterre. j^^^^^ ^^^^^,_ 



To begin, then, we find flower-beds habitually 

 considered too much as mere masses of colour. Instead 

 of an assemblage of living beings. The only thought 

 is to delight the eye by the utmost possible splendour. 

 When we walk in our public gardens everything 

 seems tending to distract the attention from the sep- 

 arate plants, and to make us look at them only with 

 regard to their united efl^ect. ^^^^^^ ^^^^^„_ 



As to colour in gardens. Flowers in masses are 

 mighty strong colour, and if not used with a great deal 

 of caution are very destructive to pleasure in gar- 

 dening. On the whole, I think the best and safest 

 plan ,is to mix up your flowers, and rather eschew 

 great masses of colour — in combination I mean. 



William Morris. 



Variations of flowers are like variations in music, 

 often beautiful as such, but almost always inferior to 

 the theme on which they are founded — the original 

 air. And the rule holds good in beds of flowers, if 

 they be not very large, or in any other small assem- 

 blage of them. Nay, the largest bed will look well 

 if of one beautiful colour; while the most beautiful 

 varieties may be inharmoniously mixed up. 



Leigh Hunt. 



