GARDENS AND GARDEN DESIGNERS 3 
mere haphazard treatment of a piece of enclosed ground. 
Its votaries have many of them been men who knew 
absolutely nothing of the ways of flowers, to whom the 
wonders of nature were as a sealed book. That they 
were clever draughtsmen none will deny, and that 
many beautiful gardens were made on paper is equally 
to be admitted. But that was all, they were unable to 
see how their gardens would look after being planted 
a few years—probably they did not care, at any rate 
they were miserable failures, as must ever be the case 
when a well drawn design is considered sufficient proof 
of supreme ability. This class of garden maker is by 
no means extinct to-day, and with paper, drawing 
appliances, and a few books of plans for guidance, is 
able to turn out sketches which, to the uninitiated, seem 
to suggest unlimited acquaintance with the subject. 
But transfer these designs to the ground, lay out the 
paths and beds as he suggests, plant trees and raise 
mounds, dig watercourses and build rockeries to 
satisfy his caprice, and what do we find? Our garden 
is a wretched affair, a thoughtless jumble of half- 
matured ideas, a desecration of common-sense and good 
taste. Trees are planted where their graceful outline is 
cramped and hidden, flowering plants have no possible 
chance of displaying their full beauty before us, and 
everywhere we look there are signs of ignorance and 
wasted opportunity. There is something so contra- 
dictory in the term ‘‘ garden architect”; it suggest 
the union of two totally distinct professions. Bricks 
and mortar, cut stone-work and terracing, are now 
pushed into the garden, with the result that its real 
object is lost and its beauties crowded out. The 
architect is greedy; not content with designing the 
house and its approaches, its stabling and many ac- 
cessories, he must needs take the garden in hand also, 
and we find his work everywhere and weary of its 
