EARLIER OPENING OF KEW GARDENS. 189 
May, which received a very unsatisfactory answer, nothing 
further has been done. In the interests of Londoners and of 
the public at large, and especially in those of all nature-lovers, we 
trust that the present movement will not be allowed to cease 
until it has been carried to a successful issue. 
It is important that the hollowness of the scare that the 
scientific work of the Gardens would be in the least interfered 
with should be clearl}" demonstrated ; and nothing is more easy. 
To those parts of the Gardens where experiments in culture are 
carried on, the public are (very properly) at no time admitted, 
nor do they ever visit the forcing-pits or other places of the 
kind. The Herbarium, where the systematic botanist pursues 
his work, is a building entirely apart from the Gardens ; the 
Jodrell Laboratory, for scientific work of an experimental kind, 
is equally inaccessible to the public. If the Gardens were open 
every day from sunrise to sunset, the scientific work would go 
on, as it does now, unhindered and unchecked. 
Whth regard to the houses in the Gardens, the case is different ; 
they, of course, must be closed at times, in order that the 
necessary watering, cleaning, and like operations may be carried 
on. But, so far as we are aware, it is not proposed that these 
should be open earlier than they are at present, so that this 
objection also falls to the ground. 
There remains only the Gardens proper to be considered. It 
cannot be seriously contended that the work in them would be 
interfered with by the admission of the public, any more than is 
the case in the various parks. The Kew “bedding” is not so 
extensive as that, for example, in Battersea Park, which is open 
all day and every day without let or hindrance ; and we have 
never heard that there, or elsewhere, the people cause any incon- 
venience to the numerous gardeners engaged. It might, perhaps, 
be opportune at this juncture to reprint the little pamphlet issued 
in 1879 by the Defence Association, in which the question is 
dealt with at greater length than is possible here. But should 
this be done, we trust that one needlessly offensive passage — that 
in which it is stated that “ the real reason of the exclusion of the 
public is that the scientific staff find it agreeable to have for 
themselves and their friends the exclusive command of these 
noble Gardens during the best part of the da}'-,” will be expunged, 
and that no insinuation of this kind will be countenanced by 
those who have the matter in hand. 
While we are on the subject of Kew, there is another matter 
which may be mentioned — the absence of an authorised guide to 
the beautiful Gardens. There was an excellent one at one time, 
but this has been out of print, we believe, for five or six years. 
The subject has more than once been brought before Parliament, 
and l\Ir. Plunket last IMay announced that the book was almost 
ready, and would probably appear during the summer. The 
satisfactoriness of this assurance was somewhat marred by the 
reminder that “ a precisely similar answer ” was given “ fourteen 
