September 1,1881.] JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 193 
1st 
TH 
Dundee Horticultural Show. 
2nd 
F 
Paisley Horticultural Show. 
3rd 
S 
4 th 
SDN 
12th Sunday after Trinity. 
5 th 
M 
Cth 
TO 
Royal Caledonian Society’s Show. 
7th 
W 
Oxfordshire and Glasgow Shows. 
THE MANCHESTER INTERNATIONAL SHOW. 
AST week we directed attention to the great 
horticultural event that has since been held at 
Manchester, and advised as many as possible 
of our readers to embrace the opportunity of 
inspecting what was predicted would be one 
of the greatest exhibitions of fruit that has 
been held in any country. Our prediction was 
fulfilled, and our advice was accepted, as letters before 
us testify. One very experienced cultivator writes as 
follows— 
“ I hardly know whether to thank you or not for inducing me to 
visit Manchester. With the Show itself I was delighted beyond 
measure, hut I was depressed exceedingly by the cruelty of the 
weather. That such great efforts and such splendid results should 
have been made and produced under such unfortunate circumstances 
is a source of general regret, and sympathy cannot be withheld from 
the Council of the Society and Mr. Bruce Findlay. The Show was 
indeed grand, but the weather on the whole was miserable.” 
Another correspondent writes—• 
“ I received the Journal on Thursday afternoon and went to Man¬ 
chester on the Friday. I was glad I did not go sooner, or I should 
have been swamped in the deluge. I was, however, soon enough 
to have the ‘ conceit taken out of me ’ in some respects ; but on 
reflection I do not think that I ought to be expected, or that 
any gardener ought to be expected, to produce everything as good as 
was seen there. I shall be glad, Mr. Editor, to have your opinion on 
this point, as I think there is at least a chance that some gardeners 
may be the victims of what I may term too great expectations on 
the part of employers, who may expect what it is impossible can be 
produced by the resources of their establishments, however competent 
their gardeners may be, and however earnestly they may labour to 
make the most and the best of the means at their disposal.” 
This is a new aspect in which horticultural shows may be 
regarded, and we confess it would not have occurred to us. 
But we have no difficulty nor hesitation in giving an opinion 
on the point that has been submitted. Not only is it utterly 
impossible for any man to produce everything as good as was 
staged at Manchester last week, but it is to us equally impos¬ 
sible to suppose that anyone would be expected to do so. It 
were as reasonable to expect that any one artist could equal the 
best portraits and landscapes that are exhibited at the Royal 
Academy, as to suppose that any gardener could do what has 
been suggested. No one gardener can possibly be expected 
to compete at a given day with all other gardeners and their 
specialities, and the very supposition of such an unequal con¬ 
test is utterly unreasonable, not to say absurd. The best pro¬ 
ducts that are staged at the leading exhibitions show what 
can be accomplished by competent men under favourable 
circumstances, and it becomes the duty of all cultivators who 
inspect those products to turn the resources at their own 
command to the best possible account with the view of ap¬ 
proaching as nearly as is possible, and if possible to excel, the 
examples that have commanded the approval of the Judges 
by their conspicuous merit. If a gardener who is skilled in 
his calling “ earnestly labours to make the best and most of 
the means at his disposal,” he does his duty, and no more can 
reasonably be expected from him. 
Another letter before us treats of exhibitions generally in a 
still different aspect, and one on which a great number of horti¬ 
culturists often express similar opinions privately, if not 
publicly. The writer of the letter in question, who is a gar¬ 
dener of great experience and an exhibitor of some note, says— 
“ I seldom go to a show but I find it marred by some bold plan of 
advertising that is alike obtrusive and disagreeable to a great number 
of visitors. At a great show that I could name cards as large as a 
moderate-sized window sash were placed on several collections of 
plants, informing the public that the said plants had been ‘ grown by 
so-and-so’s boiler ! ’ The absurdity of the statement, added to the 
unsightliness of the unwieldy cards, imparted to those parts of the 
Exhibition a shoppishness that was quite out of place. It appears to 
me, and I know to many others, that if private business cards are 
permissible in the classes for competition they should be in some 
degree proportionate to the character of the exhibits. Judging by 
the efforts made by certain exhibitors to direct attention to their 
wares, it would appear as if they were under the impression that the 
visitors were blind. It is still worse when incongruous ‘trophies’ 
are erected, as was the case in one conspicuous instance at Man¬ 
chester. Such ‘trade enterprise’ cannot be admired. It may be 
said the managers of shows should prevent obtrusive trade exhibits. 
This is easier said than done. A manager of an exhibition necessarily 
hesitates to incur the disfavour of those whom he looks to for sup¬ 
port ; on the contrary, in his desire to oblige he will at times strain 
a point and grant a favour if he is conscious that he will not pre¬ 
judice others. The result is too often an exemplification of the 
existence of the spirit of the old proverb ‘ Give an inch take an ell.’ 
The fact is, the council and directorate of shows, as a body should 
decide on matters of this kind, and not place on an individual the 
responsibility of rendering himself liable to the charge of being dis¬ 
agreeable by the refusal of favours that he ought not to be requested 
to grant.” 
We publish the above letter, trenchant though it may be, 
because it has reference to a practice that the public certainly 
do not approve of. At the same time the principal contri¬ 
butors to the leading shows incur considerable cost in the 
conveyance of their exhibits and the deterioration to which 
they are subjected, and it is only natural that they should 
endeavour to turn the opportunity to account with the object 
of recouping themselves for the outlay and extending their 
trade. The question then arises whether this cannot be done 
as effectually in a more quiet and appropriate manner, as by 
such methods as have been referred to by our correspondent. 
With regard to the extent of this magnificent Exhibition, 
the statement of a few simple facts will convey the best idea 
to those who were unable to inspect it. In the 250 or 260 
classes, which included those of the National Rose and Car¬ 
nation Societies, there were over 3500 entries, and the produce 
staged necessarily required considerable space. The glass 
exhibition building and the permanent iron marquee usually 
suffice for the exhibits at the Whitsuntide Show that are ex¬ 
tensive in no ordinary degree, but on this occasion a great 
addition was required. A marquee 327 feet long was occupied 
with fruit and vegetables, the central table being devoted to 
the former, and presenting such a display as few have seen 
before. From this long marquee three annexe tents, each 
No. 62 .—Yol. III., Third Series. 
No. 1718 .—Yol. LXVI., Old Series. 
