494 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ December 4, 1890. 
of the flowers in early summer, and its beautiful purple berries in 
winter ; these are produced in far greater abundance than those 
of the common Berberry, and make quite as good a preserve. 
Planted in woods it affords one of the best, if not the very best, 
cover for game. On a lawn it makes a good bed or group, and in 
shrubberies and by woodland walks it is quite at home. The treat¬ 
ment recommended for evergreen Barberries suits it, but it will 
thrive in nearly all soils and situations without any trouble beyond 
planting.—G. 
Amateur Rose Growers.—In Memoriam Rev. H. T. Fbere. 
“An Exhibitor” says : “ It cannot be denied that the schedules of 
the National and many of the provincial and affiliated Societies, as at 
present constituted, are a monopoly, inasmuch as there is every facility 
and encouragement provided for the larger growers, but none for the 
smaller.” 1 feel constrained to write once more to say that I deny 
this ; it seems to me utterly at variance with the plain facts. He says, 
also : “ The schedules are framed in such a manner as to obstruct the 
smaller growers.” Would anyone believe, on reading this, that at the 
National Show not only are there very many restrictions and divisions 
as to who may and who may not show in every class, but also that there 
is an actual class with four prizes “ for those who have never won a 
prize at a National Show ?” Here, at all events, there must be four 
entirely new names every year. 
But I should not have ventured to write again on this subject this 
week (hoping that “ J. B.” and “ An Exhibitor ” are preparing to bring 
forward their views at the coming general meeting of the N.R.S.) had 
not the latter made an astonishing quotation from “ The Rosarian’s 
Year Book for 1890.” 1 hope anyone who has read his letter will turn 
to the Year Book, page 16, and read the whole of the passage in question. 
It seems to me the plainest statement of how “ the young ones are either 
timid or wanting in energy, and null not believe that Rose showing, like 
everything else, mvst have a beginning .” (The part in italics is omitted 
by “ An Exhibitor.”) The passage goes on to narrate one instance (with 
the facts of which I am well acquainted) of the many that can be shown 
where it was simply “ pluck, and not protection” that were required to 
raise a small grower in four years into the first rank. 
I feel sure that, if it had been possible, the Rev. H. T. Frere, the 
author of the capital article in the “Year Book” thus quoted, would 
have written to protest against his well-known sentiments being thus 
distorted. But, alas ! the same post that brought me the Journal this 
morning gave me also the sad notice of his death after a short illness ; 
and it is left to his old friend and rival of many years’ standing to 
declare that “ Pluck, not Protection,” was certainly his motto, and to 
assert that in the passage in question it was “ the timidity and want of 
energy in the young ones ” (which were certainly no failings of his) to 
w’hich he ascribed the lack of new names among the winners at exhi¬ 
bitions. I am very glad he wrote that paper ; a very good one it is, as 
I had the pleasure of telling him at the time. I have just read it 
through again two or three times, and have found the whole a strangely 
faithful memorial of the man as I knew him, and the first and last 
paragraphs especially touching in the light of that sad note this 
morning. 
Mr. Frere, as his article in the “ Year Book ” testifies, w r as a veteran 
at Rose showing, and good to the last, as was seen by his winning the 
principal prize at Norwich this year ; but he never could be persuaded 
to exhibit in London or away from the eastern counties, though well 
qualified to do so. An excellent winner, and a still better loser, it 
would astonish me much to learn that he ever made an enemy at Rose 
shows. But as a rosarian, horticulturist, and botanist, he ranked far 
above the ordinary exhibitor ; he was perfectly qualified to judge any¬ 
thing at a flower show ; and I always used to go round the tents with 
him, if possible, in order to take notice of what he pointed out (especi¬ 
ally in herbaceous and wild flowers) as “good.” Of his other attain¬ 
ments and qualities this i3 not the place to speak ; and as a man and a 
Christian I would prefer to let his own paper in the “ Year Book ” speak 
for him, especially in the closing sentence which he adopts and endorses 
from the lips of an aged parishioner, “ The reason why I love my 
flowers is that God Almighty made them so beautiful.”—W. R. Railleji 
NOTES ON EARLY ENGLISH HORTICULTURE. 
(Continued from page 291.) 
A large number of exotic plants were brought into England 
during the reign of George II., that is, between 1727 and 1760. 
This is attributed chiefly to the stimulus given to research by the 
demand for new or rare species at the Chelsea Botanic Garden, 
where Miller was then curator, and in frequent correspondence 
with florists in all parts of Europe, being also in communication 
ith travellers into nearly every part of the globe. It is reckoned 
that in the above period we received upwards of 1700 new plants, 
more, indeed, than were introduced during the whole of the seven¬ 
teenth century. Miller’s exertions were seconded by several well 
known men, chiefly resident in or near London, who rank amoDgst 
the fathers of modern horticulture, most of them proprietors of 
nurseries, and who got their information not so much from books 
as from observation and practice. Some of them, at a time when 
travelling was a serious matter, braved the perils of land and water 
that they might see exotics growing in their natural soil, and be 
the means of bringing with their own hands into Britain plants 
suitable for garden or greenhouse. We find it is an historical fact 
that horticulture was advanced in our land much more by the 
exertions of men of small incomes than by those who had ample 
means at their command. Amongst the few noblemen of the reign 
of George II. who gave time and money to it, honourable mention 
must be given to Lord Petre, who died in 1742 at the early age 
of twenty-nine. At his residence in Essex (Ingatestone) he had 
houses and stoves, which contained specimens of most of the 
tropical plants then known. He had the first samples of the 
Camellia, a single red variety, but his plants died. The Duke of 
Ohandos was one of the encouragers of gardening at this period, 
and it is supposed that Dr. Blackwell, afterwards of Chelsea, 
assisted him in planning the grounds of Canons, once so celebrated. 
The wife of this unhappy doctor (who went to Sweden, got 
involved in a plot there and was executed) was more fortunate 
than her husband, and did good service to horticulture. Living in 
Paradise Row the pair were frequent visitors to the Apothecaries 
Garden, and Mrs. Blackwell, who was skilled in drawing, obtained 
specimens of exotics there, drew them upon copper, and coloured 
them ; to the plates were appended descriptions in several languages. 
This Herbal, as she called it, was published in 1739, with 500 
figures, and much commended by gardeners and naturalists. One 
of the friends of Miller, so many years in charge of that garden, 
was Robert Furber, founder of the Kensington Nursery, and who 
owned extensive orchards in that district. He prepared a folio of 
twelve plates, delineating the fruits of the year, and also a small 
book with remarks on the culture of fruits and flowers, also a brief 
list of plants for sale, one of tbe first of the kind ; this appeared 
in 1733. Christopher Gray, of the Fulham Nursery, a receiver of 
numerous novelties, brought out his catalogue of trees and shrubs 
in 1740, and the long famous firm of Dickson & Co., nurserymen 
of Edinburgh, had their first list out a few years later. 
It seems odd to us that at Mile End, in Georgian days, were 
nurseries renowned for their choice exotics, two leading growers 
being Clements and Gordon. But the place was then a semi-rural 
suburb, wuh only scattered houses, and it was a great resort of the 
citizens on summer evenings. Geraniums and Heaths, also other 
species now of universal cultivation, had not arrived in Britain. 
The Camellia did not flower here till 1739, and Mignonette was 
unknown till 1752. Of the Rose many new varieties had been 
obtained, but in popularity Carnations and Gillyflowers were its 
rivals, and the Magnolia was a great favourite, being commonly 
planted against dwelling houses. To Are nones, Lilies, and Tulips 
much space was allotted in the gardens of those who liked display, 
and a writer in the “ Connoisseur ” cites, as a proof of the taste 
for Auriculas, that a Mr. Redmond of Islington could get half a 
guinea each for his new sorts. Horticulture was advanced in this 
reign by a man who, as a doctor and poet, was made a butt of by 
the wits of that day—Sir John Hill, who wrote articles upon a 
variety of popular subjects, and was honoured by the patronage of 
Lord Bute. That he had an extensive knowledge of botany and 
gardening is certain, hence by his books and personal influence he 
helped to diffuse a taste for ornamental plants. He also made our 
gardeners acquainted with the Linnean system of classification. 
At Bayswater he had a garden where he cultivated native and 
foreign species, kept bees also ; here he prepared his “ Waterdock 
essence ” and “ balsam of honey,” which he sold with quackish 
zeal, inconsistent with his character as a man of science. One of 
his schemes was a sensible one, the formation of botanic gardens in 
towns, where the plants should all be duly labelled, and lectures 
given from time to time on the habits and structure of the different 
groups and orders. His most pretentious work was a system of 
botany, which ran to twenty-six volumes, and next to this in im¬ 
portance was his “ Gardeners’ New Kalender,” published in 1755. 
He also published “ Eden : A Complete Body of Gardening,” a 
few years later ; both had coloured plates. Two of his small 
works excited a good deal of attention ; one of these was a sugges¬ 
tion for raising trees from their leaves, the other was on the 
methods of producing double and proliferous flowers. One of the 
accusations brought against him was that he used to visit gardens 
and then conceal specimens of plants to carry away. His widow 
issued at Edinburgh in 1779 an account of his life and writings. 
Mr. Ord’s garden at Parson’s Green, which was laid out towards 
the middle of this century, though not very large, was an object of 
