Febraary 4, MM. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
77 
EDUCATION IN GARDENING 
AT CHISWICK. 
--1-- 
W E have received letters from correspondents in reference 
to the Royal Horticultural Society’s proposed scheme of 
technical education in gardening, and it has been made abund¬ 
antly clear to us that both gardeners and amateurs desire an 
expression of our views on that scheme. In intention it is 
admirable, and nobbing would please us better than to be able to 
foresee the probability of good practical results accruing. The 
project appears to divide itself into two essentially dissimilar 
parts. 1, Spade industry on small holdings for purposes of 
practical usefulness to the tillers. 2, Establishing a British school 
of gardening for the training of young men in all the details of the 
craft for making them efficient in the calling they hope to pursue. 
It is undoubtedly most desirable that not only “small holdings” 
but large tracts of land should be more highly cultivated, and thus 
rendered more productive ; but at present we fail to see that many 
persons whose holdings, actual or prospective, come under the 
denomination of “small” will feel themselves justified, even if 
able, in spending a year or two at Chiswick, at a cost of about £45 
per annum, to learn the art of spade husbandry. That useful 
knowledge might be gained on land in working and cropping by the 
inexperienced goes without saying, but how far those who pur¬ 
chased that knowledge on the terms indicated would benefit by it, 
or how soon they would recoup the outlay invested, are questions 
entirely problematical. The probability is that a small percentage 
might realise the object of their hopes, but it is at least equally 
probable tbe majority would be in some measure disappointed. 
It is very much a question of individuality and surrounding 
conditions as to whether students who might seek to acquire 
knowledge in the art of spade husbandry would be able to derive a 
commensurate return on the time and outlay invested in their 
education. It is not easy to see that lower terms could be offered, 
but the amount, small as it is for a year’s food and instruction, 
cannot be paid by the great majority of workers, whose chief object 
is to obtain a livelihood mainly by manual labour on the land. 
Possibly there are among the affluent classes some who may 
desire to educate their sons in the science and practice of land 
cultivation with the object of their becoming directors of labour 
on spade-worked land on estates in different parts of the country. 
In such case a few apt students and energetic workers might 
be able to show their efficiency, competing successfully with 
growers of produce for sale who have gained their experience 
by long years of activity oii the land and in the market, 
but we are inclined to think the issue of the contest, broadly 
speaking, would be in favour of those who were, so to say, born to 
and in the work. By far the best schools of gardening for com¬ 
mercial purposes now existing in this country, if not in any other, 
are the best managed market gardens, where high culture is 
combined with smart business experience in disposing of the 
produce to the best advantage. 
Passing to the next, and not in the interest of our readers the 
least important part of the scheme, the “ School of Gardening,” 
the more we think about the scheme as set forth the more con¬ 
vinced we become that it cannot in any reasonable time fulfil the 
expectations that will be raise! in the gardening community. All 
who have had much practical experience in supplying the homes 
of the wealthy with the produce of gardens well equipped for that 
No. 606.— VoL. XXIV., Third Series. 
purpose with fruit, vegetables, and flowers, not in their natural 
season only, but as far out of it as possible, and who are, at the 
same time, acquainted with the resources of Chiswick, must know 
that these resources are wholly inadequate for giving young men 
from fifteen to eighteen years of age " a thoroughly practical 
training in all the details of their craft.” It may be said that 
though the essentials for such complete training may not exist 
now, they will follow by the initial outlay of £1000. Most 
experienced gardeners familiar with the Chiswick gardens as they 
are must know the suggestion is wholly optimistic. Not for a 
long time to come, and with the expenditure indicated, could 
the Chiswick School be made to bear any favourable comparison 
with hundreds of established schools of gardening in various 
parts of the country. We wish it were otherwise, and should 
rejoice to see the historic establishment sufficiently equipped for 
giving young men a “ practical training ” in “ all tbe details ” of 
the art of gardening. A great deal that is good may be taught 
there practically, but to teach all that is promised is out of the 
question. 
Scientific instruction may unquestionably be given, because the 
Society can have no difficulty in obtaining the services of competent 
lecturers, and their teaching would doubtless be quite sufficient to 
“ enable the students to take an interest in and gain an insight into 
the manifold operations of Nature, which they will in after life be 
concerned.” With that we cordially agree, and it is very desirable 
that the gardeners of the future should conduct their practical 
operations on a scientific basis, and be able to give a sound reason 
for every step they take in working for a definite issue. We have 
to remember that very much appropriate and scientific knowledge 
can be gained, and has been acquired, by gardeners by reading and 
study. Not a few of our gardeners act on scientific lines, and some 
without knowing it, in the conduct of their operations, and conse¬ 
quently pursue the most direct course to the end and object they 
have in view. Scientific instruction can be given at Chiswick if 
classes are established, and it will be for gardeners to consider 
whether they will send their sons, and for young men to decide 
whether they will invest of their means for receiving such instruc¬ 
tion jsZms practical instruction such as it is within the means of the 
establishment to afford. 
Probably the tendency of the scheme will be to attract as 
students the sons of professional men and others in well-to-do 
positions, who are in doubt as to “ wbat to do with the boys.’ 
Gardening is tempting to many, and it is because of tbis that the 
supply of gardeners so much exceeds the demand as to bring down 
their wages to about the average of those of bricklayers’ labourers, 
and below those of butlers and valets. Is it desirable to offer 
temptations for increasing the supply ? Is not the natural rate 
of manufacture sufficient to meet all demands ? It may be 
urged that it is desirable to have more highly educated men in 
the ranks. It would be if the demand for such men exceeded 
the supply ; but does it ? There are as many men of bright 
intelligence to be found amongst British gardeneis as among 
men similarly engaged in any other nation in Europe, and 
men abroad, as well as at home, who come into a different 
category, and useful, indnstriou'J, and honest many of these toilers 
are. There will always be a demand for men whose labour is 
more highly regarded than their intellects, though we know quite 
well that some of the most intellectual gardeners are at the 
same time, to employ an expressive term, “ gluttons for work.” 
Intellectual workers are just what we need, and we believe with 
the sure and steady progress of education and sterner competition 
we shall have sufficient of them without creating a supply by 
special inducements. 
Is there not a good deal of sentiment connected with the craving 
for schools for horticulture ? Having regard to gardening in its 
broadest aspects there are no schools of horticulture in existence 
equal to the best managed private gardens in this country ; and we 
No. 2262.—VoL. LXXXVI., Old Series. 
