Oaoember 7, 1893. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
509 
Oompany holding its great Fruit Show the 6rit week in September, as in 
former years (excepting 1892 and 1893). As an exhibitor for several 
years past in all the principal daises at the Show in question, as well 
as at many leading shows in the provinces, I am in a position 
to say that the Crystal Palace September Fruit Show has been looked 
upon, and justly so, as the great show ot the season—in fact, the National 
Fruit Show of the country. 
The Palace, as far as my experience goes, is quite unique as a place 
for holding horticultural exhibitions, and the details of the exhibitions 
held there have always been admirably arranged ; and last, though by 
no means least, the prize money has always been forthcoming soon after 
it had been won. I am sure that in thus writing I am only expressing 
the sentiments of the numerous fruit growers who used to annually com¬ 
pete in the fruit classes at the Crystal Palace Show, and who looked 
forward with much pleasure to meeting one another in friendly contest 
early in September every year. Permit me to express a hope that the 
■Crystal Palace Company may give us—its old and regular exhibitors—an 
opportunity of doing so again in 1894, as the Shows in question gave a 
great impetus to the movement of high-class and profitable fruit culture. 
—H. W. W. 
THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY AND 
SOUTH KENSINGTON. 
You state in an article on page 492 in your last issue that “in 
<3on8equence of a leakage from the Council of the R.H.S.,” proposals as 
to the removal of the meetings of the Society to the Imperial Institute 
are known to be under consideration. I made careful inquiries at a 
late meeting of the Council whether any member had communicated 
with the horticultural Press, directly or indirectly, on this subject, and 
was assured that no member had done so. I think this contradiction 
should be published, because at the time you name the proposal had not 
even been submitted to the Council, and it is therefore a somewhat 
severe, and I believe unjust, imputation on a member or members of 
that body.— Henry J. Pearson. 
[We publish the above correction with very great pleasure, but 
at the same time we think Mr. Pearson will have no difficulty in 
admitting that his inquiries at a late meeting of the Council were not 
made in consequence of anything that appeared in the Jourrial of 
Horticulture. We did not say the proposals were “ known " to be under 
consideration, but that there was a “ rumour ” of the nature indicated. 
This was quite true. It also appears to be equally true that the 
rumour was not groundless, as proposals were admittedly made by the 
authorities of the Imperial Institute for the removal of the headquarters 
of the Royal Horticultural Society to South Kensington. “ Rumour ” 
is quite liable to be at fault relative to the origin of a leakage, but that 
there was an “ escape ” in this case from somewhere appears self-evident, 
■or there could have been no occasion for any gentleman to make 
•“ careful inquiries ” on the subject at a Council meeting held prior to 
ithe publication of our remarks last week. We unhesitatingly accept 
Mr. Pearson’s assurance that no disclosures whatever were made by any 
members of the Council, and we include in this assurance all attendant 
officials.] 
A RETROSPECT. 
Time has been given me to look back over the last fourteen years or 
so, during which my heart has been wrapped up in matters horticultural. 
Although the love I have borne and bear still for everything connected 
with a garden has never been a means of supplying my daily wants, but 
has, on the other hand, impoverished me, I cannot even now say that 
I regret it. 
During this period I have seen horticulture advance by giant strides, 
and gardeners become in their best representatives a body of scientific 
well read men. The pages of VaQ Journal of Horticulture bear testimony 
to this. 
I have also seen of late years the culture of fruit brought to the 
front, and the old rough and ready ways of planting any variety 
the nurseryman sent abolished. Dr. Hogg’s “ Fruit Manual ” and 
Mr. Wright’s “Prize Essay” have been of inestimable worth to our 
young planters. 
Many changes have happened of late years ; we seem to have lost 
an unusual number of first-class gardeners, and when Mr. Laxton 
(whose helpful letters to me were a source of great comfort at a trying 
time) went over to the majority I felt a blow I shall never forget. 
How much knowledge and pleasure I have gained by the perusal of 
“our Journal” I know not. This I know, that there was always 
something fresh to learn, always something to add to the pleasure of 
reading. I owe very many thanks to the contributors to “our Journal,” 
many of whom have been most courteous and kind to me. I heartily 
return my thanks to one and all. If I might single one out I should say 
that any contribution with “ D., Deal," underscribed has been a lasting 
pleasure to me. 
And now, starting as I am on a long journey from which I shall not 
return, I desire to thank our kind Editor and each contributor for the 
knowledge, pleasure, and profit I have ever received from them.— 
H. S. Easty, Ashdcne, Hill Lane, Southampton, 
[It is with profound regret, in which our readers will share, that the 
painful malady from which Mr. Easty has long suffered has at last been 
pronounced mortal. Mr. Easty is a gentleman by birth, and has devoted 
his means to acquiring information by travels abroad ai:d experiments 
at home, until those means are, we believe, exhausted, and we fear he 
has difficulty in obtaining simple home comforts. Under these circum¬ 
stances the calm trustfulness of his pathetic letter cannot but evoke 
admiration, and impart a suggestive lesson on a subject of a momentous 
character.] 
Aberdeen Roses. 
With a view to keep things right, may we ask you to kindly insert 
the following remarks, by way of correcting a mistake in “ D., Deal's," 
very interesting article on “ The Rose in 1893,” which appeared in your 
issue of the 30th ult. (page 494) ? We observe he credits Messrs. Hark- 
ness & Sons with carrying off every first prize for “ seventy-two’s ” in 
the kingdom. 
We only staged in two “ seventy-two’s ” during last season in 
England, and had the satisfaction of winning them both. The first 
was at Tibshelf (Derbyshire), on July 25th, and we understand that 
this was the best and keenest contested “ seventy-two ” of the season, 
there being six exhibits staged, Messrs. Harkness coming in second. 
The second was at Elland (Yorkshire) on August 15th, where we also 
won the first prize. 
We do not wish by any means to detract from the Messrs. HarknesJ 
splendid record, but we take this opportunity of pointing out that we 
met the above-mentioned firm eighteen times in England during the 
season, commencing July 20th, with the following result—viz., Messrs. 
Harkness & Sons two first prizes. Cocker & Sons fifteen first prizes and 
one equal.— James Cocker & Sons, Aberdeen. 
The National Rose Society and the Future of Exhibiting. 
I TAKE advantage of some remarks made by “ D., Deal," in his 
article on “ The Rose in 1893,” page 494 of the Joxirnal of Horticulture 
last week, to fay a few words as to the future of the Society as they 
occur to me, both in regard to its membership and the advantages 
which are now offered, and those which, I think, should be offered to 
new rosarians. “ D., Deal" —than whom there are few more experi¬ 
enced, whether as men of the world or as “past masters” in Rose 
matters—says, in regard to the annual recruiting of rosarians for the 
Rose shows of the future, “ one asks, with some degree of misgiving, 
where are the successors of the past” [why not present ?] “giants to 
come from ? ” This question may be one fraught with consequences of 
the first magnitude to rosarians, and is of vital importance to the 
N.R.S., therefore it is one which, having been put forth by a leading 
official at what is apparently a propitious moment, might be discussed 
with advantage at the annual meeting of the N.R.S., which coincides 
with the date of the next issue of the Journal. 
It is of vital importance to the Society that its membership should be 
materially increased, as there are many members who, when it first 
started in December, 1876, were the mainstay of its exhibitions, and 
who now either from age or disinclination have dropped out of the fray. 
Future exhibit'ons and the Society itself must sooner or later depend 
for support from those who are now becoming interested in Rose 
growing, and it is with the object of sounding a note of warning to the 
N.R.S. executive that I write this letter. 
I have for some years been a persistent advocate for the encourage¬ 
ment of new members and small growers amongst rosarians, and unless 
the Society offers more inducement in the future than it now does to 
“young” rosarians, it will find it a matter of difficulty to keep up its 
roll; death and desertion will soon outnumber the yearly recruiting, and 
the number inscribed on the roll-call will then be found a diminishing 
quantity. 
I do not write this letter as a pessimist, but in the present day a 
society or a business must either advance or retrograde, you cannot stand 
still and succeed ; and I say that when I find there are forty-eight local 
secretaries of the N.R.S., and through that body of supposed active 
workers only thirty-four recruits (not counting those I myself brought 
in this year) were obtained in 1893, the Society is in a perilous state, 
especially if its schedules are to be maintained at a satisfactory level. I 
have worked fairly hard and not unsuccessfully in getting in new 
members ; but I confe-s that the question often asked me, “ What do I 
gain or obtain by becoming a member of your Society?” frequently finds 
a reply difficult, and at times I have been puzzled to find a suitable one, 
but the question being a proper one there should be a satisfactory reply 
ready to hand. I therefore appeal to those now responsible for the 
Society’s working to offer next year advantages to new members—do 
away with useless classes in the prize schedules, such for instance as the 
one for residents within an eight-mile radius (which is practically a 
monopoly to a very small coterie), and in the place of those eliminated 
