Joly 7. 18S7. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
7 
than gardeners winning by their zeal a claim to rest, and those for 
whom they labour recognising that zeal and claim, and granting facilities 
for the compensating holiday. Many do so, but not all ; nor do all 
make good their claim for consideration. 
When I commence a series of erratic notes I never know where my 
thoughts will lead. They led me to say that writing was not tempting 
to the tired or the lazy, and reading somewhat of a task rather than a 
recreation in broiling summer weather; but I did read with attention 
and enjoyment the “ Reminiscences of Fifty Years Ago,” in the opening 
article of the issue of the 23rd ult. Not many persons could have 
evolved from their memory that most interesting historical review. 
It seems to have attracted attention beyond the community of gardeners, 
for I find in a daily paper a paragraph that was evidently inspired by 
tthe article in question. Very clever are expert newspaper paragraphists 
in garnishing ideas and placing them temptingly before the public, and 
the example referred to is worthy of reproduction. Here it is. 
J ‘ Evolution and advertising are two very incongruous subjects, but 
they come readily together in a retrospect of the last fifty years as 
regards horticulture. Fifty years is but an hour or a second in con¬ 
nection with evolution ; but what marvellous changes have been effected 
by the skill of the horticulturist in that comparatively short time ! 
The flowers we have now would scarcely be recognised by the old 
gardeners, so much have the} 7 been improved or altered. What, then, 
nrust be the result of fifty centuries of cultivation and trying what can 
be done ? Fifty years ago the old firms of seedsmen and horticulturists 
•considered it inf a dig. to advertise ; but more enterprising rivals arose, 
took another course, and, by persistently telling the public what they 
had to sell, they gradually drove the old firms out of the market. We 
bdlieve only one of the pre-Victorian ‘ large firms ’ in the seed trade 
still exists as a leading house ; though some of those which have since 
risen to the top of the tree had an existence in a small way fifty years 
ago. Certain it is that the present leading firms have accomplished 
their elevation primarily by persistent advertising, and secondarily by 
supplying good articles ; for it is no use keeping the latter unless you 
let the public know that you do keep them andean supply them. Fifty 
years, after all, tells much in favour of the evolution theory, and a 
great deal more about the advantages of advertising.” 
That paragraph was evidently founded on the article in question, 
and I have only one objection to it. I do not believe that any firm 
could become strong and really and lastingly great who made the sup¬ 
plying of goo<l articles a “ secondary ” matter. An ephemeral success 
may be attained by “ puffing,” but public confidence can only be won 
by making the superiority of the article sold the first consideration ; 
but it is palpable that the mere possession of such articles does not 
suffice to make a prosperous trade. The public must know of their 
existence and disposal, or they simplv represent dead capital. And 
farther, experience oroves that advertising to be profitable must be per¬ 
sistent and systematic. A full succession of crops can only be had in 
the garden by regular successional sowings of seed. 
Another thought now arises. It has sprung spontaneously from 
the subject and was in no sense premeditated. It is that some would- 
be advertisers do not pay a great compliment to the discernment of 
readers to whom they appeal; and I am not quite sure that the editors 
of papers are to be altogether congratulated in encouraging a system, 
that appears to be growing, of vendors extolling their own wares under 
the guise of “ news,” for disguise it how they may the public can see 
the underlying motive, and a feeling of revulsion, rather than approval, 
is engendered. There is nothing like fair and square legitimate adver¬ 
tising in a genuine business manner for winning confidence, and it is by 
acting on that principle that every really great firm in the kingdom has 
made itself what it is to-day. 
But I must go back to the “ Reminiscences ” mentioned, or rather to 
the comment on them by an “ Old Gardener,” on page 523. I claim 
to be an oldish member of the craft, but feel to be nowhere as regards 
long experience with the author of the historical review, which is the 
most complete of its kind of any I have seen. It is possible, too, that I 
may be younger than the “ Old Gardener,” who so ably supplements the 
notes in question, and may consequently appear a little presumptuous in 
venturing to dissent from one observation in the comment. With nearly 
everything said by an “ Old Gardener” I agree, only my memory will 
not take me back for much more than forty years ; and I believe we had 
quite as good Potatoes, Cauliflowers, Cabbages, Onions, Parsnips, Carrots, 
and Celery then as we have now. I gathered Peas forty years ago 
quite as early in the season as I have done since, but we have finer later 
sorts now. 
In "the far past time we had, apart from the Early May, the Charltonsj 
Scimetar, Bedman’s Impeiial, and the best of all the lates, the British 
Queen ; and it is not bad yet. But we had no Champion of England, 
Ne Plus Ultra, Veitch’s Perfection, Telegraph, Telephone, and a number 
of others now in cultivation, therefore I am bound to conclude a great 
advance has been made in Peas. We had Ashleaf Potatoes just as good 
then as we have now, and just as good now as we had then ; but I am 
not certain that the same can be said in respect to any other variety. 
But I had, perhaps, better not dwell on that subject, or friends Iggulden 
and Abbey may—well, not give me their generous support. 
The remarkof “ An Old Gardener,” in which I cannotquite coincide,or 
rather with two words in it, is this—“ There is not much gain in the 
quality of fruits, it any.” The qualifying words “ if any ” implies there 
has been no gain. I think, on the contrary, the gain has been very 
decided, but am open to correction. I have no time to hunt up records 
on the point, and may possibly be led a little astray by faulty memory, 
and we have it on a great polemical authority that this is excusable. 
In considering old and new fruits let us take Grapes. The two best 
in existence, the Black Hamburgh and Muscat of Alexandria, were 
grown half a century ago ; so were the Frontignans, but these latter 
delicious little Grapes appear to have gone out of fashion. But previous 
to Her Majesty’s reign we had, I think, no Black Alicantes, no Gros 
Guillaumes, no Foster’s Seedlings, no Mrs. Pinces, no Madresfield 
Courts, no Duke of Buccleuchs, no Gros Marocs, no Gros Colmans, and 
others might be indicated that were not known in 1837, but sufficient 
are named to show that there has been advance in Grapes, and I cannot 
help thinking a very great advance. 
Now let us go outside. Apples.—I know we had good sorts over 
forty years ago ; indeed, I never remember better than the red-cheeked 
“ Summerings,” the old Ribstons, the Wyken Pippins, and some others ; 
but possibly their quality was enhanced by the circumstances of the 
case, for we often incurred some risk in gathering them, for the simple 
reason they were not exactly our own property before they were in 
possession ; but I remember no Cox’s Orange Pippins or Pomonas, no 
Lord Suffields, no Duchess of Oldenburgs, no Prince Alberts, no Ecklin- 
villes, no Stirling Castles, no Lord Derbys, no Lady Hennikers, no 
Lord Grosvenors, no Mr. Gladstones, unless the old “Summering” was 
identical, for we know that “ grand old ” sorts do sometimes get new 
names. But the subject as regards Apples need not be pursued, as I 
think enough has been said, if no mistake has been made, to show that 
there has been a little gain in this important fruit. 
Pears. —Names crowd on me] which I had not seen forty years ago. 
Here are a few—The Royal Pears of Mr. Huyshe, Prince Consort, Prince 
of Wales, Princess of Wales and Victoria. Beurr^s Giffard, Hard 1 ', 
de l’Assomption, Superfin; Doyennd du Comice, Souvenir du Congres, 
Marechal de Cour, Marie Benoist, Madame Treyve, and Ollivier de 
Serres. We have thus the additions of early and late Pears, and all of 
the best. Numbers might possibly be enumerated that have been 
brought into cultivation during the past fifty years if anyone were dis¬ 
posed to search into the matter. 
Plums. — I think there has been a useful gain in Plums during the 
period in question. The most generally productive and serviceable of 
all Plums, Denyer’s Victoria, whenever and wherever it may have been 
raised, has certainly come into cultivation during Victoria’s reign. The 
season of Plums has been extended too by the Messrs. Rivers, father and 
son, the former giving us the Early Prolific, the latter the Grand Duke. 
From the same source also comes the Czar, that has met with much ac¬ 
ceptance by growers of fruit for market, and the demand for trees is, I 
believe, constantly increasing ; indeed, I think that is the case with all 
the varieties named, so that there seems to have been a gain in Plums. 
So there has in Cherries, Peaches, and Nectarines ; but a long time 
elapses before new fruits get widely circulated and generally known. 
Early Rivers, Governor Wood, Monstreuse de Mezel, Reine Hortense, 
Bigarreau Noir de Schmidt have been added to Cherries in my time—at 
least I think so, but may be wrong as regards Governor Wood. Peaches 
have increased in numbers and in varieties that cultivators would not like 
to be without, especially the early American and Sawbridgwortheans—of 
the former Alexander, Waterloo, and Hale’s Early ; of the latter Early 
Rivers, Alfred, Beatrice, and Louise ; then of late sorts we have 
Goshawk, Sea Eagle, Magdala, and Gladstone, some or all of which 
hive probably a long future before them. As to Nectarines, it will not 
be far from the truth to say that Rivers has revolutionised them. When 
Her Majesty ascended the throne there was no such large and rich 
fruits as are now produced under the names of Pineapple, Rivers’ 
Orange, Lord Napier, Victoria, Stanwick Elruge, Albert Victor, Hum¬ 
boldt, Milton, Newton, and Spencer. The “ gain” is enormous, as I am 
sure must be admitted on reflection. 
In small fruits additions have been made that arc worthy of recog¬ 
nition. In Strawberries I have no recollection of gathering Vicomtesse 
Hericart de Thury, Dr. Hogg, President, Sir Joseph Paxton, Marguerite, 
or Empress Eugenie even thirty years ago ; and I suspect that no half- 
dozen that were grown in 1837 can be found to equal those named. In 
Raspberries we have gains in Prolific and Prince of Wales; in Black 
Currants, Lee’s Prolific ; in Reds, Victoria ; in Gooseberries—well the 
additions are so numerous that I had perhaps better let them alone, or 
the Editor will be playing old gooseberry with me, on the ground that 
he has more than enough at once of the jottings of—A Thinker. 
ROSE-GROWING FOR BEGINNERS. 
Mr. Gilhour has now, I presume, completed his useful and interest¬ 
ing articles on “ Rose-Growing for Beginners.” Now please allow him 
to collect them into a neat little volume, and command him peremp¬ 
torily to publish it, when I feel sure it will meet with a ready sale. 
As soon as Bank Holiday in August is past, and R >se shows over. 
