312 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
October 13, 1887. 
Mr. Iggulden has no justification whatever for his cool assumption 
that I had charge of a garden “ somewhere not far from Lincolnshire.” 
I never had charge of any garden on the borders of that county. No 
Beetroot of my sowing and growing was ever wheeled out of the garden 
to the pigs in the manner so graphically described on the page quoted. 
A circumstance of the kind may have occurred somewhere, and no doubt 
did occur, or it would not have been recorded, but I have certainly never 
been snubbed for growing coarse vegetables, as the fanciful remarks 
imply; 
And yet presenting that view of my capacity, your correspondent 
flatteringly refers to me as so “ good a man.” I am not aware he has 
ever seen my work “ except on paper,” and clearly that does not meet 
his approval. Where, then, does the “good” come in? I grow coarse 
vegetables and get snubbed ; I communicate what my critic labours to 
prove erroneous, yet he, by some strange method of reasoning, applies to 
me the same mark of commendation as if he approved of everything I 
said and did. Ballast wanted. 
As to the controversy of deep versus shallow land working, Mr. 
Iggulden is ready to fight the battle over again. That we can quite 
understand ; but it is not necessary, and better for him not to fall foul 
of the first principles of husbandry. He knows best, no doubt, how to 
manage the land in his charge, or at least he is learning how to do so ; 
but to denounce deep culture as a system is a waste of words. His first 
onslaught on it was practically unqualified, but he has since taken care 
to qualify almost every sentence. The last is in this wise, “ Some 
gardens are benefited by intelligent deep cultivation, and there are 
plenty injured by a reckless adoption of the plan.” The plan of what ? 
Intelligent deep culture ? No garden has ever been injured by that ; 
and as for reckless intelligent culture there is no such combination, for 
if a practice is reckless it is not intelligent, and if intelligent it is not 
reckless. Much land in gardens and fields has been injured by deep 
working, as all intelligent gardeners and farmers know in these days. 
Burying a thick layer of sour subsoil on the better surface soil that is 
turned down in the process is not “ culture ; ” it is spoliation. Culture 
represents improvement, and a cultivator is an improver. It is well to 
comprehend the significance of words before assailing a system. The 
so-called steam “ cultivators ” that were recklessly employed twenty or 
thirty years ago were entirely misnamed. They ought to have been 
called land ruiners. The best implements are very different now, for 
they stir well the surface and break up the subsoil, leaving the great 
bulk of it below. That represents culture by the crops following being 
better than those before them. I do not think there are any of these 
real “ cultivators ’’ in Mr. Iggulden’s part; they have not reached there 
yet. The high culture of the north travels southwards slowly, conse¬ 
quently where the surface of land is merely turned over, the hard 
subsoil being left unmoved from generation to generation, farmers have 
to be content, or discontent, with less crops, landlords with less rent, 
and workmen with less wages than where the opposite system prevails. 
Founding an argument in favour of shallow over deep working on a 
patch of ground of exceptional density—land that has not had its 
cultural resources developed—is a mistake. It is inherently faulty— 
a small dabbling with a great subject that can only do good in one way, 
and that is by making the weakness of the mere surface digging system 
more apparent. There are soils that will “ hold ” sufficient nutriment 
for the support of a fair annual crop in 9 inches or a foot from the 
surface, but even most of these are amenable to improvement by a more 
“ intelligent ” system, and in the overwhelming majority ot cases the 
•improvement from deeper working would be enormous. Science and 
practice prove this to demonstration. Most gardeners who have to be 
content with shallow culture regret the want of means to work the land 
deeper, but Mr. Iggulden does not appear to be one of them. 
He says truly “ heavy cold lands require sunshine and warmth.” I 
suspect they cannot have warmth without sunshine, and goes on to 
add, “ and they also require good surface culture.” Why “ also ” when 
they cannot have the greatest warmth without it ? Th y are warmed 
the quickei and better when the subsoil is broken and the water passes 
the more freely away. They are cold because wet, and that is the 
condition of the Marston garden. It is not until the stagnant water is 
out that the warm air can enter with its great fertilising power. The 
water must be dissipated before the heat of the earth is raised a degree. 
I told Mr. Iggulden a long time ago when trying to answer one of his 
characteristic essays, that if he could not drain his land in the ordinary 
way to throw it into rid.es and crop them instead of sowing and 
planting on the level. He appeared to have found that Lettuces grew 
best on Celery ridges, and actually had the temerity to claim that as 
evidence against deep culture. They grew so well because of the deeper 
soil he provided them and warmer rooting medium. His own facts 
scatter his'fanciful theories to the winds. If he can dig out a number 
of trenches and spread the soil on the ground between them without 
making that ground deeper he will be very near the solution of the old 
problem of putting a quart of beer into a pint pot. His experience of 
the best crops being on ridges proves with exactitude the benefit of a 
deepened and warmer soil. He lets us know that his past method of 
culture, which he advocated so strongly, was not the best, for he 
describes his ridge crops as “extraordinary.” He is then learning still, 
and finding out in spite of himself the benefits of deep culture. 
His successful experiment of placing Potatoes on the surface and 
covering them with soil equally proves the advantages of a deeper and 
warmer rooting medium for the plants. But what is an experiment 
with Mr. Iggulden is the regular practioe in some other gardens 
where the land is of a cold heavy nature. I hope he will admit that the 
difference between placing the sets on the surface and sinking them 
3 inches below it is a gain in depth to that extent, and of the best and 
warmest soil. It is nothing less than extraordinary that anyone should 
so completely prove the fallacy of his own arguments, and apparently 
without knowing it. 
My jaunty critic amuses himself at my expense because I gathered 
evidence in favour of deep culture from several of the best exhibitors- 
of vegetables during the past hot season. These men he complacently 
pats on the back, and then denounces prize vegetables as coarse. I think 
he knows that in the best competition they are quite the reverse. They 
may be large, perhaps some of them too large for my fancy, but they are 
not coarse, or they would not win. And now let me give the retort 
courteous that he has invited. Judging by the reports of shows Mr. 
Iggulden never misses a prize when he can win it. He admits the hot 
summer has suited his garden exactly, yet I am not aware he has been 
strikingly successful in vegetable classes against the best growers. He 
used to be considered rather a formidable opponent, and I, with others, 
have been hoping to see him come to the front again, but so far in vain. 
The summer was right, but something else was wrong evidently ; per* 
haps he had not time to mulch and give water, and attend to showing ^ 
still, I am glad to see he “ pulled off ” several prizes for fruit and cut 
flowers, and hereby has the congratulations of one whose harmless- 
signature appears to “ tickle him up ” a little.—A Thinkeb. 
[Another communication on this subject arrived too late for insertion 
this week.] 
GRAPE JUDGING. 
As one of those at the Crystal Palace fruit and flower Exhibition 
who heartily agreed that Mr. Ward was not justly treated by the Judges- 
who were entrusted in making the awards in the Grape classes, I may 
be allowed to say a word on the subject, not that I am the least in- 
favour of a matter of this kind being brought before the gardening com¬ 
munity through the different periodicals, but quite the reverse. That 
errors do occur on the part of the judges is an established fact, and there 
is not the least doubt that exhibitors are very apt to overrate their own 
productions ; but in Mr. Ward’s case we have from the different reports- 
which have appeared ample evidence that the Grapes in question were, 
under-estimated. Further, I think it is scarcely consistent with reason- 
that Mr. Ward, whose reputation as a fruit grower is well known to- 
the public generally, or any other exhibitor of proved ability, would 
ever attempt to take inferior produce a distance of over a hundred 
miles in view of the chance of snapping up a prize, and especially to a 
first-rate exhibition, where the liberal prizes are likely to bring out a 
great competition. I am willing to admit that in Mr. Ward’s collection 
there were a few weak points ; but is not this the case in every collec¬ 
tion of twenty dishes of fruit put up for exhibition, still not sufficient to- 
condemn the lot, nor to convince those that saw them they were only 
deserving of a third prize ? I had the privilege of seeing Mr. Ward’s- 
Grapes last year which easily secured for him the second prize in a good 
competition, and I saw them again this season, and at once took them to- 
be far superior to those of last year. It is evident that such an 
enthusiastic gardener as Mr. Ward knew his bunches well befere taking 
them to the Palace, and was not the least afraid of all comers, and un¬ 
doubtedly he fully expected meeting several. In conclusion I need 
hardly say that to have twenty bunches of Grapes in ten distinct 
varieties fit for the exhibition table by the end of August or the be¬ 
ginning of September is a task probably only known to the grower.—- 
Venn. 
PJEONY MOUTAN. 
The deciduous shrubby Pteonv is becoming a great favourite. For 
many years two species have been cultivated, but of late the French and 
other hybrids have been introduced, and their extreme effectiveness as 
decorative plants has been recognised. There are two drawbacks to be 
found in Pseony culture, one is that the young shoots are liable to be 
injured by frost, the points of the growth also being generally* killed 
back during winter. The other drawback is, that there will be very 
few shoots to become damaged unless some change is made in the old- 
fashioned mode of culture. Under ordinary shrubbery cultivation the 
plants do not grow and seldom flower, but place them in rich well worked 
soil, and in a few years you have a bush which you occasionally step 
round in order to compare its progress, and the flowers a foot across may 
be counted by the dozen. After getting established the shoots must be 
occasionally thinned, and when the plants become too large they may be- 
cut back with impunity. Both foliage and buds are of much value for 
filling large vases. They are indeed plants which everybody who has 
room should grow.—B. 
NOTES ON THE CULTIVATION OF ASPARAGUS. 
I AM sorry I cannot answer “ J. L. B.’s ” queries on September 29th in 
the way I should like to do, as the Asparagus grown on the flat was only 
under my charge for the latter half of the season, and I do not know to- 
what extent manure was given to the ground previously, although I 
believe it was the practice to give a good dressing of cow manure in 
the autumn, but not with salt in spring as advised. To some extent 
“ J. L. B.” may be right-in his surmise as to its not being so liberally 
treated, and of course, through not salting, weeds were much more 
troublesome than they are now. 
I should like to give my reasons more fully than in previous notes 
