106 
JOURXiVL OF HORTICULTURE AKD COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[ February 9, 838. 
superannuated cattle drover before I am done, and if I am not ashamed 
to admit this I do not see why anyone who is a market gardener should 
object to be called one. 
The paragraph to which my attention is directed is the following— 
“ Personally I do not see why a gentleman should be thought mean if 
he disposes of his surplus Peaches any more than of his surplus short¬ 
horns or Berkshire pigs. He is not regarded as a butcher if he does 
the one ; then why should he be called a market gardener if he does 
the other ? ” Most certainly a gentleman should not be considered 
“ mean ” for selling food produce that would bo otherwise wasted. I 
could tell of a nobleman who sells his surplus fruit and vegetables and 
devotes the whole of the proceeds to hospitals. It is to the advantage 
of the community that private garden crops should be sold, because not 
only is much labour thereby employed in the production, but con¬ 
sumers are Ijetter supplied with what they require at the cheapest rate, 
as the greater the supply the lower the market rates must be. But 
while I would do the fullest justice to noble sellers, and claim for them 
the freest action, it is impossible not to distinguish between those who make 
selling a secondary matter, a prevention of waste, and those whe convert 
their gardens into trade establishments with the object of gain. And 
even then I would not object if these were placed on an equal rating 
assessment with cultivators whose livelihood depends on their work ; but 
I cannot recognise the principle of fair trading when one grower for 
market is rated at from 100 to 200 per cent, higher than another, and I 
know that industrious men have been crushed out of competition 
through having to work against gentlemen on unequal terms. 1 
remember “ D., Beal,” once scoring a strong point when he submitted 
that a grower of florists’ flowers was no longer an amateur when he 
published a catalogue of plants for sale, but must then be regarded as a 
nurseryman. The proposition was unanswerable. I have before me a 
trade catalogue, issued from the gardens of a nobleman, from which 
gardens not only seeds, but all the flowers, fruit, and vegetables that 
can be raised, are sold. It is a trade establishment or nothing. Why, 
then, should not its owner be called a seed dealer and market gardener ? 
It Is well known that ladies of distinction conduct dressmaking and 
millinery busines.ses in London, and are not ashamed of their calling. 
Why should they be ? It is at least as honourable as the useless frivoli¬ 
ties of life that many engage in as befitting their circumstances ; as 
honourable, too, as it is for their lords to engage in banking, coal dealing, 
and other trades. Xo one objects to this, because it is fair trade, and 
their competitors arc not handicapped in towns by accidental conditions. 
But to go into the countiy. Is a gentleman who sells farm stock 
and produce a butcher .’ He would be if he killed his shorthorns and 
pigs and cut them up for sale ; but if he only rears and grows them, as 
he has every right to do. 1 take it he is not a butcher, but a farmer. And 
many a high bred gentleman does not object to be so called. We road of 
one of the kings of the realm rejoicing in the appellation of “ Farmer 
George.” One of the best farmers 1 have known and Best of men was a 
country vicar, and he hail the word “ Farmer ” attached to his name on 
his carts. Once he sent me with a man to drive some cattle a few miles 
to one of his filends. The man—that is, the drover in chief, for I was 
a small subordinate, was a thirsty specimen of humanity and did not 
like returning home without a drink, while he scarcely dared to ask for 
one. However, he started, but suddenly turned round while within ear¬ 
shot of the master and shouted, “ If you please, sir, if the vicar should 
happen to ask what sort of beer you keep, what am I to say, sir 2” What 
could the master say under the circumstances, but “ Come back and try 
it ?” The man’s point was thus gained at that end, but there was the 
other. Fortunately the vicar was in the way on our arriving home, 
and we were greeted with a hearty “ Well, you have tot back, and what 
did Mr. Blank say V' “ He asked me what .sort of a farmer you was, sir, 
and I hope I didn't make a mistake, for I told him you had six quarters 
of Wheat an acre in one close, seven in another, and eight in another.” 
The Vicar paused, then replied, ■' You told him quite right, go in and 
have some supper.” So, as my chief said, all came right at both ends. 
I fear some of my friends will think I have had a “queer bringing up 
and it is true 1 have had varied experiences, with not a bad memory, 
and I cannot forget this good vicar farmer. He was rich, and farmed 
with a high motive of showing what could be done by suixirior culture 
and the free yet judicious employment of labour. His farm was a model, 
as clean as a garden, and his exact accounts showed it was profitable. 
He is long since called away. The pari.sh remains with the same 
acreage, but not half so many men are emploved on the farms, and it is 
ciuestionable if they yield half the amount of produce they did when 
the vicar led the way so nobly. He was a devoted parish priest and 
proud to be a farmer. I have seen a nobleman, too, indicate his calling 
as a farmer on his farm vehicles. Why, then, should a gentleman who 
m.akes all the money he can by the sale of fruit and vegetables object 
to be called a market gardener 2 I cannot see that one vocation should 
be more undignified than the other, and I think whoever is ashamed of 
either should retire from the business. 
But I have the suggestion of “ meannc.ss ” to deal with, and this can 
best be done by relating an episode from life exactly as it occurred. It 
shows the difference in “ feeling ” upwards of forty years ago and now. 
Then trading by jiersons of rank was done clandestinely, now it is con¬ 
ducted openly, and few persons will doubt which is the better way. A 
change was made in the garden of a territorial magnate. All the pro¬ 
duce that could be raised and spared was to be sold. A greengrocer was 
engaged to fetch the “ stuff,” and none was to be sold to anyone else, 
but he must not come on the premises till seven o’clock at night, and 
mu.st be off them by half-past five in the morning in summer ; and in 
winter the time was half an hour before and after working hours. I do 
not know why the rule wms imposed, but I know it was strictly enforced 
for a few years, then broke down. One Saturday morning the green¬ 
grocer took away all he could do with, and at night I was sent to borrow 
a horse and cart, as our owm would not do. Two men and a boy were 
sent to the market to sell new Potatoi-s, Strawberries, &c., against the 
greengrocer, and were instructed to call at the best houses. I was the 
boy, and got lost in the crowd. It would seem as if pride were in¬ 
grained in my constitution ; at any rate, I was ashamed of my work, 
shirked it, and got what was known in those days as a “ good jacketing.” 
That was the “ meanest ” act I have seen in connection with selling pro¬ 
duce from a private garden. The author of it was not disclosed. 
Some thought it was the steward, who was known as a “ sharp ” sort of 
person, others the gardener, and others again the men who prevailed on 
him to let them earn a shilling or two by the huxtering ; but no one 
suspected the owner of the garden of this peculiar method of trading, 
the worst feature of which vv'as borrowing the cart as a mask for the 
whole transaction. I remember it well for the reason named—the 
“ jacketing.” 
My friends must wait as patiently as they can for references to other 
subjects they wish me to dwell on, for if I start now there is no telling 
where I may stop, and it is easy to have too much of a bad thing.—■ 
Spectatok. 
FLORAL DECORATIONS. 
The leading article by ‘‘ C.” on the above subject last week reviews 
the questions previously discussed in the Journal. Being somewhat of 
an enthusiast in floral decorations generally, I have been glad to see the 
matter taken up by the Journal, and also that some of the committees 
of societies are acting upon the suggestions. 1 have often wondered 
there has not been more written about it, as there is a very wide scope 
in matters of taste, as people seldom agree at once or even after a good 
deal of discussion as to what is the correct thing. The bouquet 
mentioned by “ 0.” I should say had been made to order, as I cannot 
undi-rstand any practical florist committing such an atrocity. The 
proper place for real Lilac would be in rather medium size sprays round 
the outside of the bouquet drooping a little over the paper. I have 
heard of a fashionable lady entering a ballroom with a large bouquet of 
Richard ia spathes, and 1 tohl someone of the circumstance, and they 
exclaimed, “How beautiful!” Not long ago I saw an exhibition bouquet at 
a local show, by which I mean one not for competition ; it was made in 
a very loose style, not very bad till the centre was rrached, then a large 
Richardia stood about (! inches clear of the other or surrounding part of 
the bouquet. It was a bridal bouquet, and I irnfortunately made a 
laughing remark to my neighbour, and was caught in the .act by the 
proprietress, who said, “ Do you know that style is to be the taking one 
of the future 2” Then I thought tastes certainly differ. Faircy a 
Richardia in a bridal bouquet! but I am of the same opinion as “ C.” 
that these eccentricities in bouquet making are brought about by the 
peculiar tastes of different customers. I had on one occasion a special 
order for a bridal bouquet not less than 2 feet in diameter. I pointed 
out to the lady the enormous size it would be, but all to no purpose. It 
was a grand bouquet compose! of Eucharis, G.ardenias, white Roses, 
Lily of the Valley, white Azalea, white Cyclamen, white Heath, and 
studded with single flowers of Ccelogyne cristata, interspersed with the 
Lily of the Valley, but much too large and weighty for a lady to carry. 
I could have made as handsome a bouquet with half the flowers, but of 
course 1 had to obey orders. I avoid using white Camellias in bouquets 
as much as possible, as they are injured by the least touch of anything 
hard. I use them in wreaths, as they look well if put into use at once, 
which ill wreaths or crosses is generally the case. I am also of the same 
opinion as “ C.” that Richardias should be used sparingly, say one in the 
centre of a cross and three at the mast in a wreath without special 
orders to the contrary. 
1 should like to suggest that if gardeners wish to excel in bouquet 
making they should not bo content with defeating their fellow gardeners, 
but to try hard to lower the colours of the florists who exhibit in the 
neighbourhood, and not to mind a first or second failure, but to per¬ 
severe. Fortune favours the brave, and the fiercer the fight the greater 
the honour. 1 should like to ask “ C.” if he does not .agree with me 
that of late years too much importance has been attached to the first 
prizes at exhibitions, I do not mean that any exhibitor should not aim 
higher th.an second or third, but that when obtaining either of those 
places he should be encouraged rather more than it has been the custom 
of late, as often and often there is not much difference, if any, between 
the first three exhibits. 1 am not alluding entirelj'’ to floral decorations, 
but other exhibits also. I cannot help thinking if, “ Well done ; per¬ 
severe ! ” was said to the unsuccessful sometimes, it would stimulate 
him to greater exertion, whereas in the re^'erse case he would perhaps 
give up in despair. 
I should like to have somconc’sopinion as to dinner-table decorations. 
I have watched them year after year for a long time, and have often 
thought that an improvement could be m.ade. Nothing.has been intro¬ 
duced at any time better than the stands th.at are met with at c.xhi- 
