April 29, 1886. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
327 
29 
TH 
SO 
F 
1 
S 
2 
SUN 
1st Sunday after Easter. 
3 
M 
4 
TU 
5 
W 
Society of Arts at 8 p.M. 
THE PAST AND FUTURE OF THE ROYAL 
HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 
OR some time past a feeling has been growing 
and deepening that the position of the Royal 
Horticultural Society as regards its location and 
tenure at South Kensington is the reverse of 
satisfactory, and if we are not misinformed pre¬ 
liminary steps have been taken with the object 
of severing a connection that is to say the least 
incongruous, and which must sooner or later 
terminate, it may be abruptly, and result in the 
pitiable spectacle of an old chartered Society being cast out 
on the world without a habitation. 
Nothing can be more unwise than to take any rash steps 
that may lead to sudden and fundamental changes in 
established institutions ; at the same time it is none the less 
necessary to avoid a rigid adherence to existing arrange¬ 
ments through the force of sentiment alone. When the 
circumstances of tho time indicate with sufficient clearness 
future possibilities, and these are not such as can be favour¬ 
ably anticipated, the most destructive of all policies is to 
stand still and trust to chance to avert in some miraculous 
manner the danger that is seen looming in the distance. It 
cannot be said that those in whom the interests of the Royal 
Horticultural Society are vested have acted precipitately in 
the conduct of its affairs. On the contrary, there is not 
wanting a feeling that if there is a lack of anything it is of a 
disposition, as it is expressed, to “ launch out.” It is very 
easy for persons of sanguine temperament and free from the 
responsibilities of office to advocate changes and force on the 
popular remedy for all ills—an “ advanced policy.” It is 
well that outside pressure should be exercised as a stimulant 
to progressive action in consonance with ever-changing cir¬ 
cumstances ; but it is nevertheless imperative that respon¬ 
sible officials consider well before taking a “ new departure ” 
that may be fraught with important consequences. The 
change now projected is too momentous in its nature to be 
lightly made, and it ought not to be made without very serious 
deliberation; and considering the habitual caution of the 
Council of the Society, it may be reasonably, not to say con¬ 
fidently, expected that if anything like an unanimity of 
feeling prevails in favour of a transference of the seat of 
government, that very strong reasons exist for the important 
step contemplated. 
What are the facts of the case ? In the first place, even 
if the Royal Horticultural Society had a certainty of tenure 
at South Kensington, its objects and those of the Royal 
Commissioners, who are the owners of the property, are far 
from being identical. That of itself, however, may not be 
sufficient to justify a divorce, though it is evidence of the 
initial mistake that was made in the union that was effected 
in 1859. For some time anterior to that date the Horti¬ 
cultural Society had been in financial difficulties, mainly 
through unremunerative expenditure on shows and general 
unpopularity. In 1856 it was only by a special effort of 
earnest horticulturists the Chiswick Gardens were saved, and 
No. 305.—Vol. XII., Third Series. 
a proposal was made to effect au union with the Crystal 
Palace Company. In 1858 it was decided to sell the Society’s 
house in Regent Street, and it was sold in the following 
year, the Chiswick Gardens being again saved, but only by 
the strenuous action of practical men and against the pro¬ 
posal of the then Secretary and Council. The library was 
also sold. The late Prince Consort then became President, 
and first acted in that capacity, attended by the Queen, at a 
show in St. James’ Hall. In the meantime the great scheme 
was propounded, under which a vacant space was to be 
converted into a splendid garden, and the Society, which was 
to share in the undertaking, was to realise a brilliant career. 
No more debt, no more contentions, nothing but harmony 
was to reign, and a cloudless future was confidently antici¬ 
pated—by the promoters of the scheme, but not by all who 
were concerned for the best interest of the Society as the 
exponent of scientific and practical horticulture in this 
country. 
The meeting, at which the decision was arrived at com¬ 
mitting the Horticultural Society to enormous responsibilities, 
was held in the theatre of the Society of Arts on July 20th, 
1859, being the adjournment of a previous meeting held on 
June 9fch. The opening meeting, which was described in our 
report of it as “ one of the most important that was ever 
held since the establishment of the Society, to consider a 
proposition which emanated from the Royal Commissioners 
of the Great Exhibition of 1851 for the construction of a 
grand horticultural garden on a plot of ground in the posses¬ 
sion of the Commissioners at Kensington.” The attendance 
was small, “being by no means commensurate with the 
importance of the subject.” Dr. Lindley in advocating the 
scheme pointed out that the Council had been in communi¬ 
cation with the Commissioners, who wished to know if the 
Society would form a new garden upon the ground placed at 
its disposal, and that a Council meeting had been “ held at 
Buckingham Palace, at which the Prince Consort presided, 
and His Royal Highness thought that the proposition was of 
sufficient importance to be discussed by the Society at large.” 
It was not, however, so discussed ; for Mr. Charlwood 
proposed that a circular should be sent to every member with 
full details of the plan. He objected to the scheme, because 
it was not one which went to further the objects for which 
the Society was founded, and deprecated the outlay of 
£50,000 debentures. No notice was taken of that propo¬ 
sition ; but a resolution was carried in favour of the plan 
generally, that the negotiations should continue, and the 
final proposals of the Commissioners be reported as early as 
possible. They were reported to the adjourned meeting on 
the date named, “ at which there were not at any one time 
thirty-five members present.” Yet the momentous resolution 
was passed “ that this meeting approves of the steps taken 
by the Council; authorises the negotiation with the Royal 
Commissioners to be continued, and empowers the Council 
to proceed to raise the sum required for the construction of 
the garden at Kensington Gore, and if the money should be 
obtained to complete the arrangements.” 
There can be no doubt that the decision was arrived at 
with the greater alacrity in consequence of Mr. C. W. Dilke 
observing that it had been his duty to keep the Prince Consort 
and the Royal Commissioners informed of all the bearings of 
the case, and he was instructed by his Royal Highness, who 
had looked over the draft report, to say that if the resolution 
submitted to the first meeting were passed he would assist; 
but at the same time he (Mr. Dilke) was commanded not to 
express any opinion on the part of His Royal Highness or 
Her Majesty, so that there might be no appearance of dicta¬ 
tion ; but after the passing of Hie first resolution sanctioning 
the scheme generally he announced that Her Majesty and His 
Royal Highness would give donations of £1000 and £500 
respectively, that it was also proposed to place the Prince of 
Wales and the younger Princes and Princesses as Life 
Governors, and he announced that Her Royal Highness the 
No. 1961. —Yol. LXX1Y., Old Series. 
