Jane 3, 1886. 5 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
439 
given number of plants than any other which I am acquainted 
with. It originated as a sport from Golden Empress in the hands 
of an ex-policeman in Somersetshire, who was fortunate in fixing 
the sport and distributing it amongst horticulturists. The present 
general system of growing Chrysanthemums for the production of 
large blooms is not favourable for increasing the number of new 
varieties by sports, as the side shoots are taken off the plants 
as they grow, and it is from these side shoots, when they are allowed 
to develope into flowers that the largest number of sports appear. 
The best method of fixing sports and obtaining a stock of plants 
of the sported variety is the following If one branch only 
produces the new bloom cut away all other branches, and remove 
the dead bloom from the “ sport,” but not the leaves ; turn the 
plant out of the pot and lay it on its side in a propagating house or 
frame which has bottom heat, and cover the roots and branches 
with cocoa-nut fibre, burying the buds in the axil, but not the 
leaves. This induces shoots to break at each joint, and when these 
are long enough take them off as a cutting with a sharp knife, but 
do not cut too low, as that might prevent other young growths 
springing from the base. Insert the cuttings singly in small pots, 
using sandy soil, place in a propagating case with bottom heat, and 
attend to carefully with water and shade. Plants which have 
been thus established should produce flowers of the new variety. 
Some growers cut the stem into lengths, but these do not strike 
freely, and a very small number of plants can be raised in this 
manner as compared to the system of inducing new growth to start 
from the buds. It is advisable to strike all cuttings growing from 
the base of the plant carefully, marking them, as some may perfect 
flowers of the sported variety. — E. Molyneux. 
GARDENERS AND PREMIUMS. 
It requires two to make a bargain, and it is evident that there are 
plenty of men willing to pay a premium of £5 or £10 for one or two 
years. A gardener, however energetic and pushing he may be, cannot do 
the whole work required in a large establishment, and therefore must 
have assistance. Young men are eager to enter large establishments, 
especially if they have a name, for they naturally conclude that garden¬ 
ing is “ better done ” in such places than is the case in those of a smaller 
size. They offer premiums, or their friends do, and are in consequence 
taken on when there is a vacancy in preference to men who will not pay 
That this is a fact I kuow by my own experience. I have been offered 
premiums many times from young men, gardeners, and from the friends 
of young men. This spring no less than three such offers have been made 
me without being sought. 
When I took charge of these gardens over eight years ago four men 
were paying premiums of £10 each for two years, two having paid nearly 
the full amount, one about three parts, and the other half. Whether 
these men would have been willing to pay me the remainder I do not 
know, but, knowing the circumstances of their case I announced that 
premiums would not be taken from them and that they could all remain, 
provided they conducted themselves properly and did their work. Since 
those men left I could have filled every vacant place with premium men 
had I desired to do so. 
There is another side to this question, and that is, that there are 
gardeners who will not engage men unless they are prepared to pay the 
premium they require for a certain length of time. At the expiration of 
that time they are sent to some nursery to take their chance for a place 
in another garden, or if they are not willing to enter a nursery they are 
soon treated coolly. This is not mere fancy, but a fact that can be 
proved. Frequently the premium system in gardens has commenced 
with taking one or two improvers who may have perhaps served a term 
only as boys in some second-rate garden, and they or their friends are 
anxious to give them a good start, hence a premium is willingly paid to 
establish them in a garden of some pretension. I see but little harm in 
this if it went no further ; but some gardeners, like other individuals out¬ 
side our profession, do not possess the virtue of unselfishness, and there¬ 
fore are only satisfied when the whole of the young men under them are 
paying premiums. I have known this system extend to the foreman, so 
that room for a fresh one could be made by elevating the oldest hand to 
that position until his time for paying expired. 
Such a system cannot be too strongly condemned, for it not only tells 
materially against the young men, but also the garden in which they are 
employed. It is worse for the latter, in fact both, when the foreman is 
one of themselves instead of being a thoroughly competent person. The 
person who benefits by this practice—which is not uncommon—is the one 
who receives the money, and this is more apparent than real, for his re¬ 
putation, as well as that of the garden, soon suffers, and in the end he is 
the loser. Premium men are in most cases less experienced than could 
be obtained for the wages they receive. The consequence is that they are 
a source of annoyance to the foreman and render his duties threefold 
more difficult, for he in a large measure is responsible to the chief for all 
their actions. The majority of them have to be shown or told every little 
thing, or blunders perhaps of a serious nature occur, which often is the case. 
Frequently when they are told and shown, mistakes are made, not 
wilfully, but through inexperience. In a large garden where the whole 
of the men are incompetent to do the work required of them, the foreman, 
however good he may be, has a very trying and by no means a desirable 
post. On him falls in no small degree the task of teaching, and the daily 
difficulties that arise through lack of experienced men to assist him in 
satisfactorily carrying out the many and varied duties entrusted to him. 
Under such circumstances the reward for labour done is paid to the wrong 
person, for instead of the chief receiving the premiums I think the fore¬ 
man is more entitled to them. Young men that pay premiums generally 
receive as much wages per week as experienced journeymen can be 
obtained for. The latter will not pay premiums, for they are in demand 
in plenty of gardens where the gardener, rather than enrich himself by a 
few pounds annually, is anxious that his own reputation should not suffer 
as well as that of the garden. If an employer allows his gardener to take 
premiums to make up his wages, and men are willing to pay them, I do 
not see that anybody else has anything to do with the matter; but 
employers had much better pay their gardeners an extra £10 or more a 
year, as the case may be, for in return they would be repaid more than 
twofold. 
It may be argued by the advocates of premiums that men appreciate 
more highly the knowledge gained if they pay for it. Perhaps they do, I 
will admit this point for the sake of argument, but it must be remembered 
that gardening is not learned in two years. If men appreciate that for 
which they pay, and pay only for one or two years’ service in some good 
garden, they have not much to appreciate. There is another side ; 
perhaps they lose more than they learn. When a man knows that he 
is secure for a certain period of time he invariably makes but little if any 
progress, and at the end of the term is no better than at the beginning. 
There is a tendency in all of us to grow indifferent, and I know nothing 
more certain to produce it with many men than security for a time. It 
causes carelessness and after negligence, from which they are only roused 
by some individual who will have the work done properly, quickly, and 
intelligently. They realise then that it is necessary for them to push, or 
they will be dismissed, and this is the turning point in the lives of many, 
and in others the end of their gardening career. Do not let me be mis¬ 
understood, for all men who pay premiums are not careless and negligent, for 
some are sharp, persevering, intelligent, pushing young men. I have had 
some of the indifferent and slothful as well as some of the latter from 
premium establishments. Security for two years through paying a 
premium has this tendency, for it is certain that gardeners will not dis¬ 
charge them unless they become intolerable until the amount agreed upon 
has been paid. 
It has been said there would be an insufficiency of young men in the 
gardening profession if it were not for these apprentice establishments. 
Such is not the case, for there is work in nearly all gardens of any size 
for one or more boys, and there is no difficulty in obtaining them, and 
most of them now are better educated than the present race of gardeners 
were when they wero boys. It is uncharitable to keep these boys back 
because they are not in a position to pay premiums. Many of them in 
consequence are destined to be labourers, for there is no other prospect 
for them without someone kindly takes them by the hand and pushes 
them forward to give them a start. I thoroughly believe there would be 
less second-rate young men wanting places to-day if the premium system 
was abolished. 
The question of dress has been raised, but many a young man might 
be termed “ dressy ” when he enters a fresh garden, for there are plenty 
of young men who turn out their old things and enter upon their new 
duties in a highly respectable manner, perhaps it may be with a new suit 
of clothes. I have had several who have done so, and further, I have in 
the past done the same myself. It invariably follows that a man who is 
clean and neat in his dress is equally so in his work. I like to see young 
men respectably dressed, and should be one of the last to interfere with 
a man on this point. Gardeners are not justified in dictating to a man 
what they are to wear and what they are not to wear. Young as well as 
head gardeners have a perfect right to liberty of opinion on this subject, 
and as long as the former keep themselves sufficiently respectable, accord¬ 
ing to the work they have to do, that is all we have any right to expect. 
If a young man were engaged for table and house decoration, I should 
certainly expect him to be better dressed than the m in engaged to dig 
and work in the kitchen garden. I am no advocate for rings, or the 
wearing of jewellery of any description, and would not wear a ring if I 
had one given me. Other people, however, have a perfect right to please 
themselves, and if a man desires to wear a ring, and he does the work 
required, I fail to see what right a gardener has to complain. The 
employment of gloves when stoking need not be discussed at any length. 
I have provided strong leather gloves for my men ever since I have had 
the charge of a garden, and had them found for me previous to that, and 
highly appreciated the thoughtfulness of the gardeners who did so. It is 
impossible for a man to keep his hands clean without their aid. Stoking 
and watering for a week means two or three weeks’ labour before the 
hands are thoroughly clean again. This is not all, for many men’s hands 
crack badly through being wet and then half roasted in stoking largo 
boilers, watering, and other inside work, and then stoking is very trying 
to the hands, however soft the skin may be to commence with. Gloves 
are not very expensive, as they last a good length of time if re-stretched 
by a sadler previous to being used.— A Looker- ox. 
“ Outside Foreman ” appears to have introduced a very much more 
pleasant and practical tone into this subject. If the majority of young 
men could be treated and worthily make progre-s as sketched out, perhaps 
less might be said against this rather doubtful practice. Your corre¬ 
spondent says, first of all, “ I cannot see why a premium should not be 
paid by an apprentice in our profession just the same as by an apprentice 
in any other trade and profession ? ” I am inclined to think, if this 
