February 7, 1889. J 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
99 
A S the concluding notes on this subject—written, it must be 
remembered in reading them, thirty-six years ago—refer to 
a, matter that will be new to many, if not the majority of present 
■day readers—namely, a Parliamentary inquiry on the question of 
fruit, prominence is accorded to them. Previous instalments of 
-the series appeared on pp. 530 and 554 of the last volume. 
“ We have always held that the cultivation of fruit in this country 
lias not received that attention which the importance of the subject 
•demands ; and in reviewing, as we have done in our former articles, 
the history of the orcharding of the past three centuries, we have 
seen that, instead of forming a permanent and systematic branch of 
rural economy, it has been allowed to wax or wane according to the 
■ever-varying taste of the various periods to which our attention has 
■been directed. 
“ Our firm belief is, and we have the evidence of the past to con¬ 
firm it, that the cultivation of fruits, if judiciously and well practised, 
is much more important and profitable than in the present day it is 
generally considered to be. We have shown that for centuries 
past there have been, at certain periods, great movements in this 
•direction ; numerous and extensive plantations were formed, but 
in time they were invariably allowed to fall into decay, and no 
•succession provided till urgency compelled it, and then, in many 
instances, it was too late. We have seen that at the close of the 
war in 1816, notwithstanding the high prices at the lime, the 
■demand was greater than the supply, and foreign fruit was imported 
to such an extent, that the then few growers became so alarmed as 
to apply to Government for an increase of duty. This they obtained, 
and as will be seen from the tables at page 555 last volume, 
the importations decreasing from 1819, the supply would become 
less still. From 1819 a great system of planting was commenced, 
and carried out to such an extent that in 1838 the breadth of orchard 
land in the county of Kent alone was upwards of 15,000 acres. 
Now, taking these 15,000 at 100 bushels per acre, which is allowed to 
be the produce for an average of years, it will give 1,500,000 bushels. 
Wet, notwithstanding this seemingly enormous average quantity 
■from the county of Kent alone, when the orchards were in the 
highest state of productiveness, and before the displanting, conse¬ 
quent on the removal of the 4s. duty in 1838, had commenced, the 
value of the Apples imported in 1839, as shown in the table below, 
amounted to no less a sum than £43,866 13s., clearly showing that 
even then the home growth was insufficient for the consumption, 
at the average price of 5s. 6d. per bushel. 
“ In 1838 the duty of 4s. was removed, and one of 5 per cent. 
<zd valorem substituted. This called forth strong remonstrances 
from the growers, who represented that nothing but ruin would 
befal them ; that they could not maintain their orchards and their 
population ; and that the total extinction of both must be 
the consequence. This became a subject for Parliamentary 
inquiry, and a committee was appointed to investigate the subject. 
Thirty-five witnesses were examined, and out of these only four or 
five were in favour of the alteration. In the evidence before this 
committee, it was stated that the remunerating price to the grower 
would be from 3s. 6d. to 4s. per bushel. One witness was of 
opinion that, taking the average of years, 3s. would be ample 
remuneration. Judging from the evidence before this committee, 
the main object the growers had in view was to induce the Govern- 
No. 450 .—Vol. XVIII., Third Series. 
ment to believe that, from the comparatively low prices arising 
from large crops obtained between 1832 and 1837, it would be 
impossible to continue their plantations unless the protecting duty 
was restored. They were, however, unsuccessful, and many of 
them, in their visions of despair, did actually begin to displant, 
some to the extent of eight and ten acres, supposing they would 
never again see their remunerating average of 4s. But, notwith¬ 
standing the great reduction of duty, we find, from the table 
subjoined, that the price has been actually greater since than it 
had been for thirteen years previously. 
“ In 1843 the duty was altered to 6d. per bushel ; and what was 
the consequence of that great fiscal change ? We find that in 
1846, with an importation of 292,427 bushels, the average price in 
the markets was 8s. per bushel, or 4s. more than the most sanguine 
expectation of the most doleful witness could possibly have reached ; 
and that in 1850, with an importation amounting to no less than 
467,629 bushels, the average price was 5s. 6d., or Is. 6d. more than 
any other doleful witness would have been satisfied with. Now, 
what we want to know is, Why do the orchardists and occupiers of 
land in this country allow 467,629 bushels of foreign Apples to be 
brought into our markets, when an average price of 5s. 6d. can be 
obtained for our own growth of that article, and for which 4s. is a 
remunerating return according to their own statement ? 
“ Here, again, we are forced to remark on the total disregard to 
the importance of treating orchards as a branch of rural economy. 
We hear of agricultural societies and horticultural societies, cattle 
shows, poultry shows, and flower shows ; and what would the cattle, 
and poultry, and flowers of this country have been were it not for 
these societies and these shows ? But why is it we hear nothing 
of orchard societies and fruit shows ? Why of no premiums for 
the best cultivated orchards, the best grown fruit, nor for the best 
essay on the adaptations as to soil, climate, and use of the best 
varieties of fruit ? Surely these are subjects worthy of attention in 
this age of progression and improvement. Look at our increasing 
population, and increased consumption of all kinds of produce ; the 
facilities of communication from one end of the country to the 
other ; the comparative luxuries that our mechanics, artisans, and 
labourers now enjoy ; and contrast this with the low, limited, and 
laggard state of our orchard cultivation ; it would seem that in 
proportion as other pursuits progressed this was retrograding. It 
is not from choice that our mechanics and artisans consume these 
467,629 bushels of foreign Apples, tainted and worthless as they 
generally are, but it is because there are some 4000 or 5000 acres 
less of orchard produce of our own that they are compelled to do so. 
Now, there must be in this country some 4000 or 5000 acres of land 
in the condition of that on which one of the witnesses gave the 
following evidence :—• 
“ Q. If you could have let your land without any difficulty as a 
fruit plantation at £5 an acre, what do you suppose you could let 
it at to grow corn ?— A. It is very light land, on a hill, and stony ; 
I should have great trouble to get £1 an acre for it to grow corn. 
“ And as regards the quality of this foreign fruit, we again quote 
part of the evidence already referred to, as given by a witness who 
fought hard for the old duty. How he supported his views will be 
seen from the following :— 
“ Q. Will not the effect of the introduction of foreign Apples 
be to lower the price ?— A. Yes. 
“ Q. Then will not the poor have the foreign Apples at a lower 
price ; and, of course, will they not consume them when they are- 
brought in ?— A. They are hardly worth consuming, half of them ; 
they are scarcely woi th eating. 
“ Q. Then, if they are not consumed, the English Apples will 
com? into consumption ; must we not suppose that the English 
consumer, finding that the French are not worth eating, will consume 
the English ?— A. I suppose they must. 
“ Q. How will they consume the English if they have ceased to 
exist ?— A. I am supposing that they have not ceased. 
No. 2106 .—Vol. LXXX., Old Series. 
