January 30, U90. J 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
93 
you put it.” An that amounted to the expression of a wish, I felt 
bound to cimpl}’, and if I am lucky enough to “ put it’’in an 
acceptable mame-, I shall certainly lose nothing, but may possibly 
gain a compliment, and that is something to a man who values his 
situation and has pleasure in trying to oblige those to whom he is 
under obligations. 
_ The subject that has been exercising the minds of men—and 
editors—in the Times is fruit culture. A sort of triangular duel 
seems to have been going on, all the combatants appearing to be on 
very good terms with themselves, and—well, I will say ” gentle¬ 
manly ” towards each other. They may have dined together since, 
just as we are told barristers do who seem to fight each other so 
Sfiercely over cases in court. Be that as it may, they have had their 
little differences in public and—their airing. 
I am not sure that I have been instructed in reading the letters in 
•question, but I have been amused. There are six of them. There 
may be others I have not seen, but six suffice for me, two from each 
of three editors, for I take no account of a dozen others from 
persons who are not editors, therefore must be placed in the 
■category of the commonplace multitude to which so many of us 
•belong. 
So far as I can make out, Editor No. 1 first stepped on the 
■stage and said his little piece and retired. Next, Editor No. 2 came 
on and said his, which was different, of course, made his bow, and 
vanished. Then Editor No. 3 emerged from behind the scenes for 
a share in the public applause. 
We have no theatre in our village, but from what I have read, 
actors appear as types of character. There is usually, I think, a 
■“ swell ” in the company, generally a “ funny man,” and often a 
heavy man.” Judging entirely from the performance, if I were 
asked to indicate the characters, I should be inclined to regard 
No. 1 as the Swell, No. 2 as the Funny Man, and No. 3 as the Heavy 
Man of this piece in six acts. 
Act 1. No. 1 enters. This gentleman says another gentleman 
blames people for not buying an Apple of very poor quality,” 
and goes on to say the public are not such fools as they are sup¬ 
posed to be, and they rightly refuse to grow English grown 
Gravensteins, and adduces as a model Apple the American New¬ 
town Pippin, which cannot be grown here. He condemns King of 
the Pippins, and concludes by recommending the “ Ribstone,” and 
•especially the Blenheim, for planting freely for market purposes. 
i(Exit). No. 2 enters and says No. 1 puts his case “ obliquely ; ” 
a claim then follows for Gravenstein and Newtown Pippin for 
amateurs, but though he thinks the American is often the better 
of the two, forthwith dismisses both as “curiosities.” He praises 
King of the Pippins, and adduces supporting testimony, having 
also a good word for Cox’s Orange Pippin, Stirling Castle, Golden 
Noble, Fearn’s Pippin, Boston Russet, Lane’s Prince Albert, and 
Dumelow’s Seedling ; but the pet of No. 1, the Blenheim, he says 
has been much overrated as a fruit for profit, and only after long 
waiting in a “ place that suits it,” it may prove a “ pearl of great 
pice.” (Exit). 
Enter No. 3. He says the true German Gravenstein ripens in 
this country, and the fruits are delicious, but many that are sold as 
Gravensteins are not Gravensteins ; that the variety known as 
King of the Pippins, and generally grown under that name, is one 
of the most certain and profitable of table Apples, but is not the 
true King. The Blenheim he pronounces handsome, but too slow 
for people who want quick returns, therefore it was excluded from 
£ list in a certain book, and he agrees generally with the sorts 
favourably mentioned by the previous performer. (Exit). 
Act 2. Re-enter No. 1. No. 2, he says, “misleads in various 
ways,” then gives an example of his research in analysing some¬ 
body’s hook for showing that King of the Pippins is not of fine 
Havour, and “ R le’s ” testimony to that effect was too old ; that if the 
“ Ribstone ” did canker he was trying to cure it by grafting on 
dwarfing stocks ; that a child who eats Apples would reject some 
of No. 2’s, and that the Blenheim is worth any ten of them. 
"(Exit). 
Re-enter No. 2. He says he prefers the public judgment to 
individual tastes and fancies, yet would rather trust No. I’s taste 
in selecting fruit than framing arguments ; that the Apple known 
as King of the Pippins sells better than any other of its season, 
and pays the grower ; that it is quite sufficient for him that No. 1 
admits the defects of the Ribston and Blenheim, the first by 
cankering, the second by slow bearing, and “ for a man of moderate 
means to plant the latter on another man’s land would be to pledge 
himself to ruin.” Experiments are not facts. The “argument 
from the taste of the child is childish,” and that experienced men 
who are planting for profit will trust their own judgment before 
that of all the children in the world. (Exit). 
Re-enter No. 3. He thinks discussing the flavour of Apples 
about as useful as discussing the beauty of colours. He thinks 
there is a muddle over the “ Kings,” and suggests the King of 
Rea (not Rae) has not been grown, if seen, oy the other actors, and 
that the variety sold as the King is not the King but Golden 
Winter Pearmaiii. Apples for quick bearing and cottagers should 
not be the same as for gentlemen’s gardens, as poor men cannot 
afford to wait long for crops, but rich men can. The Ribston 
(not Ribstone) and the Blenheim he would not advise the former 
to plant, but gentlemen might plant them. Fine young trees of 
the Blenheim, about fifteen years old, at Chiswick, he says have 
not averaged a shilling’s worth of fruit a year each, and Cox’s 
Orange Pippin he pronounces the best dessert Apple in cultivation, 
but it does not bear so well in bad fruit years as does the Golden 
Winter Pearmain, which is sold as King of the Pippins. (Curtain). 
Now, what can we plain people, who are unskilled in polemics, 
make of all that ? What can the mixed readers of a general 
newspaper make of it ? It seems to me to be a case of doctors 
differing, and may I add of doctors advertising ? We are taught to 
believe that general editors are ultra cute men, but I am inclined 
to think some garden editors are cuter. If one can do the la-de-da, 
another take a burlesque, and a third a heavy part, and so get on 
the stage, we as amused onlookers must “ clap ” them all. I can¬ 
not for the life of me regard the business as otherwise than 
serio-comic. It seems comical enough to suggest that the 
Gravensoein Apple cannot be ripened in this country. Two 
hundred miles from London they ripen deliciously, but it is a 
gentleman’s Apple. Equally funny is it to fancy the Newtown 
Pippin is worth growing in British gardens. In such it must be 
regarded as a curiosity. Rich, too, it must be to old hands who 
have tried the Ribston on different stocks for a good deal more 
than a generation to be told that it is to be cured of canker because 
a beginner is going in the same old track and thinks it new. I am 
not learned enough in the genealogy of pomology to give an 
opinion on the claims to kingship of two rivals, but I think I may 
venture to say that when a person advocates the planting of the 
Blenheim Pippin Apple for profit, he, at the same time, in my 
opinion, tells us as plainly as he can in a negative way that he has 
not planted any great number of trees and waited for their bearing. 
In these days of small profits and quick returns, the Blenheim 
with its good looks and fairly good quality, must steadily, but surely, 
decline in favour amongst planters of Apples fer profit. Only 
men under thirty years of age can plant trees of it freely in con¬ 
fidence of realising a good return, while persons who plant after 
fifty may confer a benefit on the next generation, as it is only bj' 
chance that they will malerially benefit themselves. As I ha-se 
neither trees, books, nor papers to sell, nor anything to gain by 
posing as an authority, I must be content to remain in obscurity as 
—A Yoekshire-bite. 
THE SUNNY HILL VINERIES. 
A EUN through the Sunny Hill Vineries, Littleover, Derby, is 
most interesting, showing what Mr. W. Innes has already achieved. His 
first three vineries date six years back—viz., three-span houses 100 feet 
by 21. Two are planted with Gros Colman, the other with Alicante. 
This produced 2,3 cwts. of Grapes last year, about l^cwt. less this 
year. One house of Gros Colman was nearly emptied. On tasting these 
Grapes, the greatest connoisseur could do no other than pronounce them 
deliciously refreshing. The other, still intact, was a sight never to be 
forgotten, containing eighty-two Vines, carrying twenty bunches to a 
Vine, averaging quite 2 lbs. a bunch. With all shoulders taken off the 
uniformity throughout was remarkable, there seemed scarcely a foot 
between the bunches. We could not help asking for a wrinkle, which 
Mr. Innes soon imparted. The borders were made entirely of turf cut 
from the land the houses stood on, to which a fertiliser was added. 
Last year the late Grapes were cut on the 15th March. All fruit hangs 
till marketed. Two lean-to’s were erected and planted in the Jubilee 
year. The Vines were planced on the 10th August, and in seven weeks 
reached the top of the house. They have carried two crops, and produced 
600 lbs. of Grapes the second year from permanent Muscats and temporary 
Gros Colman. The house is 70 feet by 16 feet. The other house is 
planted similarly. Steam power raises water from a well 80 feet to a 
tank elevated 30 feet. There is also a soft water tank the length of the 
building. The houses are well heated with two Trentham Cornish 
boilers and abundance of piping. I must add a word of thanks to Mr. 
Innes for so kindly explaining the details connected with his vineyard. 
—G. B. 
GARDENERS OUT OF SITUATIONS. 
I THINK “ B.,” page 50, is on the right track when he makes a 
suggestion that gardeners ought to study their own interest more than 
they do by providing some remedy amongst themselves to lay the ghost 
of that ever present bogey, even to those who seem firmly fixed in 
situations—viz.,the time when they are out of a situation ; for, as “ B.” 
says, a hundred things may happen over which they have no control to 
bring about that undesirable event. The case of the gardener is much 
harder under those circumstances than that of the mechanic ; the latter 
can take his kit to another shop in the same town, his loss only amount¬ 
ing to so many days or weeks, whereas the gardener must bre.ak up his 
