Fjbrnary 3,1887. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
81 
3 
th 
Linnean Society at 8 P M. 
4 
F 
5 
9 
6 
SUN 
SeTTDAOESS'MA. 
7 
M 
Society of Arts, CaLtor Leo'ure at 8 p.m. 
Royal Hoit. Soc ety, Committee Meetings at 11 A.M. Annual General 
ft 
Tu 
9 
W 
[Meeting at 3 p.m. 
THE BEGINNING OF WISDOM. 
ET it at the outset be explained that the above 
heading is borrowed from a newspaper, and 
has reference to the subject of hardy fruit 
culture. About a fortnight ago a paragraph 
went the round of the press relative to the 
grubbing up of some orchards in Kent. This 
was evidently regarded as the death knell of 
hardy fruit culture in this country; and the 
cause of death was what? a “ plethora of fruit.” That 
and the high prices charged for fruit in shops formed the 
subject of a leading article in the Daily Neivs recently. 
This was followed by so many letters that the Editor had 
to close his columns in three days against further 
correspondence No better evidence could be adduced of 
the great public interest that attaches to the question of 
fruit. It proved too great even for a great newspaper, 
and was dismissed with a few significant remarks, some 
of which I will cite. “The reason ” (of fruit being dear 
when in such great abundance) “is, we are told by the 
fruiterers, because the middlemen absorb all the profit. 
The suggestion that producers should themselves take the 
distribution in hand comes with a curious persistence, 
and no one seems to have a kindly word for the middle¬ 
man. He has not thought proper to plead in his own 
defence, and we are reluctantly compelled to regard his 
silence as a sign of conscious guilt.” In respect to market 
salesmen one correspondent pointed out that their prac¬ 
tice in Covent Garden is to charge, not on a per-centage 
of the amount realised, but fid. per sieve (a bushel) and 
3d. per half sieve whether the sales are of Greengages at 
18s. in a year of scarcity, or of Apples at Is. in a year of 
plenty. The production of fruit is referred to as 
follows:—“One of our correspondents gives a humili¬ 
ating picture of the old half sapless Apple trees that 
abound in so many of our orchards, and tells us we can¬ 
not do better than go on ‘grubbing’ till they all disap¬ 
pear. Yet it was the grubbing or rooting out that, when 
we first heard of it, excited our liveliest apprehensions. 
We are rejoiced to learn that grubbing is the beginning 
of wisdom.” As I happen to be the correspondent above 
alluded to I may as well say over again here what I said 
in the newspaper, for there must be a vast number of 
“ Journal ” readers who did not happen to see the ori¬ 
ginal discussion. My object in writing will be apparent 
—namely, to encourage the uprooting of profitless trees and 
the raising of thrifty orchards by planting better varieties 
in good soil, as undoubtedly the remarks that had ap¬ 
peared were calculated to discourage planting, and thus 
to play into the hands of foreign competitors in supplying 
our markets with hardy fruit. I wrote :— 
The necessity for the destruction of orchards in Kent may be 
No. 345 ;—Yol. XIV., Third Series. 
locally inconvenient, but if we take a broad glance over a great 
subject the circumstances are not to be seriously deplored—at 
least so far as the “ grubbing ” is concerned, the method of dis¬ 
posing of fruit being quite another matter. 
Kent is famed for its orchards, and undoubtedly some of them 
yield fine fruit, but not all ; and those trees that bear good crops of 
superior fruit will not be destroyed. This orchard grubbing, that 
may a,t the first sight appear unfortunate, is a hopeful sign, in¬ 
dicating, as it does, the recognition of an important fact—namely, 
that low grade or inferior fruit can no longer be profitably grown 
in this country. It may be asserted, with the greatest confidence in 
the accuracy of the statement, that there are thousands of trees, 
even hundreds of acres of orchards in Great Britain, that simply 
encumber the ground ; and it is the trashy character of their pro¬ 
duce that lowers the average quality of home-grown fruit so 
seriously as to afford such a splendid opportunity for American 
growers to compete successfully in our markets. 
Far more deplorable than the grubbing of a few orchards in 
Kent is that enterprising Transatlantic cultivators practically “ hold 
the field ” in the market supply in this country of the most 
serviceable of all fruit—Apples. Not last year only, when the 
English Apple crop was light, but every year barrels of American 
Apples abound in London and all large cities and towns ; and more 
than this, and more significant, they have precedence in country 
towns and villages, where there is land all around that would grow 
equally good fruit if young orchards of the best varieties alone 
were established. The fruit trees in many English orchards and 
gardens are gaunt, gnarled, canker-eaten, lichen-laden specties— 
picturesque no doubt, but not capable of affording fine, juicy, well- 
fed fruit, even if the varieties were good, and it is quite a matter of 
chance whether they are or not, the inferior usually predominating. 
Our successful competitors “ over the water saw the coming 
collapse of the British fruit supply. They perceived the deteriorating 
orchards, observed the negligence in planting the best market sorts 
extensively and systematically, and made provision for supplying 
the deficiency in their own distant land. They have done the work 
well, and now have extensive orchards of thrifty trees in the zenith 
of vigour, of sorts that command attention by their size, symmetry, 
and appearance ; and they can afford to pay higher rates for wages 
than prevail in this country for the labour requisite in cultivating, 
gathering, and packing the crops ; then, further, afford to send 
them 3000 or 4000 miles to market profitably, while tons of a 
British fruit grown on British soil cannot be disposed of at any¬ 
thing approaching a remunerative price. 
As to “ soft ” fruit—Plums, Strawberries, Gooseberries, 
Currants, and Raspberries—that which is converted into jam, 
should be preserved, so to say, “on the spot.” The w r aste and loss 
incurred in sending thousands of tons of raw fruit to London and 
other populous centres to be boiled down and “ mixed ” must be 
enormous. The next time Mr. Gladstone raises his powerful voice 
on the jam question it is to be hoped he will be able to show that it 
is better to take bags of imperishable sugir to the fruit than to 
convey perishable fruit to the sugar. 
Lord Sudeley’s fruit is converted into jam “ on the premises.” 
His lordship is not. I think, grubbing up orchards and diminishing 
his fruit supply, but i ather increasing it ; and I should not be sur¬ 
prised if his “ takings ” for raw fruit during the past year were 
nearer £10,000 than £5000. There is no reason to “ fear the 
foreigner ” in tho production of hardy fruit if we make the best of 
our resources at home. 
Many letters followed. An Essex cultivator stated 
that his Apples sent to Covent Garden last year realised 
8s. to 9s. a bushel, his crops of Golden Noble, Cox’s 
Orange Pippin, Ecklinville, &c., netting him Y500. He 
describes fruit growing well carried out as profitable and 
laughs at American competition. Mr. William Paul, of 
Waltham Cross, gave a good hint, founded on experience, 
in the advocacy of growing early and late varieties mainly 
when foreign consignments are not arriving. We were 
told also by Mr. G. Looseley that Messrs Lane & Son, of 
Berkhampstead, preserved their Plums “on the spot” 
last year or the crop would have been lost, and lately 
made a welcome distribution of jam to their men. Mr. 
F. J. Smith, of Covent Garden, recommends the higher 
culture of the best varieties, packed to arrive in the mar¬ 
kets in the best condition, then will home-grown fruit be 
profitable, but he does not quite see who is to buy “ any¬ 
body and everybody’s home-made j*m.” 
No. 2001.—Von. LXXVI., Old Series. - 
