•September 13,1894 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
255 
not being an orchard, garden, nursery, or conservatory— i.e., an ordinary 
open field. Therefore, if it can be brought home to a trespasser that a 
Mushroom which he has picked is “cultivated,” though in a field, he 
can be convicted under ihis section (sect. 37 of 24 and 25 Viet., c. 96). 
The penalty is 20s. fine, beyond the value of the article stolen, or a 
month’s hard labour. We admit that there may be difficulties in 
proving that a given Mushroom found in a trespasser’s hands is one of 
the artificially sown and not one of natural growth ; but that is a 
question of “ fact ” entirely for the court, and if it can be shown that 
the prisoner took several Mushrooms off the land, and that a certain 
proportion of the crop were attributed to the artificial culture, they 
would have a basis of fact upon which they might find him guilty of 
stealing one or more cultivated Mushrooms. 
If the theft were from a forcing house, or from a garden or orchard, 
the offence would be more serious. It would be misdemeanor for a 
first offence, punishable by £20 fine or six months in gaol, and on a 
second conviction it amounts to felony. But it is not theft from hot¬ 
houses or gardens that is now the crux ; it is the systematic raiding 
from open meadows of a distinctly valuable commodity—a lawless pro¬ 
ceeding, but one which the state of the law does not make a crime 
2 )er se, so long as the growth is “natural for that which is “naturm 
soils ” is not a subject of larceny at common law. 
We have long ago pointed out the need of a statute to make “ trespass 
in pursuit” of any natural product of the soil that has a market value a 
criminal offence. If the article taken has value, that value morally 
belongs to the owner or occupier of the soil; anyhow, the passer-by can 
have no title to it, still less should he be free to trespass to capture it, 
with no greater deterrent than that of civil process for nominal damages. 
If the law would but abandon its fiction, and vest all natural produce of 
the soil, animal and vegetable alike, in the occupier, and make it a 
chattel and the subject of larceny, all this evasion of the rights of meum 
and tuum would be stopped, and the occupier of the soil would have as 
much property in a casual and wild Mushroom as in a cultivated Turnip. 
We hope that among the various agenda of the new Agricultural Union 
we shall find a bill to the effect here mentioned, to create a generic 
offence of “ trespass in pursuit ” of a product, though natural, of the 
soil ; and that the penalty may be one that will be fully deterrent. 
When we have evidence that, as occurred a few seasons ago near Bristol, 
the value of a natural crop of Mushrooms was such that it was worth 
while for the farmer, on the one hand, to have them guarded night and 
day, and worth while for local roughs to collect by scores for the avowed 
purpose of stripping the field by force for their own emolument, we have 
surely proof that a change in the law is necessary in order to give 
protection to the farmer for the full enjoyment of what is the produce 
of his holding.—(“ The Field.”) 
BARR’S DAFFODIL CUP. 
“ Baer is the man for medals,” observed a reader of his interesting 
bulb catalogue recently issued. This remark caused us to look into 
the matter, and we found medals for Daffodils offered twice a month, 
from February till May next, at the Royal Horticultural Society’s 
meetings. Then follow more medals for florists’ Tulips. We have 
previously said that if anyone can make these brilliant flowers popular 
Mr. Barr is the man to do it. He either is, or ought to be, the man to 
give medals, too, for we note that he icon sixteen this year. 
But the famous bulb enthusiast does not stop at medals, and his 
great prize for 1895 is the silver Daffodil cup. Some donors of such 
prizes as these have a habit of making the cups appear as large as 
possible by the process of “ thinning out.” The Daffodil cup is, I ke the 
best bulbs, solid and heavy. Designed by Mr. H. G. Moon, there is 
nothing laboured about it, no unmeaning display. It is a Daffodil cup 
pure and simple, solid and good, pleasant to look at, and handy to 
'use. We had a peep into Mr. Barr’s study the other day ; it is a veritable 
museum of curiosities. To make an inventory of the contents would be 
a triumph; among other items was something appropriate for the cup— 
namely, sundry barrels of wine—the result, presumably, of Daffodil 
hunting in Spain! Let us then in fancy drink to the health of 
the donor of the trophy—and its winner—some time next May. 
The cup is to be won by points accorded for “ Collections of 
Daffodils” exhibited in February, March, April, or May, each com¬ 
petitor to choose his own time and varieties, but must only exhibit at 
one of the meetings. 
In judging we are told that “quality will be an important con¬ 
sideration,” as it should be, and not either mere numbers or the stiff 
formal style of arrangement common in markets. At the close of the 
season the Royal Horticultural Society will award the cup to the 
exhibitor who has gained the most points. 
The conditions are framed with the object of giving the greatest 
number of growers, reside where they may, an equal chance of securing 
the blue ribbon of the year in the Daffodil world. The better they 
choose the bulbs and the sooner they plant them the better will be the 
chance of success. 
We trust the competition will equal the anticipations of the author 
of it, who has done more than any man living in making the gracefully 
“ dancing Daffodils ” the deservedly popular flowers they are to-day. 
We have tested the cup represented in fig. 38, and know it is 
good, but we have not sampled the barrels of wine in the “study.” 
Oh Mr. Barr! Possibly it is intended for the losers—to make their 
hearts glad in the moment of defeat, for we never know what the 
“ Daffodil King,” like a contemporary monarch, is going to do next. 
HORTICULTURAL SHOWS. 
GLASGO 'A''.— September 4th and 5th. 
The autumn exhibition under the auspices of the Glasgow and West 
of Scotland Horticultural Society was held in St. Andrew’s Halls on the 
above dates. Although the season had not as regards weather been of 
FIG. 38.—BARR’S DAFFODIL CUP. 
the most favourable character for floriculture, the show was very attrac¬ 
tive in all departments, the display of flowers being specially fine. In 
the open competitions the quality of the exhibits could scarcely have 
been better, and the judges found great difficulty in certain cases in 
determining the order of merit. The twelve bunches of Violas, for 
which Mr. Smellie, Busby, was awarded first prize, were excellent 
specimens ; and Mr. Alex. Gilchrist, gardener, Lennoxtown, took second 
place with a pretty exhibit. The floral sprays and coat bouquets shown 
by Mr. Galloway, Ayr, were exceedingly tasteful; Mr. W. B. M'Neil, 
Shawland, obtaining the premier place in the hand bouquet competition. 
The nurserymen’s classes were well filled, and visitors found pleasure 
in inspecting the charming collections. The plants for table decoration 
shown by Mr. Sutherland, Lenzie, made a very effective display, and the 
Dahlias from Auchinraith, Biantyre, sustain Mr. Campbell’s reputation 
as a skilful cultivator of that delightful bloom. One of the finest 
features of the show was the display of Roses belonging to Messrs. James 
Cocker & Sons, Aberdeen. This well-known firm have taken the first 
prize six successive years at the Glasgow Show for Roses. There was a 
large and beautiful collection of pot plants, and also of cut flowers 
and bouquets, in the section open to gardeners and amateurs. Mr. 
James Miller, gardener, Castlebank, was awarded first prize for his table 
of plants arranged for effect. His collection included twenty different 
