October 4,1894. 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENEIL 
309 
(mIj) 
FRUIT GROWERS IN 
CONFERENCE. 
T he Royal Horticultural Society ia to be congratulated on the 
successful results of the series of conferences that were held 
under its auspices in connection with the splendid exhibition of 
British grown fruit at the Crystal Palace a few days since, as reported 
elsewhere in this issue. For many years past this organisation 
—the recogniied leader of horticultural societies—has made 
commendable efforts to promote the extension of fruit culture 
in this country by inaugurating shows and holding meetings, 
whereby the opinions of experts have been publicly expressed, 
and a knowledge of the subject thus widely disseminated. Much 
good work has undoubtedly been accomplished in this direction, 
and we notice with pleasure that the Society is still endeavouring 
to further the movement, considering the interests of amateurs 
as well as the growers of market produce. If one may judge by 
the opening conference of the series referred to, it would appear 
that the smaller cultivators appreciate what has been done on 
their behalf, inasmuch as the hall in which the gathering took 
place on Saturday last was crowded, so much so that many 
persons were unable to find even standing accommodation. If 
such were needed this fact alone affords ample proof of the public 
interest that is now being taken in the cu'tivation of fruit, 
though corroborative evidence may be seen on every side. On 
this occasion the chief feature for discussion was a paper entitled, 
“Fruit Growing in Small Gardens,” by the Rev. W. Wilks, the 
indefatigable Secretary of the Society, and whose enforced absence 
through illness was so much deplored. The essay was admirably 
read by Mr. G. Bunyard, after a few introductory remarks by 
Mr. J. Douglas, who presided, and as showing the zeal of the 
reverend gentleman it was announced that he had prepared his 
paper whilst suffering intense pain from a dangerous affection 
of the throat. 
In opening the subject the author made a clear statement as to 
the definition of “ small gardens,” remarking that if a succession of 
fruit is expected under such circumstances quite one-half of the 
space at disposal should be devoted to that purpose. He said, and 
with some justification, that owners of gardens often did their 
gardeners an injustice in that respect, urging that when fruit was 
required in proportion to vegetables the various kinds should be 
cultivated correspondingly. Where the area of ground is limited 
it was pointed out that fruit trees might advantageously be planted 
on lawns, thus embracing utility with ornamentation, for many of 
them were really beautiful objects when in bloom or laden with 
fruit. Amongst others the Yellow Ingestrie Apple, Williams’ Bon 
Chretien Pear, and Cherries were particularised as being suitable. 
Mulberries and Medlars, too, if grown at all ought to be planted 
on a lawn. The essayist went further, and said that every third 
tree in the shrubbery should be a fruit tree, which course ought 
certainly to be adopted in small gardens. As regards the kinds of 
fruit to grow, that depends entirely on individual tastes and 
requirements. Personally he considered cooking Apples formed 
by far the most important fruit crop in an amateur’s garden, and 
with this contention many persons will concur. Raspberries he 
grew in preference to Red Currants. Peaches, Nectarines, and 
Apricots although hardy were, according to his experience, best 
grown in orchard houses, and if any wall space is at disposal it 
might be better devoted to Plums and Pears. 
No. 745.—VoL. XXIX., Third Series. 
The number of varieties of each kind of fruit should be 
restricted as far as possible, and an example of this could, he 
thought, be taken from the market growers. In recommending 
Apples for culinary use he considered from five to eight varieties 
of these would be sufficient to form a continual supply of fruit 
for many months. For early use Potts’ Seedling, Ecklinville, and 
Lord Grosvenor were useful, these to be followed by Warner’s 
King, Waltham Abbey, Blenheim Orange, Lane’s Prince Albert, 
Alfriston, and Lord Derby. Some excellent advice as to the 
manner of gathering and storing Apples was given, the results of 
damaging the fruit being emphasised. Plums for cooking were 
afforded a second position as being especially serviceable to small 
growers, and of these Rivers’ Prolific, The Czar, Belgian Purple, 
with a few Damsons were advised to be grown. For a third place 
Gooseberries were enumerated, and whilst the ordinary method of 
growing bushes had its advantages cordons were very profitable. 
Early and late fruit may be obtained by growing cordon Goose¬ 
berry trees on south and north walls respectively. Strawberries 
were, he thought, worthy of a fourth position, from 350 to 500 
plants of these being sufficient for a small garden. On his light 
soil Vicomtesse Hericart de Thury was an excellent cropper, while 
President and The Countess had proved useful sorts to grow. 
Empress of India had not done well in his garden, but Waterloo 
was a grand wet-weather Strawberry. Of Raspberries Fertility 
and Red Antwerp were named, the former for culinary purposes 
and the latter for dessert. A dozen bushes of Red Dutch and 
Raby Castle Currants were sufficient, and white varieties he did 
not think worth growing where space was limited. Apples for 
dessert came next in order of importance, allusion being made to 
Irish Peach, Devonshire Quarrenden, and Cox’s Orange Pippin. 
There is, no doubt, much truth in the assertion of the essayist 
that the best of American Newtown Pippins could not be compared 
with well grown samples of British Cox’s Orange Apple. 
Following in rotation were mentioned Plums for dessert. Cherries, 
Black Currants, Pears for dessert and stewing, Medlars, Quinces, 
and Mulberries. Thus would the essayist, who is a successful 
cultivator, devote a small garden to fruit culture, and there is but 
little fault to be found with the selection. For early use Williams’ 
Bon Chretien Pear might well be grown by amateurs. Marie Louise, 
however, was to his mind a much overrated variety, though, as 
afterwards shown, opinions on that matter varied. Mr. Bunyard 
read a short supplementary paper, chiefly dealing with the reno¬ 
vating of fruit trees. This authority strongly advised what has 
so often been urged in these pages—namely, thinning out the 
shoots in the autumn and the planting of selected varieties. Too 
frequently, remarked this expert, the fruit trees in some villa 
gardens are planted by speculative builders, many of the varieties 
being comparatively useless. 
Mr. J. Douglas, in opening the discussion which followed the 
reading of the essays, pointed out the common error of planting 
fruit trees too deeply, also that of burying carcases of animals near 
the roots. Mr. J. Wright said in listening to Mr. Wilks’ paper 
he might have fancied it had been written by a first-class pro¬ 
fessional fruit grower with literary talent, so admirably was it 
done. There may have been one or two omissions, as, for 
instance, he had not heard anything about that old favourite 
Strawberry Sir Joseph Paxton. It was here remarked by 
someone in the audience that this variety was “ worn out ” 
and poor in flavour ; but he ventured to say that “ Sir 
Joseph ” was not “ worn out,” and if obtained from a healthy 
stock and properly treated it would do its duty to the grower. 
Whilst admitting the value of Apples and Pears, we must not 
he said, underrate the worth of bush fruits such as Gooseberries, 
Raspberries, and Currants. Those were most useful for the 
amateur and cottager, and he concurred with the essayist in 
recommending the cultivation of Gooseberries as cordons ; 
indeed, they might be thus grown and a hedge both ornamental 
No. 2401.—VoL. XCI., Old Series. 
