August 9, 1890. 
THE GARDENING WORLD 
775 
purple wings ; and Miss Hunt is salmon-rose, with 
netted rosy purple wings. One of the finest of the 
dark kinds is that named Boreatton, with a dark 
crimson standard of a coppery maroon externally, while 
the wings are dark purple. Captain of the Blues is 
dark purple shaded with blue, while the wings are of 
a deep sky-blue shade. The Queen is rose coloured, 
variously striped with rosy carmine, aud the wings are 
often nearly white. Painted Lady is less striped and 
perhaps more constant than the Queen. The wings of 
Maroon are viol«t-purple, and the standard is maroon- 
purple. Delight is white, or the standard may be 
tinted with salmon-pink or rose ; but that named 
Queen of England is 'pure white. Equally good as 
others of this group is Isa Eckford, with delicate 
salmon-pink flowers ; while Mrs. Sankey is a shade or 
two paler than the last. Apple Blossom, with a rose- 
coloured standard and paler wings, all netted, is also 
very choice in its way, as is Purple Prince, with dark 
purple standard aud bluish purple wings. 
A number of others serve to give variety, but they 
are of a lower order of merit than the above. Amongst 
them may be mentioned Indigo King, with a dark 
coppery red standard and bluish purple wings. The 
flowers of Countess of Radnor are lilac-purple, sometimes 
reticulated or spotted with pale lavender. Princess of 
Wales would be prized by some on account of its flowers 
being irregularly suffused, spotted, or mottled with 
indigo-blue or crimson-purple. The wings are blue, 
but the variety is inconstant. Some unnamed seedlings 
are also very pretty, particularly a rosy scarlet kind 
fading to white. It is very floriferous. There are 
others with flesh-coloured flowers fading almost white, 
and a white variety with a sulphur-coloured standard 
when opening. 
At Reading. 
A considerable number of varieties are grown in the seed 
trial grounds of Messrs. Sutton & Sons, of Reading, 
some of the more striking of which we noted. The 
standard of Scarlet Invincible, as indicated by the name, 
is scarlet, but the wings are purple. Carmine is of a 
deep rosy carmine, almost scarlet. A choice and 
distinct kind is Prince of Orange, with rose-coloured 
flowers, but the standard is distinctly shaded with 
orange. Princess Beatrice is of a beautiful rosy pink, 
with paler wings, and presents a delicate appearance 
when seen in a mass. One of the prettiest and most 
distinct of the kinds coming under our notice was that 
named Butterfly, the white flowers of which were 
margined with lavender, or even deep sky-blue on the 
edges of the standard and wings, reminding us of what 
occurs in the Violas named Skylark and Blue Cloud. 
"We noted a number of other choice kinds, such as 
Splendour, Princess of Wales, Painted Lady, Boreatton, 
and others, which are described above. The effect of 
an isolated mass of Splendour was very striking. The 
various kinds are mostly grown separately, but a sowing 
of mixed kinds shows how effective they are when 
grown in this way. 
-•>»*- 
GARDENERS’ ORPHAN FUND. 
I was greatly surprised to read the paragraph which 
appeared in your columns last week signed by “Pact.” 
As I had not seen the references made in the Journal 
of Horticulture to the origin of the appellation, 
“Gardeners’ Orphan Fund,” I was quite unaware that 
the subject was under discussion. Admitted that it was 
in bad taste for anyone to have raised the question as to 
the origin of the appellation now, certainly it is not to be 
complained of that wherever credit is due it should be 
given. 
have in my time made so many suggestions which 
have been found valuable to others that I never trouble 
about seeking the credit due for their origination. If 
it gratifies anyone’s egotism to seek credit for what is 
not theirs, it does not trouble me. It is all very well for 
Shakespeare to declare that “ he who steals my purse 
steals trash, but he who filches my good name,” &c. ; 
but I should make more noise about the stealing of my 
p Urse — trash though it be -than of being robbed of the 
credit of a suggestion. 
As to the Orphan Fund, I feel that everyone who 
protested early and in time against the squandering of 
the proposed Fund in buildings, to be called an 
orphanage, and in founding lucrative offices for matron, 
attendants, &c., the charge for which would have been 
like a millstone round the necks of the committee, 
deserve the warmest thanks of the subscribers and the 
orphans deriving benefit from the Fund that so mad a 
proposal was killed. The Fund as it exists is the 
great glory and honour of the gardening profession.— 
Alexander Dean. 
“ Fact ” (see p. 763) appears to be commendably 
anxious that some future historian should not be 
misled by drawing something out of an admittedly 
accurate statement that was not in it, which appeared 
in the Journal of Horticulture of the 24th ult. It is 
impossible to prevent inferences beiDg suggested, 
indeed, “Fact” has suggested one himself. If he is 
concerned solely for some future historian, he will of 
necessity, through the columns of the Journal of 
Horticulture, explain what he thinks is needed in 
reference to matter which appeared in its pages ; and if 
he does not think good to do this, it will be tolerably 
evident that after all his solicitude he will be content 
for the historian to be left in ignorance on the point 
which he (Fact) conceives to be of importance, namely 
the identity of the originator of a combination of words 
which form the title of otir excellent institution. 
I very readily admit that Mr. Barron suggested, in 
your issue of March 7th, 1887, the raising of a fund as 
more feasible than an orphanage, also that Mr. A. Dean 
preferred to discuss the scheme in the issue of the 
following week under the title of the “ Gardeners’ 
Orphan Fund,” and I have no doubt that “Fact’’ 
will with equal readiness admit that in the Journal of 
Horticulture, of March 3rd of that year, it was suggested 
that “ much more good could be done (with the money 
that might be raised) without a necessarily costly home 
than with one ” ; also that a proposition was at the 
same time made for “ forming a central committee for 
deciding on a form of appeal and drafting propositions 
to be submitted to the meetings of gardeners and others 
in sympathy with the object in various parts of the 
country.” It is well known that action was taken on 
the lines indicated, and with results, I am thankful to 
say, that have exceeded my anticipations. 
Though it was on my proposition that the scheme 
should be entitled the “Gardeners’ Orphan Fund,” I 
have never thought of myself as being the originator of 
the precise form of words. I had certainly never seen 
them in print, but I had heard words expressing the 
same meaning, and as “Fact ’’seems anxious to fix the 
origin of the name, it affords me an opportunity of 
stating that in seeking for this I think we must go 
past Mr. Dean and myself, also past every other 
man and give the credit to Mrs. Barron. Just 
after the suggestions referred to appeared in the 
Journal of Horticulture, I called on Mr. Barron, 
and the whole matter was discussed at his house ; 
and I distinctly remember Mrs. Barron remarking, 
with the emphasis bom of conviction, “You want no 
building, but a fund for gardeners’ orphans,” and it is 
to Mrs. Barron, and no one else, that I was in the least 
indebted for the “combination of words” that were 
unanimously accepted. 
Mr. Barron has done yeoman’s service for the Fund, 
but there has been a gentle yet effective power behind 
him from the beginning ; and it is largely due, in my 
opinion, to the active sympathy and earnestness of 
Mrs. Barron on behalf of destitute children, and her 
helpfulness to her husband, that he has been able to do 
his work so well, and I believe that no one else is so 
fairly deserving of “whatever credit may attach” to 
the formulation of the title of the institution as is Mrs. 
A. F. Barron.— J. Wright, 171, Fleet Street. 
-- 
THE HOP INDUSTRY. 
The report of L the Select Committee of the House of 
Commons appointed to inquire into the causes which 
have produced the decrease in the acreage of land 
under Hop cultivation has been issued. The statistics 
which have been laid before the Committee show that 
there have been great variations from time to time in 
the acreage of land under cultivation of Hops, and that 
this was the case even before the Excise duty on 
English Hops and the duty on foreign Hops were 
repealed, in the year 1861. This reduction in the 
acreage under Hop cultivation has taken place mainly 
in the Wealds of Sussex and Kent and in Mid-Kent. 
From the evidence received it appears that the best 
qualities of Hops are grown in East Kent and in parts of 
Mid-Kent; then come the Farnham, the Herefordshire, 
and Worcestershire Hops, the last two of which have 
grown greatly in favour the^last few years ; and lastly 
come those of the Wealds of Sussex and Kent, where 
Hops, abundant in quantity but of less value in quality, 
are grown. The decrease of cultivation, therefore, has 
occurred mainly in those districts where Hops of inferior 
quality are produced, and it is from these districts mainly 
that complaints have been made to the Committee. 
The immediate cause of the decrease in the culti¬ 
vation has undoubtedly been the losses incurred by 
the growers, owing to the very low prices which have 
ruled for Hops during the last few years. The great 
majority of witnesses engaged in the cultivation of 
Hops attribute the fall of price mainly, if not wholly, 
to foreign imports. They allege that the price of 
foreign Hops rules the market for English Hops, and 
that foreign Hops have largely supplanted English 
Hops in the home consumption. The greater number 
of these witnesses favour the imposition of a duty on 
foreign Hops to the amount of 30s. or more per cwt. 
By some it is suggested that this duty should be 
accompanied by a tax of £1 per acre under cultivation 
of Hops in England. This, however, was objected to 
by the great majority of witnesses. The proposal, 
therefore, is practically one for a protective duty on 
Hops. The Committee, while not excluding evidence 
in this direction, have not thought it necessary to take 
evidence as to the ultimate effect and incidence of such 
a protective duty upon the cultivators of Hops and 
consumers of beer, or as to the expediency of taking a 
step with respect to a single article of production and 
consumption at variance with the general commercial 
and financial policy of the country. The Committee 
cannot recommend the imposition of a duty upon 
foreign Hops. It is evident that the recent depression 
is due to other causes besides foreign competition. 
From the evidence and statistics laid before the 
Committee, says the report, there is reason to conclude 
that those causes have been (1) the reduced consumption 
of malt and sugar for brewing purposes, and conse¬ 
quently of Hops since 1879, owing to the depression of 
trade and other causes ; (2) the economy effected in the 
use of Hops in proportion to malt since the year 1882, 
owing to the more scientific manufacture of beer, and 
to the altered taste of the public, which has required a 
beer of lighter and brighter character ; (3) the use to a 
certain degree of Hop substitutes. The evidence 
further shows that there has been a considerable 
economy in the use of Hops since the year 1882. The 
change which has taken place in the quality of beer, 
and the increased demand for a lighter and brighter 
beer, has also told mainly on the inferior qualities of 
Hops, for the better qualities alone can be used for beer 
of this kind ; and it has consequently followed that the 
reduced demand has mainly affected those districts 
where the inferior qualities of Hops have been grown. 
The evidence shows that the same causes have led, in 
many parts of the Continent, to a reduced cultivation 
during the last few years of much land where inferior 
Hops were grown. 
The proposal for increasing very greatly the already 
high protective duty on hops imported into the United 
States appears to show that the cultivation in that 
country has not been profitable. Much evidence has 
been given with reference to the use of “Hop sub¬ 
stitutes.” It shows that in 1882, when the price of 
Hops rose so greatly, owing to the almost total failure 
of the crops, substitutes were used by a certain number 
of brewers, and the price of these substitutes, such as 
“quassia,” “cheretta,” &c., rose considerably; but in 
subsequent years, when the price of Hops was reduced, 
the use of substitutes again fell off. It is confidently 
stated that none of these so-called substitutes can be 
relied upon to perform the work of Hops in the 
manufacture, flavour, and keeping of beer. Although 
the depression of the Hop industry cannot be largely 
attributed to the use of such substitutes, the evidence 
submitted to the Committee is sufficient to show that 
their use, in years when the crop of Hops is deficient, 
is prejudicial to the interests of growers ; the Committee 
therefore recommend that, if used, they should be 
declared. Evidence has been given as to the expediency 
of compelling the marking of foreign Hops in the same 
manner as English-grown Hops are marked. The 
foreign Hops which are imported to this country come 
without any special marks guaranteeing the districts in 
which they are grown. The committee, however, are 
unable to see that the interests of English Hop growers 
can be promoted by requiring any certificate of origin 
of such foreign Hops, and thus giving greater security 
to purchasers of them. 
The evidence before the Committee has been to the 
effect that, while for several past years the price of 
Hops has been unprofitably low, especially in the case 
of inferior qualities; yet the year 1889 has been'an 
exception, and the growers in many districts have done 
fairly well. “As the crop in that year was somewhat 
above the average,” adds the report, “there is reason 
to hope that, with a reduced acreage under cultivation 
and an increased consumption of malt, the balance 
between supply and demand is being redressed to the 
advantage of the producer, and that more prosperous 
times may be at hand.” 
