440 
THE GARDENING WORLD 
May 27, 1905. 
Letters to the Editor. 
Lamium puralbum. 
To tlie Editor of The Gardening World. 
Sir,—In your review of our herbaceous and alpine plant cata¬ 
logue contained in The Gardening World of this week’s date 
you kindly draw attention to a very unfortunate omission in 
our description of Lamium x puralbum. 
I write to inform you and the readers of your veiy interest¬ 
ing and instructive paper that the plant above mentioned is an 
excellent hardy perennial. 
In habit and in its free-blooming character L. x puralbum 
resembles the charming native L. album, the annual L. pur- 
pureum having only contributed to its progeny the delicate 
shade of shell-pink much is so beautiful and attractive a 
feature of this interesting hybrid. 
We particularly recommend L. x puralbum for naturalising 
in suitable positions. Not that its beauty does not merit a 
place for it with other herbaceous perennials on the border, 
but because its peculiar grace and charm are seen to greatest 
advantage in natural surroundings. 
The demand which has arisen for this unique plant leaves no 
room for doubt that there are numerous owners of gardens who 
are possessed of that aesthetic taste in flowers which does not 
demand of a flower that it shall of a necessity possess beauty 
with characteristics akin to arrogance. 
AA'hile one can admire the blaze of colour produced by such 
plants as the Oriental Poppy and Gaillardia, one learns to love 
the modest beauty of the Daisy and Violet. 
E. Horton. 
(For the Co-operative Bees, Limited.) 
To be, or not to be, Apprenticed to Horticulture ? 
To the Editor of The Gardening World. 
Sir,—It becomes difficult indeed to' follow Mr. Blair’s mean- 
derings and random statements, for he contradicts himself as 
unblushingly as he does his opponents. In his letter of 
April 29th lie says : “ • Heather Bell ’ accuses me of straying 
from the subject. I fail to 'see how I have done so. ‘ H. B.' 
himself chose the text, and if I tackle the whole subject instead 
of discussing only a very small part thereof, why, I think 
‘ H. B.’ ought to' be grateful rather than grumpy.” 
To that I replied on May 6th : “ The subject cannot be 
divided into parts, since there is but one point to discuss.” 
Then, behold! on May 13th, Mr. Blair says : “ As I was not 
addressing my remarks on the other parts of the subject to 
him, but to other gentlemen who are interested in the whole 
subject, he does not require to distress himself.” 
Put these two quotations from Mr. Blair’s letters together 
and we have a fine sample of that “ logic and common sense ” 
which characterise his attempts to get a. footing by some means. 
It is utter waste of time and space to attempt to reason with 
one who eats his own words in such a fashion, and I think it 
is now about time I had my last word. My desire at the outset 
was not to dictate but rather to draw out the opinions of others. 
The result has been highly gratifying, for without doubt the 
more substantial arguments of contributors have been in sup¬ 
port of the views expressed in my original article. 
For the large amount of space you have so' generously 
granted for the discussion of this subject, and for the hearty 
manner in which readers have entered into' it, I desire to 
express my thanks, and I trust the pages of The Gardening 
World will be largely used for the discussion of many im¬ 
portant subjects connected with our profession. 
Heather Bell. 
To the Editor of The Gardening World. 
Sir,—It is most amusing to read the “ ebullient contribu¬ 
tions ” of the “ garden boy ” and labourer champions. Here 
we have our friend “ Homocea” on the warpath again, and 
while vigorously denouncing his opponents for straying from 
the subject-, carefully avoids the subject himself and treats us 
to a tirade entirely foreign to the discussion. Of course, it is 
very gratifying to- find that “ Homocea ” is reduced to using 
personalities, as this is the last resort of the vanquished. 
Certainly “ Homocea ” shows marked taste in his choice of 
language, and I am glad that I am unable to soar (or tumble) 
to his level. However, as I have no doubt that lie is a fair 
sample of the class he so- ably champions, I need not grumble. 
My other critic, Mr. Weston, gets even more ridiculous and 
offensive than formerly. It would be well if Mr. W. would 
stick to- facts, and not endeavour to put constructions on my 
words that I plainly never intended to be SO' understood. It 
is funny, however, that Mr. W. and myself are in agreement on 
one point. 
He says : “ Is lie (the labourer) not indispensable to a large 
garden ? ” I say certainly, but keep him there. What I have 
objected to all along was not the labourer, as such, but the 
man who works for a year or two in a garden and then con¬ 
siders himself a gardener, and who, by offering his services at 
a low salary, thereby keeps a trained man out of employ¬ 
ment, or at all events lowers the standard of remuneration 
in the profession. 
I do not know which mechanical trades Mr. W. professes to 
be able to point out as being without apprentices. I would 
therefore' be glad to hear of the names of a few scores of such 
trades. Will Mr. W. be kind enough to- furnish a- list-? I must 
isa.y that we in Scotland have different methods, and I have an 
idea- that the Scottish mechanic can at- least hold his own 
wherever he goes. 
There is one point on which all the opponents of the appren¬ 
ticeship principle make a ludicrous mistake. They evidently 
still stick to the idea- of the premium alone constituting an 
apprentice. This system is now practically obsolete, so why 
harp continually on it? 
Another correspondent, “ A. J. H.,” tries hard to be funny, 
and ends by saying that he believes in apprenticeship, and 
then carefully tells us that the garden boy taught by the 
labourer is the better gardener. This is certainly funnier 
than the bit where he tries his wit ; especially where he says: 
“ The labourer answers the lad’s questions sincerely.” This is 
delightful. No wonder the garden boy makes such a grand 
gardener. How does “Homocea” like his brother’s explana¬ 
tion? C. Blair. 
[This correspondence should now cease.—E d.] 
Trade Notice. 
Catalogue of Horticultural Buildings. 
We are in receipt of an excellently got-up and printed cata¬ 
logue of buildings from Mr. AY. Duncan Tucker, Lawrence 
Road, South Tottenham, London, N. Every sheet consists of 
thick glazed paper, so that the illustrations, besides showing 
the structure of different kinds of buildings, are really pictures 
in themselves. Large pictures show the exterior of the works 
at Tottenham, and also a- view of the interior of a mill contain¬ 
ing the machinery at work preparing wood for different parts 
of buildings. There are also illustrations of conservatories 
attached in various ways to- dwelling-houses and conforming to 
their surroundings. Many of these, if not all of them, are 
photographs of actual buildings that have been constructed by 
Mi-. Duncan Tucker for various people. Some views show the 
interior of the buildings and the plants got together to- occupy 
them. Those who- peruse this catalogue will be surprised at 
the remarkable amount of variation in the shape of buildings, 
especially conservatories, dependent upon whether they are 
attached to dwelling-houses or entirely separated from them, 
and yet connected by passages or corridors. A ariety is also 
brought about- by the ingenuity displayed in making horticul¬ 
tural buildings beautiful and interesting as well as useful. Hot¬ 
house boilers of various kinds and their fittings 1 are also freely 
illustrated. The catalogue runs to 88 pages of large size. 
Readers experiencing any difficulty in obtaining “ The 
Gardening World” from newsagents will oblige by com¬ 
municating with the publishers. 
