ANNUAL ADDRESS. 
423 
some empty, and where every man has an ownership. We all 
have a little frame for ourselves. Is it filled ? If not, will 
you fill it ? The gallery is the beautiful earth itself. The 
frames are the surroundings of our own homes. Shall then 
our little worlds be little Edens, or little wildernesses ? In other 
words, shall we have pleasant and useful gardens, or unsightly, 
unprofitable and empty lots or yards. Resolve we this ques¬ 
tion favorably, and then it is that our duties as horticulturists 
are commenced. What kind of a garden do we want? Pleasant 
and useful it must be; but of what shape, and what will be its 
internal arrangements ? What shall we grow ? When shall 
we plant ? How feed and tend the plants ? Here is a little 
world of enquiry fo» us, but it is a world full of delight and 
content in which the true lover of horticulture finds himself 
oblivious to all other cares and knows no disquietude but what 
shall spring frofti some pleasurable solicitude for the well-being 
of a cherished plant or honored tree. In the very littleness of 
such cares lies hid very much happiness and very many com¬ 
forts. “A garden,” says the great and wise Lord Bacon, “is 
the purest of human pleasures; it is the greatest refreshment 
to the spirit of man, without which, buildings and palaces are 
but gross handiworks; and man shall ever see, that when ages 
grow into civility and elegance, men come to build stately 
edifices sooner than to garden finely, as if gardening were the 
greater perfection.” 
In the subject matter of the questions just propounded are 
involved the art and science of gardening, the methods and 
manner as well as principles of our duties, as horticulturists. 
A very ignorant man may be a very excellent gardener as far 
as art is concerned. Of this truth, we have every day proof in 
the illiterate character of the men who do our gardening. And 
one who possesses an excellent knowledge or scientific educa¬ 
tion as a horticulturist may be equally ignorant of the art. The 
distinction is perfectly legitimate, since it is the province of 
science to discover truth and of art to apply the truth discov¬ 
ered. Sir Humphrey Davy, the great chemist, as well as phil¬ 
osopher, once made a blunder notably illustrative of his igno- 
