560 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AN\ D  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
December  1?,  1S95. 
same  way,  though  with  the  beauty  of  form  somewhat  modified  by  deeper 
or  softer  tones  of  colour,  yellow  flowers  can  also  be  grouped  most 
effectively.  Names  that  occur  are  Mrs,  Libbie  Allen,  Mons,  C.  Capitante, 
Duchess  of  Wellington,  Mons.  Panckoucke,  and  H.  L,  Sunderbruck. 
All  these  and  more  can  be  grown  advantageously,  but  we  should  hesitate 
to  cultivate  at  one  and  the  same  time  for  decorative  purposes  two 
varieties  of  the  colour  of  William  Seward,  William  Tricker,  or  Charles 
Davis. 
So  far  practical  matters  have  perhaps  been  somewhat  slightly  treated. 
Now,  however,  it  may  be  pointed  out  that  several  of  these  novelties  of 
late  years  are  better  fitted  for  pot  plants  than  sorts  that  have  been  for 
long  accepted  as  the  best.  Some  of  these  are — Viviand  Morel,  Ch.  Davis, 
Mrs.  E.  S.  Trafford,  W.  Tricker,  Madame  Ad.  Chatin,  Commandant 
Blusset,  Lord  Brooke,  W.  K.  Woodcock  and  Col.  W.  B.  Smith.  Baron 
Hirsch,  in  the  incurved  section,  I  like  for  a  pot  plant.  These  are  a  few 
examples  of  dwarf  growing  sorts  that  will  produce  in  7  and  8-inch  pots 
nine  to  twelve  large  blooms,  and  with  handsome  foliage  to  the  soil.  As 
cut  flowers  these  and  many  more  are  particularly  fine. 
In  exhibitions  prizes  are  being  given  for  vases  filled  with  long  stalked 
blooms.  These  to  some  extent  show  what  can  be  done  with  the  flowers, 
but  they  at  the  same  time  furnish  examples  of  what  to  avoid .  In  every 
instance  I  have  seen  the  blooms  were  too  closely  crowded,  and  the  capa¬ 
bilities  of  the  flowers  for  decoration  were  quite  lost  to  view.  Perhaps 
the  method  of  setting  up  the  blooms  in  order  to  obtain  the  best  effect  is 
to  cut  them  with  stems  18  inches  to  2  feet  in  length,  and  to  employ  as 
receptacles  plain  jars  about  8  inches  high  and  3  inches  in  diameter.  In 
these  seven  to  twelve  blooms  can  be  arranged  most  effectively.  The 
outer  flowers  droop  sufficiently  to  allow  plenty  of  space  for  each  one  to 
be  fully  seen.  They  require  no  other  setting  than  their  own  foliage.  In 
large  and  tall  trumpet-shaped  vases  it  is  better  to  employ  a  few  blooms 
to  give  effect  to  the  whole,  but  in  this  case  along  with, the  Chrysantb,q- 
mums  bold  and  graceful  foliage,  such  as  Bamboo,  Pampas  Grass,  Cyperus 
longus,  C.  alternifolius,  or  Asparagus,  should  be  freely  employed. 
Branches  of  Euonymus  europgeus  covered  with  fruit  makes  a  most 
effective  addition.  To  Mr,  Jones  of  Lewisham  I  am  indebted  for  the 
latter  idea.  This  year,  with  an  abundant  crop  of  fruit,  I  am  making  a 
very  free  use  of  this  combination.  Single  blooms  set  up  in  small  silver 
beakers  lend  themselves  well  for  the  adornment  of  dining-tables.  I  use 
nothing  else  when  these  are  employed  unless  it  may  be  a  few  sprays  of 
Smilax  laid  on  the  cloth,  and  among  any  pieces  of  plate  there  may  be 
arranged  as  accessories.  I  do  not  much  like  cutting  fresh  blooms  for 
these  occasions,  but  as  a  rule  it  is  unnecessary  to  do  so,  because  old 
flowers  that  have  been  used  in  vases  do  perfectly  well  after  any  decayed 
petals  have  been  picked  out; — B. 
POETRY  AND  TRUTH. 
My  old  friend  “  A.  D.,”  who  might  be  felicitously  described  as  the 
clever  writer  and  cultivator  who  looks  at  most  subjects  through  a 
Potato  medium,  can  hardly  be  accepted  as  an  infallible  judge  as  to  the 
character  and  tendency  of  poetry.  Had  he  taken  more  poetry  as  sauce 
for  his  Potatoes  he  would  speedily  have  discovered  with  Campbell  that — 
“  Poetry  is  the  eloquence  of  Truth,” 
or  with  Keats — 
“  A  dramless  shower 
Of  light  is  poesy,  ’tis  the  supreme  of  power, 
‘Tis  might  half  slumbering  on  its  own  right  arm.” 
Or  in  the  quaint  words  of  Fuller: — “Poetry  is  music  in  words  and 
music  is  poetry  in  sound,  both  excellent  sauce,”  and,  let  me  add,  soundest 
sense  robed  in  beauty.  Bailey  takes  a  yet  higher  flight  in  the  following 
lines,  as  distinguished  for  their  truth  as  for  their  beauty  and  eloquence  : — 
“  Poetry  is  in  itself  a  thing  of  God. 
He  made  His  prophets  poets,  and  the  more 
We  feel  of  poesy  do  we  become 
Like  God  in  love  and  power.” 
The  world  we  live  in,  the  gardens  we  make  and  adorn  with  beauty, 
and  fill  with  richer  plenty — the  mysteries  of  life — we  are  vainly  striving 
to  unravel.  The  history  and  economy  of  the  universe  are  brimful — running 
over — ■with  poetry  to  those  who  have  eyes  to  see  or  ears  to  hear  its 
sweet  harmonies.  Hence  we  have  poetry  in  form,  colour,  structure, 
affinity,  co-operation,  everywhere — in  design,  sculpture,  architecture, 
painting,  picture  making,  whether  on  canvas  or  on  our  landscapes  with 
living  plants  and  flowers.  But  poems — or  poetry — to  live  must  be  true  ; 
and  if  I  might  venture  on  one  more  definition  of  poetry  it  should  be 
that  it  is  the  beginning  of  the  blooming  period  of  truth, 
“  A.  D.,”  on  the  other  hand,  starts  his  criticism  of  some  of  my 
utterances  wdth  this  sentence,  “Still  the  poetical  may  sometimes  be 
other  than  the  exact  truth,”  and  proceeds  to  quote  two  examples  from 
my  lecture  before  the  Horticultural  Club — viz.,  that  of  plants  distilling 
our  water  and  our  beer,  and  of  spirits  being  the  products  of  our  growing 
embryos.  Both  my  statements  are  literally  true,  nevertheless.  A  deeper, 
wider  dash  of  poetry  would  enable  “A.  D.”  to  see  further  into  and 
more  correctly  interpret  the  wonderful  economy  of  Nature.  Arrest  the 
energy  of  evaporation  or  perspiration  from  plant  surface,  stop  their 
signalling  symbols  for  water  from  the  clouds,  and  how  much  longer 
would  our  rivers  run  or  the  earth  be  watered  1 
As  to  the  growing  embryos,  your  readers  would  note  that  I  did  not 
say  that  spirits  and  beer  were  made  from  the  sprouts.  It  is,  however, 
literally  and  solidly  true  to  affirm  that  these  drinks  are  the  products  of 
the  erabrycs,  as  but  for  these  the  conversion  of  the  starch  into  sugar. 
and  of  the  latter  into  beer  and  spirits,  could  not  have  taken  p’ace.  For 
the  sake  of  the  youne:  men  and  women  who  are  crowding  into  the  ranks 
of  horticulture  I  have  endeavoured  to  remove  the  impression  that  any 
poetry  worthy  of  the  name  can  be  false  in  fact  or  sentiment.  Every 
garden  of  taste,  properly  formed,  furnished,  cultivated,  becomes  sn 
inspiration  of  poetry,  a  school  of  art  for  its  fortunate  possessor  and  his 
family. 
Thus,  every  reader  may  be  able  to  say  in  degree  with  Coleridge. 
“  Poetry  has  been  to  me  its  own  exceeding  great  reward.  It  bas  soothed 
my  afflictions  ;  it  has  multiplied  and  refined  my  enjoyments  ;  it  has 
endeared  solitude,  and  it  has  given  me  the  habit  of  wishing  to  discover 
the  good  and  the  beautiful  in  all  that  meets  and  surrounds  me.” — 
— D.  T.  Fish. 
“  Ah,  wad  some  po'W'er  the  giftie  gie  us, 
To  see  oursels  as  ithevs  see  us.” — i2.  Burns. 
It  is  John  Buskin  who  tells  us  that  the  main  difference  between  one 
man  and  another,  or  even  between  one  domestic  animal  and  another,  is 
simply  that  the  man  or  the  animal  feels  more  deeply,  or  that  he  can 
express  his  intuitions  more  clearly  than  his  fellows.  When  “A.  D.” 
wrote  his  carping  paragraph  at  page  530,  he  might  have  been  better 
employed,  for  it  is  no  figure  of  speech  for  Mr.  D.  T.  Fish  to  assert  the 
truth  that  water  is  ever  being  aerated  and  purified  by  plants  everywhere 
— in  sea.  or  river,  or  in  pool.  If  man  had  kept  his  waste  products  out 
of  the  Thames,  it  would  not  have  been  muddy,  as  it  is  to-day.  Even 
with  all  the  filth  shot  into  it,  it  is  the  plants  that  eventually  cleanse, 
and  purify,  and  utilise  the  Thames  mud,  Mr.  “A.  D-.;”  as  a  little 
thought  would  have  proved  to  you.  What  is  sewage  or  drainage  ?  Is  it 
not.  merely  the  carrying  of  offensive  matter  from  one  place,  and  the 
depositing  of  it  into  another  place — a  little  more- remote  it  may  be  from 
our  front  doors  and  windows  ;  but  is  it  not  still  a  waste  product,  that 
must  he  dealt  with  by  the  plant  all  the-same? 
The  gospel  that  Nature  preaches  to  us  day  by  day  is  this  purifica¬ 
tion  of  old  refuse.  Nature  is  the  geni,  vvho  still  goes  about  our  streets 
shouting  out,  “New  lamps  for  old,  new  lamps  for  old.”  “Give  me  your 
rel use  under  fair  conditions,”  says  Nature,  and  in  return  you  shall 
have  wine  and  oil,  and  corn  and  fruits,  and  fairest  of  flowers  !  ” 
We  must  place  our  town  refuse  on  the  land  under  the  best  conditions. 
The  so-called  “  sewage  farm  ”  method  may  have  failed  because  too 
much  waste  material  was  dumped  down  on  a  too  limited  area,  but  the 
principle  is  true  all  the  same.  Do  what  you  like,  say  what  you  like, 
write  what  you  like  ;  but  the  fact  remains  that  green  leaves  are  better 
than  bad  drains,  of  good  ones  either. 
The  green  leaf  is  after  all  the  only  chemist  that  deals  finally  with  all 
that  is  deleterious  to  our  health  and  to  our  lives.  No,  “  A.  D.,”  it  is  no 
mere  “  figure  of  speech,”  it  is  a  truth  eternal  as  the  hills,  a  gospel  as 
old  as  creation,  and  much  older  than  human  history,  and  probably  older 
■  than  animal  life  on  this  globe. 
When  “  A.  D.”  asks  if  “  it  is  quite  correct  to  say  that  drinks  of  the 
malt  and  distilled  order  are  the  produce  of  growing  embryos,  seeing  that 
in  the  process  of  malting  the  embryos  are  carefully  removed  and  swept 
aside  as  malt  dust ;  whilst  it  is  the  starch  in  the  grain,  stored  by  Nature 
as  food  for  the  infant  germ,  that  bas  in  the  process  of  gcrmhiation  been 
converted  into  sugar,  and  this  sugar  through  the  artificial  [?]  agency  of 
fermentation  been  again  [?]  converted  into  alcohol.” 
I  have  quoted  and  underlined  some  words  of  this  long-winded 
sentence,  as  its  logic  is  very  complicated  and  involved.  Of  course  it  is 
quite  correct  for  Mr.  Fish  to  say  that  malt  liquors  are  the  products  of 
growing  embryos.  When  the  embryo  plant  of  Barley  begins  to  grow  it 
develops  diastase,  which  is  a  material  of  potent  action  on  starch, 
changing  it  into  sugar  for  the  food  of  the  baby  Barley  plants,  The 
process  is  purely  natural.  So  is  fermentation  a  natural  process.  The 
growth  of  microscopic  plants  of  a  fungoid  nature  (  =  bacteria),  though 
of  course  both  germination  and  fermentation  as  natural  processes  may 
be.  and  in  malting  really  are,  artificially  induced.  The  paragraph 
“A.  D.”  wrote  so  flippantly  is  all  bombast ;  it  is  like  a  blown  bladder, 
and  bursts  with  a  mere  prick  of  the  pen. 
But  shallow  as  are  the  few  arguments  employed,  what  can  one  say 
of  the  concluding  words  of  the  paragraph?  We  are  therein  told,  “The 
conception  found  in  the  sentence  is  beautiful,  bat  like  so  much  that  is 
beautiful  it  is  not  quite  true.”  Here  is  a  woefully  false  argument,  so 
false  ihat  one  wonders  if  “A.  D.”  ever  consulted  an  elementary  primer 
on  logic  in  his  school-day  curriculum.  Beautiful,  but  not  true,  is  a 
fallacy.  Nothing  really  beautiful  can  possibly  be  untrue.  “  Perfect 
beauty  is  simply  perfect  fitness  for  a  perfect  use,”  or  as  our  old  English 
adage  has  it,  All  is  fine  that  is  fit.”  Some  day  “  A.  D.”  may  learn  ihat 
it  is  only  poetry  that  is  eternally  true,  and  that  our  so-called  science  is 
merely  a  moveable  index — a  shifting  and  unknown  quantity.  The 
poetry  of  Homer  is  as  true  to-day  as  when  first  written  ;  ail  real  poetry 
has  the  characteristic  of  eternal  truth. 
But  we  cannot  say  as  much  for  our  human  science,  which  is  ever  a 
shifting  quicksand  to  the  unvtary.  It  is  high  time  for  “  A.  D.”  to  cease 
his  cynical  sneers  at  the  “imaginative,”  the  “poetical,”  and  the 
“  beautiful  ;  ”  and  he  may  rest  perfectly  assured  of  the  fact  that  water 
is  ever  and  always  being  aerated  and  purified  by  green  leaves,  that  all 
grain  drinks,  such  as  malt  liquors,  are  the  product  of  germination— z  c  , 
of  growing  embryos,  which  are  swept  away  as  malt  du.st,  certainly  after 
their  loorh  is  done,  but  they  did  the  work  all  the  same.  Lastly,  and 
above  all,  “A,  D.”  may  rest  assured  that  poetry  is  the  most  beautiful  of 
language,  because  it  is  true,  and  not  merely  because  it  speaks  “  of  pretty 
things  in  a  pretty  way.”  It  only  remains  for  me  to  add  that  I  think 
“A.  D.”  really  ov/es  an  apology  to  Mr.  D,  T.  Fish  for  his  crude  and 
