September  29,  1898. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
245 
BIG  POTATO  CROPS. 
I  wrote  (on  page  206)  respecting  the  method  of  propagation  adopted 
by  Mr.  Pink  when  he  produced  that  marvellous  crop  of  Potatoes  in  1876 
from  memory,  and  in  the  firm  belief  that  it  was  the  process  employed,  not 
only  by  him,  but  by  others.  Of  course  I  would  not  for  one  moment  think 
of  setting  my  memory  against  that  of  the  eminent  Canterbury  horti¬ 
culturist  whom  Mr.  W.  Pea  quotes  with  such  extreme  confidence  and 
trust.  I  was  at  the  South  Kensington  meeting  when  the  huge  heaps  of 
Potatoes  were  shown,  and  I  conversed  with  Mr.  Pink,  Mr.  Beilis,  and 
others  of  the  competitors,  all  about  the  methods  employed,  and,  so  far  as 
my  recollection  serves,  I  believe  I  am  right.  Perhaps  if  the  Editor  will 
look  np  some  of  the  numbers  of  the  Journal  of  that  day  he  may  find  state¬ 
ments  relating  to  the  matter  that  would  settle  the  question  definitely. 
The  plan  of  scooping  out  the  eyes  mentioned,  and  the  same  as  was 
employed  by  Mr.  Forbes  at  Surbiton,  could  not  from  1  lb.  of  tubers  have 
produced  at  the  very  most  more  than  some  fifty  distinct  plants,  even 
from  the  coarse  Eureka,  and  for  fifty  plants  to  have  produced  647  lbs. 
necessitated  that  each  plant  should  produce  about  13  lbs.  However,  the 
prizes  offered,  and  the  wonderful  production  which  followed,  beyond 
establishing  a  record  in  Potato  production,  did  no  good.  The  bulk  of  the 
tubers  would  have  made  useful  cattle  food,  and  probably  that  was  their 
ultimate  use.  Temporarily  it  may  have  answered  a  certain  trade 
purpose,  but  it  was  very  temporary  indeed.  The  days  are  passed  when 
sums  ranging  from  Is.  6d.  to  5s.  per  lb.  were  asked  for  new  Potatoes.  It 
was  in  the  days  when  Americans  were  in  the  ascendant.  Now  that  our 
own  are  so  much  superior  purchasers  grumble  to  pay  6d.  per  lb. — A.  D. 
On  referring  to  past  volumes  we  find  that  the  “  large  heaps  ”  were 
placed  in  competition  for  the  Hooper  prizes  at  South  Kensington  on 
November  10th,  1875,  but  the  prizes  did  not  appear  to  have  been  awarded 
when  our  reporter  left  the  exhibition.  We  very  well  recollect  the  piles 
of  coarse  tubers  and  the  delay  in  announcing  the  awards,  but  the  reason 
for  this  delay  cannot  be  remembered. 
We  find  in  our  issue  of  January  20tb,  1876,  a  review  of  what  was 
termed  a  “  sensational  pamphlet,”  entitled  “  How  to  Grow  One  Thousand 
Pounds  of  Potatoes  from  One  Pound  of  Seed.  By  James  Pink.”  The 
author  failed  in  showing  that  he  had  done  this,  but  he  did  show  that  he 
in  some  way  obtained  121  plants  from  a  pound  of  Eureka  tubers,  or  tuber, 
for  we  find  a  record  of  tubers  exceeding  a  pound  in  weight. 
“  A.  D.”  and  others  may  be  interested  in  a  little  citation  from  the 
review.  After  some  sentences  of  complaint  “  in  the  interests  of  truth, 
and  for  the  benefit  of  horticulture,”  Mr.  Pink  goes  on  to  say  that  he  “had 
not  the  remotest  idea”  of  writing  the  pamphlet  until  “discredit  was 
thrown  on  the  successful  competitors  by  the  following  report,  which  is 
said  to  have  appeared  in  the  “  Gardeners’  Chronicle  ”  after  the  show  of 
“  huge  heaps.” 
“We  should  not  be  surprised  if  the  course  taken  by  the  judges  does  not  lead 
to  a  considerable  amount  of  discontent ;  but  for  the  present,  at  all  events,  has 
closed  one  of  the  greatest  horticultural  farces  ever  put  before  the  public,  and  it 
is  difficult  to  perceive  how,  by  any  possible  means,  this  competition  can  ever  be 
of  any  benefit  to  horticulture.” 
On  this  we  commented  : — 
As  to  the  “discredit,”  that  clearly  refers  to  the  scheme,  and  not  to  the  men 
who  carried  it  out ;  as  to  the  predicted  “discontent,”  the  pamphlet  proves  its 
existence,  while  it  fails  to  prove  that  the  competition  will  or  can  “benefit 
horticulture.” 
In  the  “interests  of  truth,”  we  may  give  Mr.  Pink  the  fullest  credit  for  the 
legitimate  way  which  he  carried  out  his  experiments.  We  accept  his  weights 
to  the  last  ounce,  and  recognise  his  cultural  skill  in  producing  his  sensational 
crop.  He  reveals  a  good  knowledge  of  Potato  culture  by  deeply  working  the 
ground  and  adding  to  it  the  following  manures: — “  10  bushels  of  wood  ashes, 
10  bushels  of  leaf  mould,  1  bushel  of  soot,  4  lbs.  of  sulphate  of  ammonia,  6  lbs. 
of  sulphate  of  soda,  10  lbs.  of  nitrate  of  soda,  and  10  lbs.  of  sulphate  of  potash,” 
to  8|  perches  of  ground,  further  dressing  with  “  50  lbs.  of  superphosphate  of 
lime  previous  to  the  final  earthing-up  of  the  plants.” 
The  pound  of  Snowflake  was  cut  into  eighty-two  sets,  and  Eureka  into  121 
sets,  a  further  pound  of  Brownlee’s  Beauty  being  cut  into  forty-three  sets  to 
occupy  the  remainder  of  the  ground.  The  sets  were  planted  on  April  3rd  in 
drills  3  feet  apart,  and  the  same  distance  between  the  sets.  On  August  6th  the 
crop  was  taken  up,  the  Eureka  produce  weighing  (according  to  the  pamphlet) 
672  lbs. ;  Snowflate,  405  lbs. ,  and  Brownlee’s  Beauty,  290  lbs.  The  3  lbs.  of 
seed  thus  yielding,  not  3000  lbs.,  but  1367  lbs.  of  produce,  or,  including  the 
diseased  tubers,  the  average  may  be  put  as  half  the  standard  weight,  or  500  lbs., 
instead  of  1000,  per  1  lb.  of  seed. 
In  seeking  to  prove  the  great  public  value  of  the  system  detailed  in  the 
pamphlet,  the  author  takes  his  stand  on  the  old  aphorism  of  “  making  two 
blades  of  grass  grow  where  only  one  grew  before,”  and  hence  he  concludes 
that  “  the  competitors  have  done  good  service  to  horticulture.”  Let  us  test 
the  soundness  of  this  premise.  The  “  two  blade  theory,”  like  other  two-edged 
blades,  cuts  both  ways.  Before  the  grass  can  be  beneficial  it  must  possess  the 
quality  of  being  “good  to  eat.”  Most  dwellers  in  the  country  have  seen  two, 
and  many  more  than  two,  blades  of  grass  grow  where  only  one  grew  before, 
and  they  have  also  seen  the  cattle  avoid  these  rank  knolls  which  have  been 
scattered  over  the  pastures,  even  when  the  animals  have  been  starving  through 
want  of  food.  Where  that  is  seen  it  is  regarded  by  the  agriculturist  as  the 
result  of  neglect,  and  betokens  bad  management,  because  the  elements  of  the 
soil  and  manure  are  wasted,  and  the  additional  grass  represents  loss  instead  of 
profit. 
The  value  of  the  varieties  are  assessed  according  to  their  number  of  eyes, 
Eureka  heading  the  list  with  121  eyes.  But  is  that  any  real  gain  ?  is  it  not 
rather  a  substantial  loss  ?  The  superiority  of  a  tuber  is  generally  expressed  as 
having  “few  eyes;”  but  here  for  the  first  time  in  Potato  history  “many” 
eyes  becomes  a  virtue.  It  is  a  virtue,  however,  that  ordinary  observers  and 
impartial  judges — those  whose  first  study  is  the  interest  of  the  community — 
will  not  and  cannot  recognise,  and  hence  the  unanimous  verdict  of  the  visitors 
in  regard  to  the  many-eved  monsters  exhibited  at  South  Kensington— a  verdict 
which  may  be  truthfully  entered  in  three  words — words  that  were  repeated 
again  and  again  throughout  the  corridor— “  Fit  for  pigs.” 
As  to  offering  prizes  of  the  nature  of  those  championed  by  Mr.  Pink  in  his 
pamphlet,  they  can  no  more  “benefit  horticulture”  than  would  prizes  for  the 
greatest  weight  of  Cabbages  from  an  ounce  of  seed,  where  Robinson’s  Champion 
Cattle  Cabbages  would  inevitably  triumph,  while  Early  York  and  other  small 
sorts  of  superior  quality  would  have  to  hide  their  “  diminished  heads”  and  be 
dishonoured. 
To  the  above,  which  appeared  on  20th  January,  1876,  we  may  add 
another  “find”  which  puts  Mr.  Pink’s  exploit  of  672  lbs.  in  the  shade. 
On  page  252,  Journal  of  Horticulture,  September  16th,  1875, 
Mr.  F.  Ford,  writing  from  The  Gardens,  Capesthorne,  stated  that 
in  the  presence  of  the  agent  he  weighed  and  planted  1  lb.  each  of 
Snowflake  and  Eureka  on  April  13th  of  that  year  ;  that  Snowflake  was 
lifted  in  the  presence  of  the  agent  and  other  witness  on  August  13th, 
the  produce  weighing  638  lbs.  ;  Eureka  being  lifted  a  week  later  (and 
here  is  the  “  record  *’)  the  crop  weighing  1082J  lbs. !  It  is  also  stated 
that  300  tubers  of  Eureka  weighed  369J  lbs.  Mr.  Ford  indicated  his 
intention  of  competing  for  the  Hooper  prizes.  Did  he  do  so,  and  if  so 
how  came  672  lbs.  of  Eureka  to  beat  1082J,  weight  being  the  determining 
factor  ?  Mr.  A.  Dewar,  according  to  the  directory,  appears  to  be  the 
gardener  at  Capesthorne  now,  and  it  may  be  wondered  if  there  are  any 
“  witnesses  ”  left  of  that  extraordinary  yield.  It  exceeds  all  others  that 
we  have  seen  in  print,  even  Mr.  H.  C.  Pearson’s  Pitcairn,  New  York,  of 
1018  lbs.  in  1874. 
The  offer  of  50  guineas  in  prizes  in  the  competition  in  question  was 
obviously  to  create  a  demand  for  American  Potatoes  at  inflated  prices  ; 
and  it  may  not  be  without  interest  to  note  that  Messrs.  Hooper  &  Co. 
published  the  following  list  ( Journal  of  Horticulture,  June  17th,  1875)  in 
order  that  “  no  exhibitor  might  be  disqualified  by  the  presentation  of  sorts 
not  American.”  Alpha,  Eureka,  Snowflake,  Brownlee’s  Beauty  (syn. 
Vermont  Beauty),  Extra  Early  Vermont,  Compton’s  Surprise,  Early  Gem, 
Late  Rose,  King  of  the  Earlies,  Climax.  Bresee’s  Peerless,  Bresee’s 
Prolific,  Early  Goodrich,  Garnet,  Chili,  Peachblow,  and  Early  Rose, 
arranged  in  order  of  date  of  introduction,  reading  the  names  backwards. 
Early  Rose  being  the  first  arrival,  and  the  others  following  upwards  and 
onwards  as  long  as  the  craze  lasted,  to  the  disgust  of  the  then  “  Upwards 
and  Onwards”  of  this  Journal— the  present  Robert  Fenn.  “A.  D.”  is 
right  in  his  surmise  that  the  dear  Americans  were  increased  by  cuttings 
like  Dahlias,  whether  Mr.  Pink  resorted  to  the  practice  or  not,  because 
we  have  seen  the.topping  and  striking  in  progress. 
JOTTINGS. 
Looking  round  the  gardens  at  Impney  the  other  evening,  with  Mr. 
Jordan,  various  things  arrested  my  attention,  among  which  was  a  large 
collection  of  Primula  obconica  in  flower  in  the  new  range  of  houses.  The 
effect  produced  by  their  delicate  tint  was  very  pleasing,  and  amply 
demonstrated  that  these  plants  are,  like  many  others,  most  effective  when 
in  masses. 
Carnations  in  pots  are  becoming  plentiful  at  Impney,  and  the  new 
bright  crimson  variety,  “Yuletide,”  obtains  a  place.  The  cheerful  looking 
Celsia  cretica,  the  lovely  rose  coloured  Plumbago  rosea,  and  the  crimson 
bracted  Poinsettias  are  there  in  quantity  and  in  robust  health  and  vigour. 
In  the  greenhouse  was  a  splendid  display  of  Zonal  and  Ivy-leaved 
Pelargoniums,  with  masses  of  Chrysanthemums  Madame  Desgrange  and 
G.  Wermig.  The  collection  of  Orchids  increases  in  health,  number,  and 
floriferousness.  Foliage  plants,  also,  are  abundant,  clean,  and  well 
coloured. 
In  the  vineries  the  Grapes  are  abundant  and  of  excellent  quality. 
The  Muscat  of  Alexandria  is  superb  in  colour,  having  the  delicate  clear 
pale  amber  tint  so  often  aimed  at  but  seldom  obtained. 
Outdoors  on  the  walls  were  two  Princess  of  Wales  Peach  trees  bearing 
large  crops  of  fruit,  likewise  Barrington  and  Lord  Palmerston.  Pears 
are  abundant  of  Ne  Plus  Meuris,  Marie  Louise,  Duchesse  d’Angoulekne, 
Fondante  d’Automne,  Glou  Mor§eau,  Beurr£  Diel,  and  Louise  Bonne  de 
Jersey.  _ 
Mr.  Jordan’has  re-formed  the  Rose  garden  and  planted  the  varieties  in 
masses  and  long  lines,  and  grand  they  look.  The  Roses  are  robust, 
clean,  and  very  floriferous,  and  a  delight  to  the  eye.  The  Rose  garden 
alone  is  most  creditable  to  the  gardener,  but  Mr.  Jordan  makes  his 
presence  felt  in  all  the  departments  of  the  famous  Impney  gardens. 
I  was  greatly  pleased  with  the  tuberous  Begonias  grown  by  Mr.  C.  H. 
Harvey  of  Haymills,  near  Birmingham,  when  calling  recently.  Unfor¬ 
tunately  I  have  lost  the  list  of  names  of  the  best  varieties  I  then  saw,  but 
the  collection  generally  was  something  of  which  he  might  properly  be 
proud,  Mr.  Harvey  is  a  good  example  of  the  painstaking  British  artisan, 
who  does  well  whatsoe’er  he  takes  in  hand.  Chrysanthemums,  Begonias, 
Gloxinias,  and  Tomatoes  are  his  favourites,  and  he  can  hold  his  own  with 
these  things  against  many  professional  gardeners. — J.  Udale. 
