'58 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
July  20,  1899. 
After  all  it  is  our  continental  friend  who  is  the  warm-hearted  excitable 
receptionist. 
It  may  be  pleaded  that  what  was  so  lacking  at  Chiswick  was  more  than 
compensated  for  by  the  hospitality  of  the  Horticultural  Club.  All, 
honour  to  it.  and  to  that  of  the  R.H.S.  on  the  following  night  at  the  Hotel 
Metropole.  But  there  does  seem  to  be  more  of  heart  required  at  the  original 
or  primary  function.  How  pleasant  would  have  been  a  small  reception 
tent  on  the  lawn  at  Chiswick,  to  which  all  visitors,  Ido  not  mean  members 
of  the  Committees,  but  invited  visitors,  might  have  been  taken  and  there 
introduced  to  the  President  and  some  members  of  the  Council.  How  nice 
to  have  conducted  them  round  the  show,  such  as  it  was,  and  the  gardens. 
How  pleasant  more  sociability  at  the  luncheon,  and  a  few  very  short 
speeches  of  hearty  greeting.  How  welcome  at  the  conclusion  of  the  after¬ 
noon  conference  would  have  been  a  cup  of  tea  or  coffee,  and  even  a  band 
of  music  which  Fellows  might  be  invited  to  enjoy  in  company  with  their 
wives.  There  seem  to  be  so  many  directions  in  which  heartiness  and 
welcome  might  have  been  emphasised. 
In  relation  to  the  actual  matter  read  or  spoken  at  the  Conference, 
without  doubt  it  was  of  interest  only  to  a  limited  number,  yet  very 
valuable  as  showing  how  far  hybridisation  or  cross-breeding  had  gone, 
how  much  further  it  might  go,  and  probable'  results,  according  to  the 
directions  taken.  The  general  inference  deduced  from  the  observations 
made  was  that  hitherto  hybridisation  has  been  erratic,  not  conceived 
or  conducted  on  definite  or  scientific  lines,  and  carried  out  very  much 
according  to  the  tastes  of  individuals,  rarher  than  with  clearly  defined 
aims.  If  from  out  of  the  Conference  it  be  found  possible  to  so  far 
marshal  efforts  to  make  it  practical,  experimental,  and  tending  in  one 
direction,  great  good  will  have  resulted. 
No  d.,ubt  many  present  thought  the  proceedings  dull  and  dry.  That 
objection  must  always  attach  to  discussion  of  scientific  research.  Doubtless 
it  was  true  that  the  discussion  tended  more  in  a  scientific  direction  than 
in  a  purely  horticultural  one,  but  that  again  could  hardly  be  avoided, 
when  scientists  rather  than  gardeners  were  speaking.  The  definition  of 
general  principles  lacks  the  interest  which  naturally  attaches  to  practical 
detail  or  work  in  hybridisation.  It  would  perhaps  have  had  more  interest 
for  the  gardener  had  the  papers  and  discussions  been  restricted  to  the 
consideration  of  hybridisation  for  purely  economic  aims  or  purposes.  That 
would  have  limited  the  range  of  talk,  but  it  would  have  shown  in  a  remark¬ 
able  way  what  hybridisation  or  cross  breeding  has  done  for  horticulture, 
and  would  also  have  helped  the  gardener  to  understand  how  much  in 
■flowers,  fruits,  and  vegetables  he  owes  to  the  labours  of  those  sterling 
enthusiasts  who  have  done  so  much  to  create  and  to  enrich  gardening. 
-A.  D.  * 
EXAMINATION  IN  HORTICULTURE. 
In  your  article  on  the  recent  examination  of  the  R.H.S.  I  notice  that 
you  mention  certain  towns  as  the  only  places  where  systematic  instruction 
in  horticulture  appears  to  be  given.  I  presume  you  judge  from  the 
addresses  given  by  the  candidates  on  their  entry  forms.  May  I  point 
out  that  for  several  years  past  a  class  in  practical  horticulture  has  been 
held  in  the  Municipal  Technical  School,  Leicester  ?  Last  year  we  sent 
in  six  candidates,  all  of  whom  passed.  This  year  we  had  eight  candidates, 
and  again  all  were  successful. — J.  Lansdell. 
[Mr.  Lansdell  is  slightly  in  error.  We  made  no  such  statement  as 
above  alleged,  but  a  correspondent  remarked  on  page  527,  June  29th,  that 
no  technical  schools  other  than  those  mentioned  by  him  were  specified  in 
the  official  list  of  successful  students  as  issued  by  the  Royal  Horticultural 
Society,  and  we  think  he  was  correct.  The  college  and  school  candidates 
who  passed  appear  to  stand  in  the  following  order  : — Swanley,  32  ; 
Chelmsford,  20  ;  Holmes  Chapel,  11  ;  Stafford,  9  ;  Leicester,  8  ;  these  in 
the  aggregate  being  exactly  half  of  the  total  passes — 160. 
The  Leicester  candidates  must  have  been  well  taught  and  selected  for 
the  trying  ordeal.  Mr.  Lansdell  does  not  state  the  number  of  lessons 
they  had.  Another  successful  teacher  informs  us  that  his  students  had 
forty  as  a  minimum,  and  complains  that  three  of  the  questions  in  the 
[‘elementary'  division  were  on  hybridisation — a  subject  which  special¬ 
ists  from  various  countries  have  been  invited  to  discuss  in  London 
conferences  ;  and  he  further  fails  to  see  the  use  of  a  gardener  storing 
his  memory  with  the  natural  orders  to  which  the  thousands  of  trees  and 
plants  belong,  and  thus  diverting  his  attention  from  subjects  of,  to  him, 
far  more  substantial  importance. 
That  is  matter  of  opinion,  and  the  question  is  open  to  legitimate 
discussion  ;  but  the  ability  and  integrity  of  the  examiners  are  not.  Our 
attention  has  been  called  to  a  sentence  on  the  page  above  cited  to  the 
effect  that  semi-scientific  questions  may  be  favoured  in  awarding  murks. 
We  interpreted  this  as  meaning,  in  the  opinion  of  the  writer,  that  such 
questions  themselves  (not  the  awards  for  answers)  were  favoured  bv  the 
R.H.S.  for  testing  the  knowledge  of  candidates.  While  this  opinion  is 
held  by  our  correspondent  “Practical,”  and  others  of  our  most  successful 
gardeners,  he  further  states  that  he  intended  to  say,  and  thought  he  did 
say,  that  scientifically  or  botanically  trained  studeuts  in  colleges  and 
schools  would  themselves  be  likely  to  favour  those  over  practical  questions 
for  obtaining  marks. 
This  may  or  may  not  be  so.  The  publication  of  the  marks  in  each 
division  would  settle  the  point.  It  is  possible,  for  instance,  for  a  student, 
■  to  obtain  say  150  marks  in  the  scientific,  but  only  fifty  in  the  practical 
division,  total  200,  entitling  to  the  “  first  class,”  while  another  might 
obtain  150  marks  tor  practical  and  forty-nine  for  scientific  knowledge 
these  placing  him  in  the  “  second  class  ”  list. 
‘ The  qu ,‘stion  now  arises,  Which  would  be  likely  to  prove  the  more 
useful,  serviceable,  profitable,  gardener  or  cultivator — the  student  with 
150  marks  for  practical  knowledge,  or  the  one  with  only  fifty  1  As  a 
teacher  of  botany— physiological,  structural,  and  taxological — there  is  no 
question  as  to  which  would  be  the  more  competent.  The  publication  of 
the  marks  in  the  respective  divisions  would  more  ffilly  represent  the 
precise  qualifications  of  candidates  than  is  revealed  in  the  present 
aggregated  list.] 
THE  ROYAL  GARDENERS’  ORPHAN  FUND. 
The  Whitehall  rooms  of  the  Hotel  Me'tropole  were  on  Tuesday 
evening  last  the  venue  of  the  Royal  Gardeners’  Orphan  F und,  as  they  have 
been  for  several  years  past. 
With  Sir  Reginald  Hanson,  Bart.,  M.P.,  in  the  chair,  the  “  City  ” 
had  additional  inducement  to  attend,  and  a  number  of  prominent 
members  of  the  great  City  companies  were  present,  including  Lieutenant- 
Colonel  Probyn,  Sheriff  of  London.  Of  the  leading  horticultural  lights 
there  were,  in  addition  to  Mr.  N.  N.  Sherwood,  the  Treasurer  of  the 
Fund,  Mr.  Harry  J.  Vpitch,  one  of  its  chief  pillars,  Messrs.  Jas.  H. 
Yeitcb,  W.  Marshall,  Geo.  Monro,  Alex.  J.  Monro.  F.  W.  Moore, 
J.  A.  Laing,  J.  Assbee,  J.  W.  Barr,  II.  J.  Jones,  J.  Smith,  H.  Russell, 
M.  Gleeson,  R.  Dean,  Geo.  Reynolds,  W.  Howe,  A.  F.  Barron,  H.  James, 
J.  Ingamels,  and  the  Secretary,  Mr.  B.  Wynne. 
Dinner  commenced  at  seven  o’clock,  and  as  Sir  Reginald  was  due 
at  the  “  House,”  being  unpaired,  the  loyal  toasts  were  proposed  with 
brevity,  and  carried  with  celerity,  although  not  the  less  loyally. 
In  giving  the  toast  of  the  evening,  “The  Royal  Gardeners’  Orphan 
Fund,”  the  Chairman  spoke  of  the  duty  that  devolved  upon  all  who 
loved  gardens  and  gardening  to  succour  those  brother  workers  who  fell 
by  the  way,  and  who,  less  fortunate  than  themselves,  bad  need  of  their 
assistance.  It  was  only  twelve  years  ago  that  the  Fund  was  started, 
and  he  wished  heartily  that  he  could  believe  that  there  had  been  no 
need  for  it  prior  to  that  date.  One  thing  was  certain,  however,  and 
that  was  that  the  number  of  orphans  that  were  receiving  benefit  did 
not  represent  all  that  were  in  need  and  deserving  of  help.  In  all 
callings  some  were  sure  to  be  unfortunate,  and  having  regard  to  the 
smallness  of  the  gardener’s  wage,  there  were  doubtless  many  parents 
who  were  not  able  to  provide  for  the  orphans  they  left  behind  them. 
Sir  Reginald  complimented  the  executive  upon  having  been  wise  enough 
not  to  build  the  regulation  orphans’  asylum,  and  advised  them  to  adhere  to 
that  policy'.  Speaking,  further,  of  the  way  in  which  the  affairs  of  the 
Fund  were  conducted,  he  said  that  he  was  pleased  to  find  all  the  accounts 
in  such  an  eminently  satisfactory  condition,  and  he  appealed  for  further 
help,  both  in  the  way  of  subscriptions  and  donations,  so  that  the  good 
work  might  be  extended.  He  reminded  his  audience  that  it  was  the  duty 
of  every  man  to  remember  the  children  as  well  as  the  old  people,  lor 
charity  should  be  two-handed,  and  the  claims  of  both  young  and  old 
should  have  reasonable  and  proper  attention. 
Mr.  Marshall,  with  whose  name  the  toast  was  associated,  responded. 
He  was  glad,  he  said,  to  be  able  to  endorse  what  had  been  said  as  to  the 
satisfactory  condition  and  management  of  the  Society.  He  had  not  heard 
a  cross  word  from  anybody  of  late  as  to  what  had  been  done,  and  he 
argued  from  that  that  everybody  was  satisfied.  Allusion  was  made  to 
the  claims  which  orphans  had  upon  the  Fund  after  they  reached  the  age 
of  fourteen,  when  they  ceased  to  draw  their  pension.  The  Committee 
had  received  many  appeals  for  help  to  apprentice  such  young  reople,  and 
these  appeals  had  been  answered  with  only  a  single  exception.  He  loresaw, 
however,  a  time  when  this  practice  would  cause  a  serious  drain  upon  the 
Fund,  and  it  could  only  be  met  by  an  increased  subscription  and 
donation  list. 
Mr.  Marshall  then  proceeded  to  formally  present  to  Mr.  Barron  the 
illuminated  address,  which  it  was  decided  at  the  last  annual  meeting 
should  be  given  him.  Mr.  Barron  was  so  moved  that  his  reply  was  quite 
inaudible,  but  his  presence  was  eloquent  enough. 
Mr.  Arnold  Moss  was  deputed  to  propose  “  Gardeners  and  Gardening,” 
which  will  have  a  familiar  sound  to  leaders  of  our  Journal,  whose  motto 
is  “For  Gardening  and  Gardeners.”  Mr.  Moss  spoke  of  the  garden  that 
he  loved,  and  repeated  Dean  Hole’s  expression  of  opinion  as  to  what  a 
garden  should  be. 
The  Rev.  S.  B.  Mayall  replied  at  some  length.  Gifted  with  a  sonorous 
voice  and  a  fine  delivery,  the  reverend  gentleman  proved  a  worthy  disciple 
of  Dean  Hole,  and  held  the  attention  of  his  audience  whilst  he  described 
the  refining,  purifying,  and  ennobling  influences  of  gardening,  and  the 
triumphant  progress  oi  the  gardening  movement. 
The  amounts  of  the  evening  subscriptions  were  then  read  over  by  Mr. 
Wynne,  and  there  was  very  general  satisfaction  when  it  was  found  that  a 
sum  of  £590  3s.  6d.  had  been  promised,  the  Chairman’s  list  alone 
accounting  for  £398  2s.  6d. 
Mr.  N.  N.  Sherwood  gave  the  health  of  the  Chairman,  who  although 
a  busy  man  had  yet  found  time  to  come  among  them  that  evening  in  the 
cause  of  charity.  Sir  Reginald  in  replying  again  referred  to  the  im¬ 
portance  of  subscriptions,  which  he  described  as  the  backbone  of  all  such 
institutions,  for  they  were  like  a  settled  income  to  a  private  individual, 
The  sentiments,  which  were  evidently  those  of  the  keen  business  man, 
were  much  appreciated,  but  there  was  a  big  round  of  applause  when  Sir 
Reginald  invited  Mr.  Sherwood  to  put  him  down  for  an  annual  subscrip¬ 
tion  of  two  guineas. 
The  toast  list  was  varied  by  vocal  and  instrumental  music,  and 
humorous  sketches  by  well-know'n  artists,  and  the  evening  as  a  whole  was 
much  enjoyed  by  all. 
