28 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
January  9,  1896. 
unless  the  season  should  be  most  favourable.  This  season  was  an 
exception,  and  I  never  remember  tasting  higher  flavoured  fruit  than  we 
had  this  year  of  these  two  varieties  from  the  open  wall.  We  have,  how¬ 
ever,  two  excellent  substitutes  in  Stirling  Castle  and  Alexander  Noblesse, 
both  beautiful  Peaches.  Crimson  Galande  is  a  splendid  variety  for 
open-air  culture,  so  also  is  Dr.  Hogg,  both  of  which  precede  the  two 
former  in  the  order  of  ripening.  Dymond  is  also  a  capital  Peach.  This 
variety  is  not  so  well  known  as  its  merits  deserve,  and  if  I  mistake  not, 
will  eventually  become  one  of  our  standard  Peaches.  Bellegarde  is  too 
well  known  for  me  to  comment  further  upon  ;  so  also  are  Barrington  and 
Grosse  Mignonne.  The  latter  must  not  be  confounded  with  an  earlier 
Peach  of  this  name,  and  known  as  Early  Grosse  Mignonne,  which,  for  our 
purpose,  is  not  worth  growing.  Princess  of  Wales  is  another  beautiful 
Peach,  so  also  is  Walburton  Admirable.  I  have  already  referred  to  this, 
and  in  a  warm  season — and  which  is  needed  for  it  to  develop  its  highest 
qualities — it  is  really  a  grand  late  variety.  Sea  Eagle,  although  of  rather 
low  quality,  is  very  showy,  and  is  a  variety  that  sells  well.  It  is 
altogether  a  healthy  grower  and  free  cropper. — A.  Young. 
FLOWER  SHOWS. 
The  above  subject  should  be  of  great  interest,  as  it  most  undoubtedly 
is  of  great  importance,  to  gardeners  and  to  lovers  of  gardening  every¬ 
where.  Like  your  correspondent,  “  Vespa,”  and  in  his  words,  “  I 
modestly  claim  the  qualifications  gleaned  in  the  career  of  a  gardener’s 
life,”  to  say  a  word  on  the  subject.  I  fear  it  is  not  an  easy  matter — 
even  if  it  were  advisable — to  guage  the  amount  of  swindling  carried  on, 
say  in  England,  or  the  percentage  of  gardeners  who  practise  it.  The 
reason  is  obvious.  Those  who  practise  dubious  methods  will,  as  a  matter 
of  course,  either  maintain  a  discreet  silence  or  theorise  in  opposition  to 
their  practice. 
I  trust  the  charges  brought  by  “A  Scottish  Gardener,”  are  “  all  too 
sweeping,”  as  asserted  by  “  Vespa.”  I  am  sorry  to  have  to  admit,  how¬ 
ever,  that  there  is  a  modicum  of  truth  in  what  he  says,  and  whether  or 
not  there  be  danger  in  “  one  of  the  craft  putting  his  finger  on  the  spot,” 
there  is,  I  think,  infinitely  more  danger  to  the  craft  in  leaving  the 
“  spot  ”  unnoticed. 
I  cannot  agree  with  him  when,  on  page  574,  he  says,  “Now,  I  think 
the  only  means  of  having  shows  as  they  ought  to  be  is  to  do  away  with 
money  prizes  altogether  and  substitute  instead  certificates.”  It  is  not 
degrees,  not  expediencies  we  are  dealing,  or  should  deal  with  in  this 
connection,  but  principles  ;  and  wherein  would  the  principle  differ  when 
cheating  for  a  certificate  in  exchange  for  cheating  for  a  prize  of  money  ? 
“  Scottish  Gardener  ”  further  says,  “  Abuses  will  creep  into  every 
institution  ...  as  certain  as  that  darkness  follows  light.”  Let  it,  then, 
be  our  part,  as  it  certainly  is  our  duty,  to  use  all  legitimate  influence  in 
assisting  such  abuses  to  “  creep  ”  out  again  as  certain  as  that  light 
follows  darkness. 
Neither  can  I  agree  with  “  Vespa,”  where,  on  page  596,  he  says  in 
effect,  if  swindling  be  the  rule,  and  not  the  exception,  we  are  past 
redemption,  and  rather  than  prolong  the  miserable  existence  of  such 
societies  by  any  so-called  remedy,  he  would  revel  in  the  throes  of  their 
dissolution.  In  his  last  paragraph  this  correspondent  presumes  to  sweep 
away  the  whole  fabric  built  by  “  A  Scottish  Gardener  ”  by  a  stroke  of 
his  pen,  or  if  he  prefers  it  by  a  buzz  of  his  gossamer  wing,  and  imme¬ 
diately  attempts  to  set  up  a  fabric  or  theory  on  what,  to  me,  seems  at 
least  an  equally  “  false  foundation.” 
Addressing  “  Scottish  Gardener,”  he  says,  “  But  if  we  could  believe 
you  to  be  serious  in  your  sweeping  condemnation  of  a  craft  of  which 
you  are  a  member,  why  do  you  remain  in  it  ?”  asking  triumphantly, 
“Is  it,  then,  for  those  horrid  bawbees?”  Would  “Vespa”  have 
“  Scottish  Gardener,”  presuming  him  to  be  an  honourable  man,  abandon 
his  position  and  its  emoluments  because  some  men  in  the  ranks  are 
not  honourable  ?  Imagine  a  ship  in  a  sinking  condition  through  the 
inefficiency,  apathy,  or  ignorance  of  the  crew;  would  “Vespa”  advise 
the  few  officers  who  really  have  the  welfare  of  the  ship  at  heart  to 
abandon  her  ?  A  splendid  opportunity  is  open  to  anyone,  including 
“  Vespa,”  wishing  to  immortalise  himself,  to  name  a  trade,  profession, 
or  occupation  in  the  ranks  of  which  no  “  black  sheep  ”  are  ever  found. 
I  suppose  it  “darna’  be  disputed  ”  that,  other  things  being  equal, 
he  who  Bhows  fairly  and  squarely,  is  a  better  man  than  he  who 
does  ever  so  little  swindling.  The  influence  of  such  a  one,  especially 
if  tempered  by  discretion  and  tact,  is  incalculable  ;  his  example  can¬ 
not  fail  to  improve  the  morals  of  those  with  whom  he  comes  in  contact. 
Instead  of  “  doing  away  with  money  prizes,”  or  taking  pleasure  in  the 
dissolution  of  horticultural  societies— be  they  never  so  corrupted — let  us 
rather  practise  and  advocate  an  all-round  elevation  of  morals,  let  us 
henceforth  prefer  rather  to  lose  a  prize  by  our  own  exhibit  than  to  win 
one  by  exhibiting  the  produce  of  another,  and  thus  untie  the  Gordian 
knot  rather  than  exhibit  our  helplessness  by  clumsily  cutting  it  asunder. 
As  in  theory,  so  in  practice,  let  us — the  whole  brotherhood  of 
gardeners — commence  this  year  not  only  by  speaking  truly,  but  by 
acting  out  the  truth  in  our  daily  lives.  We  Bhall  find  this  a  mighty 
power  in  securing  for  us  that  which  I  feel  certain  we  heartily  wish  each 
other — namely,  a  happy  New  Year. — Argus. 
A  "  Scottish  Gardener  ”  takes  a  much  too  dismal  view  of  flower 
shows.  Although  a  capable  man,  as  the  Editor  points  out,  it  is  plain  to 
see  he  is  not  an  exhibitor,  even  if  he  has  ever  been  one,  and  therefore 
has  little  sympathy  with  exhibitors  in  general.  Because  a  certain  news¬ 
paper  thought  fit  to  pad  its  pages  with  an  article  containing  vague 
assertions  of  the  supposed  practice  alluded  to,  “  Scottish  Gardener  ” 
rushes  into  print  with  a  desire  to  abolish  exhibitions  as  carried  out  under 
the  present  system.  A  few  instances  of  such  unfair  examples  that 
have  come  under  his  observation  would  have  strengthened  his  case  very 
considerably.  As  an  exhibitor  and  a  judge  of  many  years’  experience,  I 
can  safely  say  I  have  come  across  a  minimum  of  such  instances. 
I  fear  the  scheme  which  “  A  Scottish  Gardener  ”  would  have  us 
embrace  of  substituting  certificates  for  the  present  handsome  prizes  will 
not  meet  with  much  favour,  either  in  Scotland  or  elsewhere.  I  fancy  the 
magnificent  productions  seen  from  time  to  time  all  over  the  country 
would  quickly  dwindle  away.  Does  he  think  his  brethren  in  Scotland 
would  have  had  the  opportunity  of  seeing  that  very  fine  exhibit  of  cut 
blooms  that  carried  to  England  the  Scottish  trophy  only  so  recently  as 
the  last  show  held  in  Edinburgh  if  nothing  beyond  a  certificate  was  the 
reward  ?  Again,  “  A  Scottish  Gardener  ”  exposes  his  want  of  knowledge 
relating  to  exhibition  products  when  he  states,  “  It  does  not  cost  more 
to  grow  good  vegetables,  fruit,  or  flowers,  than  to  grow  inferior  ones. 
Consequently,  a  gardener  in  exhibiting  his  produce  does  not  put  himself 
or  his  employer  to  any  extra  expense  beyond  that  of  travelling.”  “  A 
Scottish  Gardener”  evidently  is  not  aware  that  many  leading  cultivators 
and  exhibitors  of  Chrysanthemums  alone  spend  £5  annually  of  their  own 
money  in  buying  the  new  varieties,  as  they  know  quite  well  it  is  useless 
to  compete  with  the  older  and  inferior  ones.  He  evidently  knows  little 
about  the  extra  cost  involved  in  manures,  to  produce  extra  good 
blooms.  Inferior  ones  can  be  obtained  without  these  aids.  “  A  Scottish 
Gardener”  says  that  provincial  shows  will  not  suffer  if  the  best  exhibits 
from  private  gardeners  were  to  remain  away,  because  the  nurserymen 
would  look  after  their  own  interest  in  that  direction,  and  goes  on  to  say 
that  the  best  exhibits  he  saw  “at  many  of  the  shows  he  visited  this 
year  were  those  of  nursery  firms.”  With  all  due  deference  to  the  many 
excellent  exhibits  seen  from  time  to  time  at  shows  from  nurserymen 
“  not  for  competition,”  they  cannot  compete  with  those  of  private 
growers  ;  neither  do  I  think  there  is  a  single  nurseryman  who  conscien¬ 
tiously  says  so.  They  are  not  intended  to  be  rivals  to  competitive 
exhibits. 
I  fear  “  A  Scottish  Gardener’s  ”  experience  of  shows  is  limited  to  a 
very  narrow  area.  Surely  his  concluding  paragraph  is  in  direct  opposi¬ 
tion  to  facts.  Never  was  the  whole  exhibiting  world  in  such  a  healthy 
state  as  at  present.  New  societies  are  springing  up,  while  but  a  very  few 
indeed  are  on  the  wane,  and  when  such  a  society  as  that  held  in  his  own 
capital  comes  out  with  a  balance  of  £100  on  the  right  side,  after 
experiencing  three  thoroughly  wet  days  and  after  spending  £1000  in 
one  way  or  another.  Surely  such  facts  are  sufficient  to  show  the  bias 
and  want  of  direct  knowledge  displayed  by  “  A  Scottish  Gardener.” — 
Sadoc. 
The  subject  raised  by  your  correspondent,  “  A  Scottish  Gardener,”  on 
page  574  of  the  Journal  is  an  important  one,  insomuch  as  it  affects  a 
community  of  men  that  is  generally  looked  upon  and  respected  for 
integrity  and  straightforwardness.  There  are  no  doubt  exceptions,  as  in 
all  bodies,  but  not  enough  to  justify  your  correspondent  in  stating  that 
the  abuse  and  its  baneful  effect  through  illegal  exhibiting  has  over¬ 
balanced  the  good  object  of  flower  shows,  and  that  the  time  has  arrived 
when  such  institutions  should  cease  to  exist. 
There  is  perhaps  some  reason  in  the  suggestion  that  it  would  be 
better  to  give  certificates  instead  of  money  prizes  as  it  might  help  to  do 
away  with  the  abuse.  But  I  for  one  could  not  hold  up  my  hand  for  it, 
as  I  do  not  think  it  would  create  such  a  stimulus  among  exhibitors  as 
there  is  at  present,  consequently  flower  shows  would  begin  to  wane, 
although  your  correspondent  thinks  nurserymen  would  keep  them  up. 
That  may  be  so  as  regards  plants  and  cut  flowers,  but  what  of  the 
splendid  displays  of  fruit  we  see  which  form  such  an  important  feature 
of  our  shows?  Nurserymen  do  not  as  a  rule  grow  Grapes,  Melons, 
Peaches,  Nectarines,  and  Figs,  neither  do  they  grow  vegetables  for 
exhibition.  I  see  one  of  our  large  seed  firms  is  offering  £500  during 
the  coming  season  in  different  parts  of  the  kingdom  in  prizes  for 
vegetables  grown  from  their  seeds,  which  in  itself  sounds  much  better 
than  a  certificate,  and  will  be  sure  to  bring  out  better  vegetables  than 
all  the  certificates  in  the  world. 
It  may  be  thought  from  what  I  have  said  that  I  am  siding  with  the 
illegal  exhibitor.  Such,  however,  is  not  the  case,  only  instead  of  doing 
away  with  flower  shows  I  would  punish  the  offender.  I  am  a  member  of 
a  flower  show  committee  which  gives  £100  in  prizes  every  year,  and  at  one 
of  our  recent  meetings  we  had  to  deal  with  this  thorny  question,  complaints 
having  been  received  that  some  exhibitors  staged  what  they  did  not  grow. 
The  matter  was  laid  before  the  meeting  and  various  suggestions  made 
with  a  view  to  stopping  it.  One  member  suggested  that  as  it  was 
obtaining  money  by  false  pretences,  such  offence  being  punishable  by 
law,  that  any  exhibitor  found  guilty  should  be  prosecuted,  but  this 
suggestion  did  not  meet  with  the  support  of  the  majority  of  the 
committee,  as  it  was  thought  the  society  would  suffer  from  such  an 
action.  Eventually  a  resolution  was  put  and  carried  that  any  exhibitor 
found  guilty  should  forfeit  his  prize  money  and  be  debarred  from 
exhibiting  again. 
I  remember  a  case  where  a  gardener  used  to  do  it  a  good  deal.  His 
employer  saw  at  one  show  that  he  was  awarded  prizes  for  fruit  which  he 
knew  was  not  grown  in  his  garden  and  did  not  belong  to  him.  He  spoke 
to  his  gardener  on  the  subject  and  forbade  him  to  exhibit  again.  I  was 
asked  by  a  neighbouring  gardener  some  years  ago  if  I  could  lend  him 
some  small  plants  to  make  up  an  exhibit.  1  replied,  No,  as  it  was 
unfair  and  dishonourable,  and  I  would  not  be  a  party  to  it. — P.  V.  H. 
