4 
JOURNAL  OF  BORTiaULTUHF  AND  COTfAUF.  GARDENER. 
July  5,  1S»6. 
forward  any  statistical  enutoerations  or  economic  factors  with  their 
correlative  bearing  upon  the  matter,  there  is  not  less  occasion  to 
take  all  due  precautions  by  those  embarking  on  this  phase  of 
gardening,  in  order  that  their  efforts  may  be  rewarded  by  a  fair 
remuneration.  Unfortunately  there  are  not  at  present ’any  startling 
new  departnrea  to  promulgate,  to  hint  at,  or  to  suggest ;  but  there 
are  some  things,  however  trivial  they  appear,  that  may  not  be 
overlooked  or  disregarded. 
Firstly,  we  have  the  fitness  of  the  man  to  the  position  he  is 
contemplating,  and,  what  is  scarcely  of  secondary  importance, 
the  fitness  of  the  position  selected  for  the  proposed  work . 
Instances  could  be  given  where  neither  the  one  nor  the  other 
has  been  fully  considered,  with  the  disagreeable  consequences 
ensuing.  Relevant  to  the  man,  it  may  be  that  he  has  gained 
in  private  situations  such  experience  as  justly  characterises 
him  to  be  an  excellent  gardener,  and  here  the  appellation 
would  be  to  some  extent  qualified  if  he  was  not  something 
more  than  a  gardener  as  well.  So  it  is  with  the  successful 
market  grower.  He,  too,  is  a  successful  cultivator,  but  some¬ 
thing  more  also  ;  but  from  this  stage  of  capability  the  fitness  of 
the  twain  for  the  position  splits  into  divergent  lines,  and  whether 
our  gardener  pure  and  simple  is  a  fitting  medium  for  the  commer¬ 
cial  spirit  to  generate  and  dwell  in  depends  upon  his  adaptability 
to  altered  circumstances.  Growing  fruits,  fiowers,  and  vegetables 
for  a  nobleman’s  table  is  one  thing,  manufacturing  good  “  stuff  ” 
for  the  market  is  another,  and  probably  i^hose  best  qualified  for  the 
latter  are  those  who  have  been  trained  in  this  particular  line  from 
their  youth  up. 
Apropos  of  the  choice  of  a  suitable  locality,  one  worthy  man 
filling  a  good  post  as  head  gardener  until  middle  age  “  set  up  for 
himself  ”  some  few  miles  from  the  nucleus  of  a  large  city  by  taking, 
not  a  nursery  pr  a  market  garden,  but  a  piece  of  vacant  ground 
with  a  dwelling  house  attached.  Here  he  erected  a  couple  of  those 
sensible  glass  houses  well  adapted  to  his  purpose  ;  yet  no  sooner  had 
he  started  than  the  conviction  forced  itself  upon  him  that  his 
pr.mary  venture  had  been  a  mistake  from  the  nature  of  the  soil, 
the  local  position,  and  general  unsuitability.  To  get  rid  of  his 
bargain  (?)  was  the  most  sensible  thought  that  arose,  without  loss, 
of  course  ;  but  he  was  too  honest  to  conceal  his  reasons  for  changing, 
consequently  he  has  it  still,  endeavouring  by  sheer  hard  work  and 
rigid  economy  to  obviate  the  mistake.  Hard  work  and  rigid  economy 
will,  I  hope,  bring  to  him  both  pleasure  and  profit,  but  there  is  no 
doubt  that  he  seriously  handicapped  his  efforts  by  this  mistake  at 
starting. 
Another  struggling  man,  whose  life  appeared  to  be  a  perpetual 
fight  to  keep  his  head  above  water,  would  often  compare  his 
unfortunate  position  with  the  good  one  he  occupied  many  years 
before  as  a  nobleman  s  gardener.  He,  of  course,  showed  various 
solutions  to  this  riddle  of  a  blighted  life,  invariably  concluding 
with  the  advice  to  gardeners  contemplating  a  similar  break  in  their 
hyes-— “  don’t.”  This  moral  I  duly  qualified  by  a  more  impartial 
criticism  than  he  could  apply  ;  the  mental  deduction  derived  from 
his  life  being  “  don’t,  if  you  are  not  suited  to  the  change.”  Such 
examples  are,  of  course,  to  be  found  in  all  phases  of  life.  With 
others  we  have  no  immediate  concern.  It  will  take,  I  think,  but 
little  reflection  from  observation  of  our  own  times  and  our  own 
calling  to  conclude  that  there  never  was  greater  necessity  for 
those  who  contemplate  growing  for  market  to  pause  and  consider 
all  points  of  the  question  ere  they  engage  in  it. 
In  spite  of  any  pessimistic  preamble  it  need  not  be  inferred 
that  pleasure  and  profit  are  thought  by  the  writer  to  be  things  of 
the  pMt.  There  is  considerable  evidence  frequently  adduced  that 
such  is  not  the  case,  but  there  are  now  many  more  factors  to  be 
taken  into  the  reckoning  by  even  the  most  enterprising  of  men. 
Rapid  and  cheapening  transit  brings  the  produce  of  the  most 
favoured  spots  of  the  British  Isles  in  direct  competition  with  what 
may  be  termed  local  growers  ;  hence  to  be  first  in  the  market  has 
its  due  significance  and  relative  difficulty.  All  desire  to  be  first  in 
the  market  with  its  contingent  pleasure  and  profit,  but  there  are 
a  few,  very  few  perhaps,  far-seeing  men  who  now  anticipate  the 
reward  ot  being  last  in  the  market.  One  great  grower,  I  am  told, 
has  Iseen  so  practically  impressed  with  this  that  he  has  turned  the 
refrigerator  to  account,  and,  as  he  quaintly  remarked  on  the  Lily 
of  the  Valley  subject,  “  I  keep  them  back  to  get  them  forrad,” 
so  whether  this  is  really  the  earliest  of  the  early  or  latest  of  the 
late,  the  desire  is  to  find  the  blank  and  fill  it.  Smartness  still  pays, 
and  reaps  its  due  reward  of  pleasure  and  profit. 
There  is  another  side  of  the  question  that  perhaps  is  apt  to  be 
ignored,  or  at  least  is  the  cause  of  invidious  comparisons  being 
drawn.  Probably  there  are  not  many  men  ostensibly  engaged  in 
inarket  growing  to  make  a  living  who  have  not  some  vague  anticipa¬ 
tion  of  making  a  fortune.  There  are  dominant  influences  through 
the  length  and  breadth  of  our  land  which  have  permeated  to  the 
quieter  regions  of  horticulture.  Fortunes  have  been  made  here, 
too,  but  whilst  the  possibility  always  remains,  the  probability 
becomes  more  and  more  remote.  It  would  not  be  appropriate  to 
these  pages  to  bring  in  outside  matter  engrossing  the  public  mind 
only,  inasmuch  as  speculative  share-dealing  may  have  disturbed  a 
gardener’s  vision  to  the  detrimental  view  of  his  work.  Gardening, 
of  whatever  kind,  for  gardeners  is  a  congenial  occupation,  having 
pleasures  for  them  that  no  other  pursuits  can  claim,  and  if 
discreetly,  energetically,  and  perseveringly  engaged  in  will  not  fall 
short  of  its  profits  also. — Invict.4. 
HORTICULTURAL  HISTORY  NOTES. 
Bygone  Gardens  In  and  Around  Kennington. 
There  is  no  doubt,  I  should  say,  that  Kensington,  north  of  the 
Thames,  and  Kennington,  on  its  south  bank,  represent  the  same  old 
name,  derived  from  a  “  king’s  town,”  or  residence,  situate  in  each 
locality,  which  was  afterwards  extended  to  the  district  made 
notable  by  royalty.  Kensington  still  retains  its  association  with 
our  monarchs,  not  so  Kennington,  yet  even  that  suburb  has  some¬ 
what  of  an  air  of  superiority  as  compared  with  others  around. 
Besides,  it  owns  memories  of  the  time  when  it  was  a  rural  village 
only,  past  which  that  pleasant  stream,  the  Effra,  ran  its  course  to 
the  river  from  the  uplands  of  Brixton.  Much  valued  by  the 
gardeners  thereabout,  it  had  peculiarities,  being  specially  liable  to 
overflows  after  heavy  rains,  forming  temporary  lakes,  and  I  suppose 
“  South  Island  Place  ”  is  a  record  of  some  sudden  inundation, 
which  gave  Kennington  a  surplus  of  water,  but  left  one  or  more 
high  spots  dry.  Kings  and  queens  often  rowed  along  the  Effra, 
which  was  formerly  well  fringed  with  Alders  and  Willows,  to  visit 
the  Surrey  woods,  especially  the  forest  of  Selwood,  near  Brixton 
Rise,  part  of  the  property  of  the  Londoners,  which  they  allowed 
somehow  to  slip  out  of  their  hands.  The  last  monarch  who 
occupied  Kennington  Palace  was  Henry  VII.,  but  Queen  Elizabeth 
is  said  to  have  more  than  once  traversed  the  stream  in  her  age. 
Being  conveniently  situate  to  the  royal  residence  at  Westminster, 
it  is  likely  vegetables  and  fruit  were  grown  on  some  of  the  land 
attached  for  the  benefit  of  the  King’s  household.  Afterwards  the 
stables  were  converted  into  a  barn,  which  same  “long  barn”  was 
made  memorable  in  1709  as  being  used  as  a  temporary  refuge  for 
French  fugitives.  There  was  also  attached  to  the  Palace  a  deer 
park  and  a  cony  warren,  the  whole  extent  of  the  land  being  about 
120  acres,  including  part,  no  doubt,  of  modern  Stockwell.  Copt 
Hall,  another  Kennington  mansion,  was  celebrated  for  its  pleasure 
grounds  and  orchards  in  the  seventeenth  century  ;  here  for  a  time 
was  confined  the  unfortunate  Lady  Arabella  Stuart.  Here,  too, 
once  experimented  Samuel  Moreland,  who  claimed  to  be  the 
inventor  of  the  fire  engine. 
Kennington  Oval,  now  famous  as  the  resort  of  cricketers,  was 
at,  or  soon  after,  the  date  of  its  formation  a  nursery  garden,  and 
in  the  occupation  of  Michelsou,  one  of  the  few  nurserymen  who 
have  made  a  century  of  years.  He  was  succeeded  by  Denyer,  who 
afterwards  had  an  establishment  at  Brixton.  From  its  position 
Kennington  became  a  meeting  place  for  the  nurserymen  and  gardeners 
of  South  London,  and  they  had  their  flower  shows  occasionally  in 
grounds  attached  to  the  well-known  Horns  Tavern.  Some  of  these 
had  their  quarters  at  Walworth.  We  might  not  think  so,  looking 
at  it  as  we  survey  it  from  a  familiar  South  London  Railway,  though 
even  then  we  may  feel  touched  in  noticing  how  many  of  the 
inhabitants  strive,  midst  smoke  and  dust,  to  make  something  of 
their  tiny  garden  plots.  But  the  author  of  a  book  of  “  Medical 
Recollections  ”  assures  us  that  “  Lock’s  Fields  ”  was  actually  fields 
sixty  years  ago,  and  he  himself  found  in  some  hedgerows  there  a 
reed  sparrow’s  nest  containing  a  young  cuckoo.  Not  far  distant 
were  the  beautiful  gardens  of  Dr.  Hooper’s  mansion,  also  the 
grounds  and  large  orchards  belongine  to  Sir  M.  Bloxam.  How 
rural  this  district  between  the  Old  Kent  Road  and  Kennington 
was  then  appears  from  the  names  attached  to  some  of  the  terraces 
first  built  thereabout. 
We  do  not  wonder,  therefore,  that  James  Maddock,  florist  and 
Quaker,  should  have  selected  Walworth  as  a  fitting  place  for  a 
nursery  that  he  commenced  at  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
George  III.  He  carried  this  on  many  years,  and  published,  in  1796, 
his  “  Florist's  Directory  and  Treatise  on  the  Culture  of  Fiowers,” 
with  plate* ;  afterwards  Milliken  and  Curtis  took  over  the  esta¬ 
blishment,  where  they  had  a  large  collection  of  hardy  bulbs. 
Another  nurseryman  of  Walworth,  who  won  much  renown  by  his 
Tulips,  was  Groom,  but  he  was  compelled  to  remove  in  1846  owing 
to  the  increase  of  smoke,  and  went  to  Clapham  Rise.  One  of  his 
beds,  120  feet  long,  used  to  be  a  great  attraction  during  May,  and 
surprise  was  caused  by  his  statement  that  he  had  250,000  Tulips. 
Stockwell,  on  the  roaid  to  Clapham,  might  have  become  more 
