554 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
December  9,  1897 
the  Aquarium  Company  towards  the  September  exhibition,  though  the 
gate  money  went  to  them  as  usual. 
On  the  October  meeting,  with  the  exception  of  the  medals  awarded, 
the  value  of  which  I  am  unable  to  separately  deline,  the  Society  appears 
to  have  been  the  gainer  of  £34  5s.,  the  difference  between  the  prizes  paid 
and  amount  received  from  the  Company  towards  that  exhibition.  But  for 
the  two  November  meetings  (four  days)  the  Society  paid  away  £620  3s.  6d., 
or  £445  3s.  6d.  more  than  the  amount  received  from  the  Aquarium 
Company.  On  the  occasion  of  the  December  Show  the  Society  paid  in 
prizes  £4  13s.  6d.  more  than  was  received.  This  refers  only  to  prize 
money  and  not  to  the  working  expenses. 
On  the  year's  working  as  shown  by  the  balance-sheet,  there  was  a 
turnover  of  nearly  £1650,  while  the  Aquarium  Company  is  only  shown 
to  have  contributed  £300  towards  the  work  of  administering  that  heavy 
amount,  unless  I  am  allowed  to  add  what  I  find  in  the  report  that  they 
“  increased  their  special  donation  to  the  Jubilee  fund  from  £75  to  £100.  ’ 
There  is  one  thing  done  by  the  enterprising  Company  which,  to  my 
way  of  thinking,  was  not  very  commendalde— namely,  that  when  the 
Directors  of  the  Aquarium  Company  discovered  that  the  Society  was 
compelled  to  give  admission  tickets  in  return  for  subscriptions  received 
towards  the  special  Jubilee  fund,  they  demanded  a  commission  on  the 
amount  collected,  and  £19  13s.  4d.  stands  in  the  balance-sheet  as  having 
been  paid  to  them  as  a  commission  on  Jubilee  subscriptions.  Fellow 
workers,  think  of  this  !  Does  it  not  rather  take  the  gilt  off  the  “  special 
donation  ”  referred  to  ? 
Three  or  four  hundred  pounds  may  appear  a  large  sum  on  the  face  ; 
but  when  this  amount  is  granted  the  grantees  have  no  further  trouble  or 
toil.  They  simply  pocket  the  gate  money,  the  amount  of  which  must  be 
very  considerable. 
As  business  men  it  is  no  doubt  the  duty  of  the  Directors  to  earn 
the  best  dividends  they  can,  and  they  very  properly  (from  their  point 
of  view)  make  the  best  of  the  N.C.S.,  but  in  my  opinion,  and  in  the 
opinion  of  many  others,  our  National  Society  should  occupy  a  much 
higher  status  than  that  of  a  feeder,  as  in  this  case. 
The  N.C.S.  does  the  work,  pays  for  all  labour,  printing,  stationary, 
clerical  assistance,  and  everything  else  that  is  necessary  for  producing 
and  maintaining  the  show,  so  that  if  the  A(iuarium  authorities  were  to 
institute  for  themselves  a  series  of  exhibitions  as  held  last  year,  instead 
of  having  to  provide  the  amount  quoted  from  the  balance  sheet  above, 
they  would  find  that  it  would  cost  them  four  or  five  times  the  amount  as 
paid  by  the  Society— viz.,  £1600. 
Greater  London  contains  a  larger  population  than  the  whole  of 
Scotland,  but  we  read  of  some  40,000  persons  attending  the  recent 
Kdinburgh  exhibition,  and  of  the  gate  money  amounting  to  £1000.  Is 
the  income  of  the  N.U.S.  from  visitors  to  its  shows  increasing  proportion¬ 
ately  ;  if  not,  why  not  ]  if  it  is,  where  goes  the  money  ]  Alter  twenty 
years  the  Society  has  a  reserve  fund  of  only  £101  18s.  2d. 
Several  other  provincial  towns  take  surprisingly  large  amounts  as 
gate  money,  and  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  surmise  from  the  crowds  who 
visit  the  Aquarium  on  our  exhibition  days  that  the  Comjiany  must 
realise  a  very  large  sum  through  the  kind  agency  of  the  N.C.S.,  and  bv 
the  efforts  of  those  who  toil  on  behalf  of  the  Chrysanthemum,  and  who 
desire  to  see  our  “National”  Society  stand  in  a  free  and  independent 
position  worthy  of  its  name. 
No  doubt  a  good  deal  might  be  endured  if  the  Society  were  granted 
the  convenience  and  accommodation  desired,  or  even  if  the  Company 
regarded  it  as  worthy  of  the  first  consideration  on  their  exhibition  days. 
Instead  of  this  we  have  to  put  up  with  any  part  of  the  building  ;  bad 
light,  no  attempt  made  to  separate  the  public  from  the  judges  while  the 
awards  are  being  made,  and  if  refreshments  are  needed  by  the  numerous 
members  and  friends,  who  are  principally  gardeners,  many  of  whom  have 
travelled  a  long  distance,  no  distinction  is  made,  but  the  fashionable 
West-End  lounge  prices  are  charged  to  all  alike. 
Remonstrance  appears  to  be  of  no  avail  ;  as  an  instance,  we  were 
recently’  deprived  of  a  portion  of  the  ground  floor  for  staging  purposes. 
A  protest  from  the  Committee  was  sent  to  the  Company.  The  answer 
that  came  back  may  be  interpreted  thus  : — “  We  have  the  power  to  prevent 
you  from  using  the  body  of  the  hall  on  this  occasion,  and  we  do  not 
intend  to  let  you  have  it  for  your  next  exhibition.’  So  verily  we  are 
slaves  to  the  Aquarium  Company — a  fact  to  which  some  of  the  principal 
officials  leading  the  Society  appear  to  be  blind — and  not  infrequently  use 
their  persuasive  eloquence  in  further  fettering  the  Society  to  its  present 
incongruous  abode. — J.  W.  Mooeman. 
P.S.— Since  writing  to  you  on  the  subject  of  the  N.C.S,,  the  Journal 
is  to  hand,  bringing  a  reply  from“  One  of  the  Executive  ”  to  “  A.  D.”  I 
also  have  been  one  of  the  executive  for  a  few  years  past,  and  am 
reluctantly  obliged  to  write  in  an  opposite  strain  to  my  colleague,  whoever 
he  may  be. 
He  says  the  “  public  appreciation  ”  of  the  November  show  is 
“demonstrated  ”  by  the  thousands  who  visit  the  place.  Nothing  of  the 
kind.  It  is  rather  the  enthusiasm  engendered  amongst  grnwers,  showing 
the  popularity  of  the  flower,  with  the  chance  of  meeting  old  friends.  This 
has  more  to  do  with  bringing  them  there  than  anything  else. 
His  praise  of  the  arrangements  being  both  “desirable  and  appre¬ 
ciative,”  and  his  boldness,  not  to  say  audacity,  in  favourably  comparing 
the  show  with  the  large  Temple  exhibition  of  the  R.H.S.,  which  is  held 
under  canvas,  is  ludicrous,  for  there  can  be  no  proper  comparison. 
The  exhibits  of  the  N.C.S.  are  from  necessity  so  split  up  in  various 
parts  of  the  building  that  a  crowd  of  persons  go  away  without  seeing  half 
the  show.  Great  credit  is  due  to  the  superintendent,  Mr.  R.  Dean,  in 
making  the  best  there  is  to  be  made  of  the  space  at  his  disposal,  and  were 
it  not  for  his  extended  practical  experience  in  matters  of  arrangement,  I 
fear  all  would  be  confusion  worse  confounded. 
The  same  number  and  (piality  of  blooms  staged  in  a  suitable  building 
would  not  deprive  the  “popular  element”  of  its  “  annual  display,”  but 
enhance  its  value  in  preserving  the  flowers  and  giving  effect  a  thousand¬ 
fold. 
“  One  of  the  Executive,”  after  his  attempt  in  lauding  the 
“advantages”  obtained  by  holding  the  exhibition  at  the  Royal 
Aquarium,  confesses  that  “  the  members  of  the  executive  are  fully  aware 
of  certain  disadvantages.”  There  are  many  disadvantages,  and  the  only 
prominent  so-called  “  advantage  ”  is  the  contributions  from  the  Directors 
in  lieu  of  the  gate  money,  which  would  otherwise  go  into  the  coffers  of 
the  Society  instead  of  swelling  the  dividends  of  the  Company. 
As  to  “labour,’  “difficulty,”  and  “anxiety,”  we  have  plenty  now. 
The  Secretary  told  us  as  recently  as  the  annual  dinner  that  the 
“difficulties,”  “anxiety,”  and  “amount  of  labour”  were  so  great,  that 
it  became  to  him  a  most  serious  matter. 
The  printed  balance-sheets  are  the  best  proof  of  the  heavy  expenses 
now  annually  incurred.  Edinburgh  this  year  realised  £1000  for  gate 
money  alone  on  three  days  only.  The  Aquarium  authorities  had  the 
privilege  of  thirteen  days’  takings  at  the  doors  last  year,  spread  over  four 
separate  exhibitions,  and  yet  this  is  regarded  by  “  One  of  the  Executive  ” 
to  be  to  the  advantage  of  the  “  National.” — J.  W.  M. 
The  N.C.S.  and  the  Royal  Aquarium. 
To  state  as  “A.  D.”  does,  that  the  National  Chrysanthemum  Society 
is  the  slave  of  the  authorities  of  the  Royal  Aquarium,  we  may  regard  as 
a  figure  of  speech.  He  neither  knows  nor  can  know  anything  of  the 
arrangements  made  between  the  Society  and  the  Royal  Aquarium,  and 
without  this  knowledge  any  statement  he  may  make  in  reference  thereto 
must  savour  of  the  romantic.  He  might  just  as  well  state  that  the  Royal 
Horticultural  Society  is  the  slave  of  the  London  Scottish  Rifle  Volunteers 
or  the  Temple. 
There  are  always  two  sides  to  a  bargain  of  this  kind,  and  the  N.C.S. 
can  be  safely  trusted  to  look  after  its  own  interests,  which  it  does  do. 
The  co-operation  of  the  Society  with  the  Royal  Aquarium  has  resulted  in 
the  Society  prospering  beyond  the  most  sanguine  expectations  of  its 
warmest  friends.  It  is  now  far  away  the  strongest,  most  influential  and 
widely  known  of  all  the  special  floricultural  societies,  and  every  week 
witnesses  accessions  to  its  members. 
It  is  enabled  to  hold  four  highly  attractive  exhibitions  annually  ;  to 
broaden  the  area  of  its  practical  work,  especially  in  the  direction  of 
extending  a  knowledge  of  and  the  culture  of  the  Chrysanthemum  ;  it 
attracts  to  the  Aquarium  yearly  thousands  of  persons  to  see  the 
Chrysanthemum  in  its  fullest  glory  and  beauty  during  the  last  tour  months 
of  the  year  ;  new  interests  in  it  are  aroused,  and  new  devotees  worship  at 
its  shrine  in  consequence ;  the  very  centre  of  London  has  opportunities 
for  witnessing  magnifleent  displays  of  the  golden  flower  provided  by  the 
Society,  without  the  N.C.S.  in  any  way  trenching  upon  the  work  done  on 
the  circumference  by  the  circle  of  metropolitan  societies  affiliated  to  it ; 
it  is  enabled  to  prepare  and  publish  editions  of  descriptive  and  classified 
catalogues,  which  are  widely  distributed  and  accepted  as  standard  and 
authoritative  works  of  reference  in  all  parts  of  the  world  ;  it  is  able  to 
pay  its  prize  money  promptly  and  fully  and  satisfy  all  demands  made 
upon  it  ;  it  can  extend  a  helping  hand  to  the  many  societies  affiliated  to 
it  in  all  parts  of  the  country  and  abroad,  and  to  many  who  are  not  in 
close  union  with  it ;  it  is  gradually  building  up  a  reserve  fund  ;  and  all 
this  while  maintaining  an  entirely  independent  autonomy  as  the  best 
administered  special  floricultural  society. 
The  Society  is  able  to  do  all  this  because  of  the  co-operation  and  valuable 
assistance  furnished  by  the  Directors  of  the  Royal  Aquarium.  I  alone 
perhaps  know  the  full  extent  of  the  valuable  assistance,  directly  and 
indirectly  contributed.  I  unhesitatingly  assert  that  all  this  is  largely  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  Royal  Aquarium  is  the  home  of  the  exhibitions  of  the 
N.C.S.  The  arrangement  is  mutual,  friendly,  just,  and  honourable  ;  and 
it  has  existed  for  a  period  of  twenty-one  years. 
I  have  had  experience  of  most  of  the  large  flower  shows  held  in 
London  during  the  past  forty  years.  I  know  the  enormous  labour  they 
entail ;  their  overwhelming  details  ;  their  appalling  expenses  ;  the  anxieties 
and  uncertainties  inevitable  to  them  ;  their  load  of  responsibilities  ;  and 
the  disheartening  dread  of  failure.  I  have  seen  some  launched  under 
apparently  the  most  auspicious  promise  become  financial  wrecks.  On 
no  consideration  could  I  be  prevailed  upon  to  assist  in  carrying  out  a 
large  flower  show  in  London  if  I  had  to  bear  a  share  of  any  financial 
responsibility.  If  “  A.  D.”  or  anyone  else  could  have  placed  in  their  hands 
the  details  of  the  actual  cost  of  such  an  exhibition  as  that  held  at  the 
Royal  A([uarium  on  November  9th  last,  and  see  that  all  dependence  for 
any  return  of  the  same  was  on  the  uncertain  takings  at  the  gates,  they 
would  then  understand  why  I  would  decline  entering  upon  any  of  the  risks 
they  appear  to  desire  the  N.C.S.  should  undertake.— Richard  Dean, 
Secretary,  National  Chrysanthemum  Society. 
[This  and  Mr.  Moorman’s  letter  above  are  two  of  the  strongest  com¬ 
munications  from  the  respective  standpoints  of  the  writers  which  have  yet 
appeared,  and  the  excellent  tone,  with  the  convictions  pervading  them, 
undoubtedly  adds  weight  to  both.  Let  their  supporters  follow  the  examples 
