JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
June  22,  1899. 
506 
2, 7iS,3*i|)  bushels  over  the  imparts  of  the  past  year.  The  (1898) 
figures  are,  however,  probably  incomplete,  for  it  is  stated  in  an 
explanator^iQote,  “they  were  taken  from  the  accounts  relating  to 
trade  and  navigation,  and  are  therefore  subject  to  revision.” 
Taking  the  returns  for  1897  as  accurate  it  may  be  interesting  to 
note  whence  the  produce  came.  From  foreign  countries  it 
amounts  to  2,991,215  bushels;  from  British  possessions  1,208, 7*56 
bushels;  total,  4,199,971  bushels  of  Apples  to  eke  out  our  inadequate 
supply. 
Of  the  foreign  Apples  the  United  Stales  of  America  sent  more 
than  half  the  bulk — 1,808,115  bushels,  the  other  chief  contributors 
being  Holland,  386,677  ;  and  Belgium,  382,914  bushels  respectively. 
France  sent  us  172,981,  and  Portugal  145,934  bushels  each.  Then 
follow  Spain  with  58,824,  and  Germany  with  26,958  bushels.  Much 
smaller'lconsignmcuts  came  from  Italy,  Madeira,  Norway,  Sweden, 
Denmark,  the  Azores,  and  the  Canary  Islands,  these  amounting  in  the 
aggregate  to  8600  bushels  of  our  slafde  fruit. 
From  British  possessions  Canada  sent  us  nearly  six  times  as  many 
Apples  as  all  other  colonies  put  together.  Tasmania  contributed 
135,495  bushels,  the  remaining  parts  of  Australasia  30,723  bushels, 
maile  up  of  20,500  from  Victoria,  10,050  from  South  Australia,  and 
173  bushels  from  New  South  Wales.  The  Channel  Islands  sent 
21,603  bushels,  while  the  Cxpe  of  Good  Hope  is  only  credited  with 
helping  us  to  the  extent  of  6  bushels  of  Apples. 
Passing  to  other  kinds  of  hardy  fruits  enumerated — namely, 
'Cherries,  Pears,  and  Plums — we  find  considerable  importations ;  or  in 
1897 — the  last  completed  figures — Cherries  312,294  bushels,  Pears 
1,051,817  bushels,  and  Plums  1,043,819  bushels. 
No  British  possessions  are  credited  with  sending  us  Cherries. 
France,  with  192,686  bushels,  contributed  more  than  all  other  countries 
combined.  We  received  from  Germany  57,214,  Holland  40,403,  and 
Belgium  21,546  bushels  respectively,  while  Spain  sent  413,  and 
Norway  only  32  bushels. 
Among  foreign  exporters  of  Pears  to  this  country  Belgium  heads 
the  list  with  529,095,  France  following  with  269,142  bushels. 
Holland  comes  next  with  134,468,  while  the  United  States  sent 
86,862  bushels.  The  consignments  from  Germany  are  22,994  bushels, 
Denmark,  Portugal,  Spain,  Italy,  and  Morocco  contributed  in  a 
small  way,  making  the  total  bulk  of  Pears  from  other  than  our  colonies 
and  islands  1,043,989  bushels.  We  received  4751  bushels  from  the 
Channel  Islands,  2654  from  Canada,  and  247  bushels  from  the  Cape, 
while  212  came  from  Australasia  and  24  from  Malta,  making  the 
total  Pear  imjiorts,  as  above  stated,  1,051,817  bushels  of  fruit. 
We  are  indebted  to  other  lands  for  nearly  the  same  huge  bulk  of 
Plums,  all  but  828  bushels  (449  from  Canada,  367  from  the  Cape, 
9  from  the  Channel  Islands,  and  3  from  Australasia)  coming  from 
foreign  countries.  France  is  the  chief  exporter,  with  509,934  bushels, 
Germany  following  with  286,905,  Holland  sent  149,503,  and  Belgium 
89,900  bushels.  The  United  States  contributed  5352  bushels. 
Denmark,  Sw’eden,  Portugal,  and  Norway  helped,  but  only  to  a 
slight  extent,  in  making  the  total  Plum  imports  1,043,819  bushels. 
Of  the  hardy  fruits  named.  Apples,  Cherries,  Pears,  and  Plums, 
we  have  to  recognise  the  significant  fact  that  our  shortage — the 
inadequacy  of  our  home  grown  supplies  for  meeting  the  requirements 
of  our  population — was  no  less  than  6,617,951  bushels  for  the  last 
year  (1897),  for  which  authoritative  returns  are  presented  by  the  Board 
of  Agriculture.  That  is  something  to  be  pondered  over  by  owners  of 
land,  which  is  capable,  under  intelligent  methods  of  cultivation  and 
appropriation  to  the  respective  kinds,  of  growing  produce  of  the 
highest  quality  for  our  markets. 
Ihe  hard  unyielding  figures  cited  afford  the  most  powerful  con¬ 
futation  of  the  dismal  allegations  of  those  so-called  growers  of  hardy 
fruits,  who  bungle  and  fail,  that  planting  is  being  overdone ;  on  the 
contrary,  it  is  only  by  systematic  planting  and  sound  management 
that  fruit  can  be  grown  in  the  bulk  and  quality  requisite  for  meeting 
the  ever  increasing  consumptive  demand.  It  cannot  be  afforded  by 
enlecbled  and  service  exhausted  trees,  but  only  by  the  young,  fruitful, 
and  well  constitutioned,  and  these  in  the  best  varieties  of  the  respective 
kinds.  Nor  can  it  be  grown  by  everyone  and  everywhere.  The 
policy  of  snatching  at  the  cheapest  of  trees,  regardless  of  varieties, 
slicking  them  anyh'-w  in  any  vacant  land,  and  leaving  them  to  take 
their  chance,  has  gone  on  too  long.  It  can  only  end  in  disappointment, 
except  to  skilful  cultivators  at  home  and  abroad,  who  have,  because 
of  the  failure  of  others,  the  better  opportunity  for  disposing  of  their 
own  superior  wares. 
It  would  be  easy  to  collate  more  startling  figures  than  those  we  have 
taken  from  the  Government  returns,  such  as  the  importations  of  other 
kinds  of  fruits — -Oranges,  Lemons,  naturally  grown  Grapes,  and  other 
tropical  kinds,  including  Nuts,  bringing  up  the  total  importations  to 
nearly  20,000,000  bushels ;  but  it  would  be  misleading  as  affecting 
British  cultivators,  and  that  is  no  part  of  the  policy  of  the  Journal 
of  Horticulture. 
It  may  be  incidentally  mentioned  that  nearly  1,000,000  “  bushels  ” 
(what  a  term  to  employ!)  of  Grapes  w'ere  imported  last  year,  the 
overwhelming  amount,  however,  being  naturally  grown  in  Spain  and 
Poriugal;  but  upwards  of  40,000  bushels  came  from  the  Channel 
Islands,  and  21,000  bushels  from  Belgium — presumably  grown  under 
glass.  British  growers  can,  all  the  same,  be  left  to  look  after 
themselves  in  this  reference. 
Reverting  to  the  subject  of  hardy  fruit,  we  seem  to  be  making  some 
progress,  as  an  increase  of  over  1900  acres  of  orchards,  cultivated  and 
under  gras-',  is  recorded  for  the  year,  though  the  area  under  bush 
fruits  appears  stationary. 
Another  point  may  be  touched  on.  We  appear  to  have  impoited 
nearly  7,000,000  cwts.  of  Potatoes  during  the  past  year,  valued  at 
nearly  £2,000,000  ;  also  over  6,000,000  bushels  (why  not  cwts.  ?)  of 
Onions,  value  almost  £800,000,  an  increase  on  all  previous  years, 
notwithstanding  this  era  of  “onionism” — i.e..  gigantic  home-grown 
bulbs. 
On  the  general  question  of  the  inability  of  the  nation  to  teed  its 
population  we  note  some  astounding  figures.  The  total  vegetable 
irroducts  imported  into  the  United  Kingdom  during  the  past  twenty 
years  amounts  in  value  to  £84,281,440,  and  the  total  agricultuml  food 
products  to  the  tremendous  sum  of  £155,807,377  1  On  contemplating 
such  figures,  based  on  facts,  two  questions  of  fundamental  importance 
force  themselves  to  the  front. 
1,  What  would  be  the  condition  of  our  dense  paopulation  in  the 
event  of  this  country  being  driven  into  a  prolonged  general  war  ? 
2,  Is  all  being  done  that  it  is  possible  to  do  in  various  ways  for 
developing  the  food-producing  resources  of  our  sea-girt  isles  ? 
Dry  as  this  brief  narrative  of  our  food  dependencies  on  other  lands 
may  be,  we  are  disposed  to  think  he  will  be  a  bold  man  who  questions 
the  importance  of  the  subject. 
NOTES  ON  SOME  INJURIOUS  INSECTS  or  1898. 
The  season  of  1898  was  on  the  whole  not  what  the  majority  of 
gardeners  would  consider  a  favourable  one ;  it  was  marked  by  great 
dryness  in  most  districts,  with  transient  showers,  sometimes  violent, 
and  the  coldness  of  the  early  summer  was  followed  by  heat  that  was 
often  scorching.  Within  my  observation  it  was  not  a  year  when 
insects  generally  were  numerous.  I  should  say  our  foes  in  gardens, 
orchards,  and  shrubberies  did  less  mischief  than  is  usual,  the  weather 
being  frequently  unfavourable  to  their  emergence  or  increase.  Cold 
winds  killed  multitudes  of  young  caterpillars  ;  very  dry  weather 
proved  a  check  to  the  appearance  of  many  moths,  also  the  foliage 
became  tough  on  some  trees  and  shrubs,  so  that  beetles  or  larvae  could 
not  obtain  nutriment.  Many  flowers  died  off  rapidly  before  the 
insects  that  fed  on  them  were  full-grown.  Even  those  species  that 
feed  on  the  roots  or  crowns  of  plants  suffered  in  a  degree  from  the 
high  temperature  and  deficient  rainfall.  This  present  spring,  too,  being 
cold  and  not  very  moist  has  thus  far  not  helped  our  insect  enemies. 
Miss  Ormerod,  whose  labours  have,  with  the  assistance  of  her 
many  coriespondents,  helped  to  spread  the  knowledge  of  entomology 
amongst  farmers  and  gardeners,  in  her  twenty-second  annual  report 
states  that  though  few  hurtful  insects  were  remarkably  abundant,  yet 
there  were  some  singular  variations  in  the  kind  and  extent  of  insect 
infestations.  Ground  beetles  of  several  species  were  plentiful  and 
active,  specially  those  attacking  Strawberries.  For  some  years  it  had 
