December  20,  1900. 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
557 
Womeii  as  Gardeners. 
May  I  crave  a  small  space  in  your  columns  to  enter  a  protest 
against  Mr.  John  Kitley’s  article  re  “  Women  as  Gardeners”  (p.  513)  ? 
Women  do  not  aspire  to  be  garden  labourers.  Educated  women  take 
to  gardening,  and,  as  a  rule,  are  of  the  class  which  employs  labour. 
Is  it  sensible  to  offer  domestic  service  to  women  who  can  afford  college 
fees  for  a  two  years’  training  ?  At  the  horticultural  colleges  students 
do  their  share  of  manual  work  that  they  may  learn  how,  and  afterwards 
take  subordinate  posts  to  continue  their  training,  but  they  look  forward 
to  something  more  interesting  and  worthy  of  their  energies  than  digging 
10  poles  a  day,  and  wages  of,  say  £1  a  week.  I  thank  “  A.  D.  C.” 
(p.  421)  for  his  tribute  to  women’s  work.  We  do  not  claim  to  be 
experts  in  two  years,  but  be  it  remembered  that  at  a  college  one  attends 
with  eyes  and  ears  wide  open,  and  the  instructors  and  gardeners  are 
there  purposely  to  teach.  Surely,  then,  putting  it  modestly,  we  may 
hope  to  stand  at  the  end  of  our  training  on  a  level  with  an  average 
gardener  of  five  or  six  years’  standing,  who  has  washed  pots  and  wheeled 
barrows  for  a  year  or  two,  and  picked  up  his  knowledge  as  best  he 
could  from  his  not  always  communicative  superiors.  I  wish  Mr.  Kitley 
could  meet  a  few  women  gardeners  proper,  for  he  evidently  does  not 
speak  from  practical  experience  of  us. — B.  Welthin  Winlo. 
Spade  ¥.  Fork. 
I  AM  now  anxious  to  know  what  Mr.  Shepherd  attempts  to  grow  on 
the  ground  he  describes  as  impossible  to  be  dug  with  a  fork.  I  again 
say  that  I  have  never  seen  the  ground  that  could  not  be  dug  with  a 
fork,  and  without  breaking  it  either.  A  good  workman  seldom  breaks 
his  tools.  Of  course,  there  are  others  who  can  easily  do  it ;  but  the 
best  way  with  such  is  to  let  them  find  their  own,  and  they  soon  learn 
better.  I  was  taught  to  dig  more  than  thirty.five  years  ago,  and  on 
very  strong  land  too,  but  I  never  broke  many  tools.  If  I  lived  within 
easy  distance  of  Mr.  Shepherd  I  should  be  very  pleased  to  pay  him  a 
visit  and  take  one  fork  with  me,  which  I  should  not  feel  afraid  of 
breaking,  and  if  I  could  not  dig  his  strongest  ground  I  most  certainly 
should  return  home  very  disappointed. — T.  Welch. 
I  HAVE  been  a  reader  of  our  Journal  for  more  than  thirty  years,  and 
have  often  wished  I  could  send  something  to  the  office  for  print.  I 
have,  however,  always  refrained,  as  I  am  not  much  of  a  writer,  but 
I  feel  I  must  say  something  about  *'  Spade  versus  Fork.”  I  have  had 
my  present  charge  twenty-nine  years,  and  it  is  all  sand.  There  is  a 
railway  embankment  not  50  yards  from  the  garden,  and  that’s  all  sand. 
I  have  always  found  the  spade  the  best  on  this  soil  ;  in  fact  we  are 
often  glad  to  have  a  spade  to  dig  Potatoes  in  very  dry  weather.  If  I 
had  to  have  only  one  tool  I  should  choose  the  spade.  My  father  had 
charge  of  a  garden,  that  was  real  blue  clay,  forty  or  fifty  years  ago, 
and  he  then  had  some  three-tined  forks  made  specially  for  the  heavy 
soil  as  light  as  they  could  make  them  locally.  That  was  before  the 
light  steel  forks  were  much  in  use. — Semper  Pidelis. 
- - 
Pear  Doyenne  du  Comice. 
This  Pear  seems  to  be  coming  to  the  front  at  last.  I  notice  your 
correspondent  “  A.  D.”  has  thought  it  right  to  comment  upon  it 
gaining  a  first-class  certificate,  and  says  that  this  Pear  has  never  before 
been  so  presented,  but  as  an  old  writer  I  think  if  he  will  carry  his 
memory  back  to  September,  1893,  or  look  in  the  EkH.S.’s  “  Journal,” 
January,  1894,  vol.  xvi.,  parts  2  and  3,  page  cxl.  and  cxlii.,  he  will 
see  this  Pear  was  awarded  two  bronze  Banksian  medals.  On 
September  26th,  1893,  to  the  Earl  of  Cork  and  Orrery  (gardener, 
Mr.  Iggulden),  when  Mr.  Philip  Crowley  in  the  chair,  and  twenty-two 
members  present,  awarded  this  Pear  a  medal,  and  again  on  October  10th, 
1893,  when  the  same  committee  recommended  another  medal  to  Chas.  C. 
Tudway,  Esq.,  The  Cedars,  Wells,  Somerset.  No  doubt  Mr.  Iggulden 
can  comment  on  the  former  dish  j  the  report  gives  it  as  being  fruit  of 
large  size  and  very  handsome.  The  second  dish  which  was  sent  from 
these  gardens  contained  twelve  fruit  weighing  13  lbs.,  the  largest  fruit 
weighing  1  lb.  4  ozs.  Again  he  says,  “When  will  any  raiser  produce 
such  a  variety  as  this  p  ”  I  have  no  doubt  the  committee  thought  the 
Glastonbury  of  equal  excellence  when  they  awarded  it  a  first-class 
certificate  on  October  23rd  this  year,  which,  I  believe,  was  merited  by 
its  flavour;  this  also  was  sent  from  these  gardens. — 0.  J.  Pewtrell, 
The  Cedars  Gardens,  Wells. 
[An  illustrated  description  of  Pear  Glastonbury  appeared  in  our 
issue  of  November  Ist,  page  395.] 
Pruning  Pear  Trees. 
I  HAVE  not  seen  practised  tbe  system  of  renovating  Pear  trees 
mentioned  by  “  N.  H.  P.,”  page  458,  of  “  cutting  off  the  whole  of  the 
horizontal  branches  close  up  to  the  bole,  and  start  the  tree  afresh. 
I  have  operated  on  many  trees  during  the  past  twenty  years  with 
marked  success,  not  only  with  horizontal  trained  trees,  but  others, 
when  the  spurs  have  become  long.  In  many  instances  the  trees  have 
been  shortened  back  and  grafted  with  improved  varieties.  The  result 
has  been  an  improved  crop  of  superior  frnit.  It  is  a  well-known  fact 
that  Pears  fruit  more  freely  on  the  young  wood  than  on  the  stunted 
spurs. — S.,  Yorks.  _ _  _  ^ _ 
Perpetual  Strawberries. 
In  answer  to  Mr.  Richards  (page  539),  I  do  not  remember  having 
said  much  as  to  the  flavour  of  St.  Joseph  Strawberry  ;  it  was  the 
abundance,  size,  and  continuance  of  the  fruit,  I  think,  upon  which  I 
principally  wrote.  Flavour  is,  literally,  a  matter  of  taste  ;  some  people 
like  a  certain  amount  of  acidity  or  sharpness  in  certain  fruits,  but  I  do 
not.  You  will  see  some  Strawberries  catalogued  as  having  a  “  rich 
brisk  flavour,”  or  “  refreshing  sub-acid  flavour.”  Personally  I  should 
avoid  these,  but  others,  I  know,  would  prefer  them.  Now  St.  Antoine 
de  Padoue  has,  to  my  taste,  a  much  sweeter  and  less  acid  flavour  than 
St.  Joseph,  but  of  the  visitors  to  whom  I  this  season  offered  fruits  to 
taste  of  the  two  varieties  a  good  proportion  (I  should  think  quite  a 
third)  preferred  the  St.  Joseph,  and  admitted  that  they  did  so  because 
it  was  sharper.  Chagun  d  son  gout.  I  think  I  have  before  related  in 
the  Journal,  some  years  ago,  how  I  was  judging  fruit  and  vegetables  at 
a  local  show,  and  coming  to  Strawberries  proceeded  to  taste  them,  and 
invited  my  co-ad jutor  to  do  the  same.  “  No ;  he  didn’t  much  care  for 
t'hem  things,  and  would  leave  them  to  me.”  Presently  we  arrived  at 
'the  Turnips,  when  his  eyes  glistened,  and  producing  a  knife  he  out  a 
good  slice  from  almost  every  exhibit,  which  he  munched  with  great 
gusto.  “  That’s  pretty  fair,  and  that’s  beautiful ;  ah  !  this  is  delicious; 
do  try  it,”  he  said.  “N-n-o,”  I  answered;  “  I  don’t  much  care  for  them 
things,  and  will  leave  them  entirely  to  you.” — W.  R.  Raillem. 
Plapt  Elemepts. 
I  SHOULD  like  to  ask  Mr.  J.  J.  Willis,  who  writes  the  article  on 
“Plant  Elements”  at  page  457,  or  some  other  well  informed 
correspondent,  to  help  me  in  solving  some  difficulties  that  have  troubled 
me  for  a  considerable  time,  and  which  I  have  only  partially  overcome. 
At  Longleat,  the  Marquis  of  Bath’s  seat  near  Warminster,  when 
bones  were  mixed  with  the  soil  for  fruit-growing,  they  decomposed 
very  rapidly,  scarcely  a  trace  of  them  being  visible  in  twelve  months. 
As  abundance  of  chalk  was  to  be  seen  in  the  hills  close  by  on  both  sides 
of  the  garden  it  was  natural  to  suppose  there  was  no  lack  of  lime 
in  the  soil.  I  afterwards  found,  however,  that  the  soil  was  very 
deficient  in  lime,  and  when  added  in  large  quantities  the  effect  was 
magical.  I  do  not  know  whether  bones  decompose  so  rapidly  there 
now  since  lime  has  been  freely  used,  but  think  very  possibly  they  do 
not,  and  that  it  was  lime  hunger  which  caused  the  bones  to  bo 
devoured  so  greedily. 
Now  I  have  to  do  with  a  soil  which  is  altogether  different.  There  is 
a  fair  proportion  of  lime  in  it,  and  the  water  from  the  springs^  is  very 
hard  (the  water  at  Longleat  from  the  springs  is  softer  than  rain  water 
as  caught  from  buildings).  Half-inch  bones  applied  here  are  not  much 
decomposed  in  half  a  dozen  years,  and  traces  of  them  may  be  found 
where  they  were  applied  seventeen  years  ago.  Shells  abound  in  the 
soft  stones  in  the  neighbourhood,  and  it  would  really  look  as  if 
phosphates  were  here  in  sufficient  quantities.  But  I  have  evidence  to 
the  contrary,  some  of  which  I  think  is  rather  curious.  A  portion  of 
ground  had  a  very  heavy  dressing  of  stable  manure  four  years  ago, 
and  bore  a  splendid  crop  of  Celery.  In  the  autumn  this  plot,  which 
was  of  course  still  full  of  manure,  was  planted  with  Raspberries,  and 
they  have  never  done  much  good.  The  rows  are  6  feet  apart,  and  have 
only  been  kept  clean  with  the  hoe.  The  soil  was  not  sour  after  the 
Celery  ;  it  does  not  hold  water  long  enough  to  get  sour.  My  theory  is 
the  stock  of  phosphates  is  so  small  that  a  vigorous  crop  will  take  up  all 
that  is  available.  The  ground  was  fully  cropped  between  the  Celery 
with  Peas  and  Spinach,  and  they  also  did  remarkably  well.  Dissolved 
bones  have  a  very  marked  effect,  I  do  not  know  how  much  it  would 
take  to  injure  a  crop,  but  a  row  of  the  Daisy  Pea  had  about  a  pound  to 
the  lineal  yard,  and  the  Peas  came  up  very  fine,  looking  altogether  like 
a  different  variety  from  those  grown  without  the  application. 
I  could  give  much  more  evidence  pointing  in  the  same  direction, 
but  perhaps  this  is  sufficient.  Now,  dissolved  bones  cannot  be 
for  general  cropping  in  such  quantities  as  used  for  the  Peas,  it  would 
be  too  costly  ;  all  the  soluble  portion  would  be  gone  in  a  few  weeks, 
and  I  have  no  evidence  as  to  when  the  insoluble  would  be  available.  I 
am  now  using  basic  slag,  and  wish  someone  would  tell  me  if  it  is  likely 
to  come  into  action  quicker  than  bones  (not  dissolved),  and  whether 
heavy  applications  would  be  likely  to  injure  plants.  They  contain,  I 
understand,  38  to  45  per  cent,  phosphates  and  about  the  same  quantity 
of  lime  ;  what  is  the  remainder  ?  Is  there  any  iron  available  for  plant 
food  or  fixing  ammonia? — Wm.  Taylor.  jaieoiM3j 
