320 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER. 
October  2,  1902. 
This  misfortune,  for  it  can  hardly  come  under  the  designa¬ 
tion  of  disease,  appears  frequent  enough  in  vineries  to  make  it  a 
cause  worthy  of  investigation.  I  have  given  some  consideration 
to  the  matter  for  the  last  few  years — indeed,  ever  since-  the  in¬ 
teresting  discussion  which  took  place  in  the  Journal  between 
the  late  Mr.  Thomson  and  Mr.  Mclndoe.  I  have  encountered 
not  a  few  curious  cases  of  “cracking  ”  since  then,  and  though  in 
many  of  them  some  people  would  not  hesitate  to  give  a  reason, 
yet  I  feel  in  the  rather  peculiar  position  of  being  yet  “  at  sea  ” 
with  regard  to  the  real  cause  of  this  evil.  I  have  not  only 
observed  the  behaviour  of  Grapes,  but  also  of  other  fruits,  especi¬ 
ally  out  of  doors,  and  here  also  I  am  as  yet  quite  unable  to  arrive 
at  any  satisfactory  conclusions.  I  have  also,  as  far  as  I  know, 
read  all  that  is  worth  knowing  on  the  subject  without  faring 
much  better.  Probably  many  of  your  readers  will  think  me 
“  tremendous  dull”  in  the  understanding,  which  to  me  in  this 
connection  is  a  matter  of  no  consequence.  But  to  be  more 
specific,  I  may  say  that  I  entertain  no  doubt  that  the-  exciting 
cause  of  Grape  cracking  is  superabundant  moisture.  My  diffi¬ 
culty  comes  in  when  I  begin  to  inquire  how,  and  in  what  manner, 
does  this  acknowledged  general  cause  act  in  producing  the 
disastrous  effects?  I  learn  this  can  take  place  in  two  ways-: 
first,  by  endosmosis,  and,  again,  by  exosmosis.  Can  your  many 
able  readers  throw  more  light  on  this  mysterious  question  ? 
— Gbapes. 
Wanted— Inventors. 
Under  the  above  heading  you  published  in  your  issue  of 
September  11  a  most  interesting  article,  which  I  am  sure  has  met 
a  responsive  echo  in  the  minds  of  many  practical  gardeners.  I 
quite  agree  with  your  correspondent  that  inventors  generally 
have  let  the  garden  severely  alone  in  the-  way  of  new  and  time¬ 
saving  appliances  so  far  as  public  records  go.  It  does  not 
follow,  however,  that  new  methods  have  not  been  adopted  in 
some  places  by  men  who  have  realised  the  necessity  of  handier 
and  more-  useful  implements.  But  the  reason  that  they  are  not 
more  widely  known  is  not  because  they  do  not  exist,  but  because 
the  expense  of  putting  them  “  on  the  market  ”  is  generally  more 
than  most  gardeners  can  afford.  Take  my  own  case-  for  instance. 
As  head  gardener,  I  have  under  my  care-  several  houses  con¬ 
taining  Orchids,  stove,  and  greenhouse  plants,  Melons,  Cucum¬ 
bers,  &c.,  and,  as  a  natural  consequence,  occasion  sometimes 
arises  as  how  to  adopt  the-  bdst  means  to-  improve  the  various 
methods  now  in  use,  so  as  to  bring  about  an  improvement  in  the 
way  of  lightening  labour.  I  have  designed  and  have  in  use 
several  useful  appliances,  such  as  an  improved  support  for  fruits 
of  Melons  ;  also  a  support  for  fruits  growing  in  pits  and  frames. 
Another  is  a  plant  protector,  very  useful  in  the  Melon  and 
Cucumber  houses  during  the  earlier  stages  of  the  plants’  growth, 
when  the  Melon  and  Cucumber  are  so  very  liable  to  be  attacked 
and  often  destroyed  by  slugs,  snails,  beetles,  and  woodlice.  We 
have  in  use  in  the  Orchid  houses  here-  a  very  useful  invention, 
which  insures  perfect  safety  to  the  plants  from  the  above-named 
foes.  I  may  state  that  some  of  the  supports  and  plant  protectors 
are  in  use  in  the  Royal  Gardens,  and  have  given  entire  satis¬ 
faction.  There  is  no  doubt,  if  one  could  afford  the  expense-  of 
taking  out  the  necessary  patent,  and  properly  advertising  these 
things,  they  would  find  a  ready  sale,  and  be  found  of  great  use 
to  gi-owers  of  these  plants.  But,  sir,  when  I  wrote  to  the 
“Patent  Agents,”  with  the  intention  of  taking  out  the  necessary 
protections,  I  was  startled  to  learn  wliat  their  fees  amounted  to, 
besides  having  to  prepare  sundry  drawings  and  specifications. 
The  result  was  that,  as  my  purse  could  not  stand  the  strain,  my 
“inventions”  remain  known  only  to  myself  and  a  few  friends  to 
whom  I  have  shown  them.  I  would  suggest  that  you,  sir,  should 
obtain  the  services  of  an  “expert,”  who  for  a  small  fee  would 
advise  upon  such  matters,  and  thereby  lend  much-needed  assist¬ 
ance  to  those  in  the  same  position  as  myself.  If  this  is  not 
possible,  then,  perhaps,  you  might  in  one  or  more  articles  tell 
us  how  to  get  the  best  and  cheapest  way  to  work,  because  I  cannot 
but  think  that  the  fees  demanded  by  the  agent  referred  to  repre¬ 
sented  to  a  great  extent  his  own  remuneration,  and  not  the 
mere  fees  which  any  intending  inventor  would  have  to  pay  at  the 
Patent  Office.- — Jas.  Babkham,  Longford  Gardens,  Havenstreet, 
I.W. 
Mr.  H.  Muncey  in  your  issue  for  September  11,  furnishes  an 
interesting  article  and  calls  for  inventions  dealing  with  gardens. 
We  arc-  not  quite  so  backward  as  he  would  suggest,  as  a  perusal 
of  some  of  the  sundriesmen’s  lists  will  show.  “  H.  M.”  desires 
an  unbreakable  pot.  It  is  already  in  existence  in  the  U.S.A., 
being  made  of  papier-mache,  and  of  a  terra-cotta  colour.  How¬ 
ever,  they  are  only  in  small  sizes,  and  mighty  expensive  at  that. 
Regarding  syringes,  there  can  be  no  improvement,  whilst  retain¬ 
ing  the  size  necessary  to  make  it  convenient  to  handle.  The 
“  Abol  ”  is  among  the  best  of  its  kind,  and  the  aerated  sprayer  is 
excellent  for  insecticides.  One  thing  that  requires  improvement 
is  the  barrow,  the  greatest  instrument  of  torture  in  the  garden. 
Give  to  us  a  self-balancing,  easy  running  barrow,  and  we  will  be 
thankful. — Squib. 
[Our  correspondent  enclosed  sketches  suggestive  of  inventions, 
and  these  are:  (1),  a  pneumatic-handled  spade,  with  spring  to 
neutralise  any  jarring  effect,  and  a  sliding,  grip.  (2),  a  one¬ 
wheeled  barrow  (wheel  in  the  centre)  to-  relieve  the  weight  on  the 
truncller’s  arms,  the  handles  being  placed  above  the  wheel  and 
worked  by  a  lever  so  as  to  act-  either  as  legs  or  as  handles,  as  the 
case  required.  There  would  be  hooks  beneath,  for  hanging  things 
on  when  the  barrow  is  full.  (3),  a  broad-toothed  rake,  con¬ 
vertible  into  a  hoe  by  slightly  pulling  out  a  rod  at  the  side. — Ed.] 
- <••«> - 
Gardeners  and  Good  Manners. 
Writing  under  the  extended  title,  “  One  Reason  why  Gar¬ 
deners  should  be  Educated,”  on  page  249,  your  correspondent 
“  Agno  ”  dilates  in  a  very  self-assured  manner  on  the-  necessity 
of  polish  and  a  gentlemanly  address  as  another  essential  to  the 
equipment  of  a  fitly  trained  head  gardener.  Granted  that  it  is 
requisite  that  gardeners  be  cultured  gentlemen,  would  it  not  be 
reasonable  that  employers  who  require  men  with  a  university 
form  of  speech  should  p-ay  a  relative  wage-  and  treat  them  as 
gentlemen  ?  Ho-w  many  are  there  at  this  moment  smarting 
under  the  injustice,  and  even  cruelty,  received  at  their  hands? 
No  amount  of  mental  culture  will  produce  a  gentleman.  It  will 
but  produce  a  corresponding  amount  of  polish,  through  which 
the  inner  man  may  at  any  time  break  through.  How  comes  it 
that  we  find  labouring  men  with  no  manners  as  understood  by 
the  aristocrat,  but  with  the  instincts  of  gentlemen  implanted 
deep  in  their  moral  fibre?  If  it  were  not  so,  such  characters  as 
George  Elliot’s  “Adam  Bede,”  one  of  the  finest  in  fiction, 
would  be  an  utter  absurdity.  On  the  other  hand,  we  know  only 
too  well  that  the  term  nobility,  while  it  may  stand  for  refine¬ 
ment,  as  equally  often,  perhaps,  means  much  that  is  vulgar,  low, 
and  degrading.  The  most  elegant  superstructure  in  the  world, 
built  on  mental  culture,  is  not  to  be-  compared  to  the  meanest 
temple  founded  on  the  bed-rock  of  all  real  gentlemanly  qualities 
—right  principle,  which  is  of  the  heart,  not  the  intellect,  and 
which  is  equally  as-  much  the  birthright  of  the  peasant  as  the 
sovereign.  In  "the  storm  and  stress  of  life  the  finer  sensibilities 
may,  perhaps,  become  blunter  and  dull,  but  never  can  the  man¬ 
hood  be-  undermined  which  is  so  founded. — D.  N. 
“  Agno-s  ”  remarks  regarding  uneducated  gardeners  are  true  to 
a  great  extent.  Quite  recently  I  overheard  a  garden  boy,  when 
questioned  by  his  employer  as  to  what  he  was  doing,  reply, 
“digging  the  spuds!  ”  However,  “Young  Gardener”  (page  292) 
should  set  to  work  to  improve  his  “ignorance,”  as  he  terms  it. 
No  one  is  past  learning,  and  the  educational  books  are  legion.  I 
am  acquainted  with  a  young  gardener,  who  received  a  poor  educa¬ 
tion  yet  in  manners  and  speech  is  quite  gentlemanly.  More¬ 
over.  I  fee-1  convinced  that  lie  will  push  forward  at  a  far  more 
rapid  rate  than  his  prototypes  who-  arc  too  fond  o-f  the  leaving-off 
time  and  sporting  attractions.  Without  a  doubt,  the  man  who 
studies  hard  possesses  a  great  pull  over  those  who  do  not.  The 
collegian  may  succeed  more  quickly  in  obtaining  a  head  position, 
but  the  outsider  may  compete  with  him  if  he  will  only  use  his 
brains. — T.  A.  W. 
High  Jinks  in  Ireland. 
Referring  to  the  query  concerning  the  reproduction  of  a 
photograph  of  Dracaena,  which  appeared  in  your  Journal,  page  20o, 
and  also  to  the  query  by  “  Quiz  ”  in  the  Journal  of  September  4, 
I  am  sorry  I  could  not  have  answered  sooner.  I  am  obliged  to 
“  Quiz  ”  for  drawing  my  attention  to  the  same.  The  plant  in 
question,  or,  rather,  photo  of  same,  was  not  “  australis,”  but 
“  Lindeni.”  However,  I  am  not  quite  sure-,  as  the  owner  of  the 
original  plant  has  consigned  it  to  the  rubbish  heap;  therefore.  I 
was  led  to  compare  the  negative  and  print  from  same  with  the 
well  known  “Lindeni,”  and  the  balance  of  evidence  would  name 
it  “  Lindeni,”  so  that  I  have  made  a  mistake  in  naming  it  “  aus¬ 
tralis.”  But  the  fault  of  creeping  into  the  avenue  of  error  docs 
not-  entitle  “Quiz”  to  deduce  the  cause  as  of  a  bibulous  condition, 
re  his  remarks  :  “  Oh,  it  was  rare  old  times,  I  hear,  and  what  with 
‘  purty  ’  colleens  hovering  about,  poteen  flying  around,  and 
elegant  Potatoes  at  sixpence  per  stone,  small  wonder  that  the 
littlest  of  little  errors  might  creep  into  Irish  correspondence.” 
I  may  as  well  state  for  “  Quiz  s  ”  benefit  that  the  photograph  was 
sent  previous  to  these  “high  jinks,”  and  was  likewise  taken  in 
