194 
JOURNAL  OF  HORTICULTURE  AND  COTTAGE  GARDENER, 
August  27,  1903 
A  Wanderer’s  Notes. 
A  Dublin  correspondent  who  visited  a  lovely  Sussex  manor 
and  two  London  gardens  recently,  sends  a  most  interesting 
letter  noticing  some  of  the  things  he  saw.  Thus  :  Water  Lilies 
at  G — —  were  splendid,  so  also  Tea  Roses,  &c.,  ai^d  I  never 
saw  Rosa  Wichuraiana  so  good  as  it  is  there,  clraping  the  flower 
garden  steps,  and  dangling  from  the  pergola  amongst  the  bronzy 
leaves  of  Thunberg’s  Vine.  Clematis  viticella  in  great  variety, 
from  snow  white  to  deep  claret  crimson,  was  also  very  dainty 
and  distinct,  and  seems  hardier  and  more  free  in  growth  than  is 
C.  Jackmani. 
At  Gunnersbury  House,  Acton,  the  coloured  Water  Lilies 
aro  very  fine  ancl  beautihdly  focussed  in  a  delightful  and 
sheltered  bit  of  water.  The  blue  Nymphaea  gigantea  of  Australia, 
in  a  frame,  had  flowers  nearly  lOin  across,  and  is  one  of  the  most 
distinct  and  noble  of  all  the  Nymphseas  I  ever  saw,  indoors  or 
out.  The  Japanese  Lotus,  or  Nelumbiums,  are  just  opening 
their  exquisite  flowers  outside  at  Gunnersbury  in  a  tank  of 
slightly  warmed  water;  the  first  time  I  ever  saw  them  healthy 
and  happy  out  of  doors  in  Britain. 
Hollyhocks  at  Hampton  Court,  both  'single  and  double,  are, 
and  have  been,  very  fine.  It  has  been  an  ideal  Hollyhock  year, 
cool  and  wet,  and  they  are  vei-y  stately  and  handsome  every¬ 
where,  and  of  all  colours,  from  snow  white  to  chocolate  crimson, 
and,  indeed,  very  nearly  black.  The  most  effective  new  plant 
on  the  mixed  border  at  Hampton  Court  is  Senecio  clivorum.  It 
is  a  little  coarse  in  habit  close  at  hand,  but  50yds  away  it  is  a 
bold  and  bright  and  telling  thing. 
The  cool  and  moist  season  that  has  given  us  good  Hollyhocks 
and  herbaceous  plants,  such  as  scarlet  Lobelias  and  herbaceous 
Phloxes,  has  also  added  a  new  freshness  and  luxuriance  to  our 
town  trees.  Everywhere  in  town  the  London  Plane  is  very 
beautiful  and  umbrageous.  So  also  the  lawn  grass  of  London, 
Poa  annua,  is  like  rich  green  velvet  under  the  trees  in  the 
squares. 
Against  the  Mole. 
•  (oil  psge  167)  repeats  the  old  plea  that  farmers, 
in  killing  moles,  are  destroying  one  of  their  best  friends.  “  Facts 
are  facts,”  he  says.  They  are;  and  I,  for  one.  believe  that 
farmers  are  not  so  stupid  as  some  people  seem  to  think,  and  that 
in  not  a  few  cases  they  know  more  about  the  good  or  damage  done 
by  the  animals  and  creatures  on  their  farms  than  “  the  text  books 
and  works  of  reference”  can  teach  them.  The  mole  is  insecti- 
■vorous,  as  anyone  with  a  smattering  of  natural  history  can  tell 
from  his  teeth.  Our  four  principal  iiisectivores  are  the  hedge¬ 
hog,  mole,  shrew,  and  bat,  which  have  similar  teeth.  Like  the 
hedgehog, he  would  also  probably  be  carnivorous  when  he  got  a 
chance  such  as  a  nest  of  young  mice.  No  doubt  he  does  good  in 
destroying  grubs,  especially  wireworms,  and  cockchafer  and 
“  daddy-longlegs  ”  grubs ;  but  I  should  say  at  least  three-fourths 
of  Ins  food  would  be  worms,  and  they,  Darwin  tells  us,  do  as 
much,  probably  very  much  more,  good  than  the  mole’s  friends  lay 
to  his  credit. 
But  he  does  good  to  the  grass,  we  are  told — that  is,  he  brings 
up  some  of  the  surface  soil  (at  the  same  time  creating  a  drainage) 
which,  scattered  by  the  bush-harrow,  does  undoubtedly  good  by 
acting  as  a  top-dressing.  That  is  so ;  and  if  he  would  confine 
himself  to  working  in  the  meadows  during  winter,  and  up  to 
the  beginning  of  April,  he  would  do  but  little  harm  ;  but  he  does 
not,  and  molehills  in  the  mowing  grass  are  injurious  to  the 
hay,  the  scythes,  and  the  machine,  and  to  the  pasture  in  the 
summer.  As  a  cultivator  of  land  I  say  to  the  mole,  “No,  thank 
you.  I  like  to  do  my  own  draining  in  such  places  as  I  wish; 
I  like  to  do  my  own  digging  in  such  places  and  at  such  times  as 
suit  me  best.  I  have  had  iieople  say  to  me  with  regard  to  bull¬ 
finches  and  sparrows,  that  they  do  me  good  by  thinning  the  too 
great  abundance  of  my  Apple  blossom.  ,I  do  hot  argue.  I  say,  I 
like  to  do  my  own  thinning.  Moles  often  get  into  my  garden  and 
do  a  lot  of  harm  by  their  indiscriminate  digging.  Of  course  they 
do;  you  might  almost  as  well  say  that  a  lot  of  children  turned 
into  a  garden  with  their  to5^  sjiades  and  told  to  dig  where  they 
liked  would  do  no  harm,  as  to  deny  that  moles  do  harm  to  the 
gardener. 
lliey  throw  up  their  heaps  on  my  croquet  or  tennis 
lawns  ;  they  destroy  quantities  of  seedlings  in  my  vegetable  beds  ; 
several  times  I  have  known  a  Tea  Rose  bed,  when  covered  with 
leaves  in  winter,  honeycombed  from  end  to  end  and  seriously 
injured.  Obviously  it  is  just  flie  same  with  the  farmers’  seed¬ 
lings  and  arable  land,  wdiere  the  mole  does  more  harm  than  in 
the  grass.  Farmers  really  are  not  so  foolish  as  to  pay  for  the 
destruction  of  moles,  unless  they  see  and  know  the  harm  they 
do.  We  do  not  want  them  exterminated,  but  merely  kept  within 
bounds — few  things  can  get  at  them  to  prey  on  them,  and  they 
increase  enormously  where  not  attacked  by  man.  They  do  not  do 
very  much  harm  in  the  low  meadows  where  they  breed,  but 
must  be  kept  down  in  the  cultivated  land. — W.  R.  Raillem. 
Plea  for  the  Manetti. 
If  “  W.  R.  Raillem’s  ”  remarks  (vide  issue  August  15)  had  only 
been  confined  to  the  comparative  merits  or  demerits  of  the 
Manetti,  with  the  Briar  or  other  stocks,  I  should  agree  with 
“  A.  C.”  on  the  inadvisability  of  rushing  into  print  on  its  behalf. 
But  when  that  most  useful  and  popular  critic,  ivith  the  usual 
courage  of  his  opinions,  would  sweep  aw'ay  the  Manetti  from  the 
face  of  every  professional  Rose  garden  (very  rarely  does  the 
amateur  find  even  a  corner  for  it),  it  is  high  time  to  break  a  lanca 
in  its  defence,  and  show  cause  why  it  should  not  hold  a  promi¬ 
nent  place ;  next  to  the  Briar,  of  course  I  am  glad  tO'  know 
the  Manetti  is  used  in  our  Rose  nurseries,  both  small  and  great ; 
ay!  in  spite  of  “  W.  R.  R.”  quoting  that  eminent  authority,  Mr. 
George  Paul,  “  that  he  could  not  sell  plants  on  the  Manetti.” 
May  I  be  allowed  here  to  give  an  extract  from  the  venerable 
author  of  “  The  Rose  Garden,”  Mr.  William  Paul,  who,  while  he 
acknowledges  his  preference  for  the  Dog  Rose  as  a  stock,  of  the 
Manetti,  thus  expresses  himself;  “Larger  plants  may  usually  be 
bought  on  the  latter  stock  and  at  a  cheaper  rate.  A  good  cultiva¬ 
tor  will  grow  Roses  very  well  on  either  stock,  provided  with  the 
Manetti  he  exercises  due  vigilance  to  keep  in  check  the  shoots  of 
the  stock  which  are  constantly  springing  into  life.  On  poor  dry 
soils,  where  Roses  on  their  own  roots  and  on  the  Dog  Rose  are 
kept  in  condition  with  difficulty,  the  Manetti  stock  has  often 
been,  found  a  boon.” 
Amateurs  often  ask,  What  is  the  Manetti?  Where  does  it 
come  from  ?  Thomas  Rivers,  the  great  authority  of  his  day  both 
as  an  author  and  practical  gardener,  answers  these  questions  in 
a  few  words.  He  says  (writing  in  the  beginning  of  the  ’60’s) :  “  I 
received  it  some  twenty  years  since  fi’om  Cairo  for  a  stock.  It 
was  raised  from  seed  by  Signor  Manetti,  of  the  Botanic  Gardens 
at  Monga.  All  the  Roses  I  have  budded  on  this  stock  have 
succeeded  admirably.”  Such  is  the  verdict  of  history  recorded  by 
high  authorities  of  a  past  generation  in  favour  of  Manetti.  Novr 
we  will  turn  to  the  almost  universal  practice  of  Rose  nursery¬ 
men  at  the  present  day,  as  a  set-off  against  the  pessimistic  views 
of  “  W.  R.  R.”  of  the  value  of  the  Manetti  as  a  stock. 
In  most  of  the  leading  Rose  nurseries,  I  believe,  at  least  half 
of  the  different  varieties  of  budding  stocks  are  Manettis,  and 
this,  too,  we  maintain,  greatly  to*  the  advantage  of  the  public. 
Going  round  lately  the  large  KingsAcre  Rosqand  Fruit  Nurseries, 
near  my  residence  at  Hereford,  three  breadths  of  Manetti 
stocks  (nearly  70,000)  particularly  struck  my  attention,  on 
noticing  which  the  foreman  remarked:  “Ah,  sir,  if  it  were  not 
for  the  Manetti  I  don’t  know  what  we  should  do  to  supply  our 
customers.  Briars  are  getting  more  expensive  and  difficult  to 
buy  every  year;  indeed,  I  believe  we  actually  lose  by  the  present 
price  we  charge  for  standards  1  ”  And  this  in  a  county  like 
Hereford,  where  the  Dog  Rose  or  Briar  grow  in  well  nigh 
every  hedge!  “A.  C.”  must  indeed  have  been  exceptionally 
favourd  in  getting  his  Briars  so  easily.  Even  when  got,  long 
experience  speaks  out  sadly,  that  the  percentage  of  those  stocks 
that  die,  owing  to  early  frost  or  drought,  or  previously  by  ex¬ 
posure  of  their  roots  in  the  interval  after  raising  and  delivering, 
is  something  enormous.  All  these  drawbacks — and  serious  ones 
they  are — enhance  the  value  of  the  Manetti  and  assign  a  just 
cause  why  it  should  be  so  extensively  grown. 
No  one  can  go  more  heartily  than  your  correspondent  does 
with  “  W.  R.  R.”  on  the  too  common  error  of  deep  planting,  what¬ 
ever  the  stock  may  be ;  but  surely,  to  introduce  the  subject,  as 
analogous  of  aerial  roots,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Vine,  from  super¬ 
abundant  moisture  in  the  canes,  is  wide  of  the  mark,  as  also  to 
speak  of  budding  on  the  Manetti  stock  four  inches  below  the 
ground  on  non-aerated  soil !  If  the  poor,  distressed  Rose 
plant,  which  is  appealed  to  for  an  answer,  were  to  give  one,  it 
could  only  be  this:  “Who  are  you  speaking  about?  I  don’t 
understand.” 
The  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter  from  the  writer’s  point  of 
view  is  that,  given  suitable  varieties  of  Roses,  i.e.,  all  but  a  very 
few  weak-growing  H.P.’s  and,  of  course,  H.T.’s  and  Teas,  the 
Manetti  is  an  admirable,  all-round,  indispensable  stock,  and  in 
almost  every  soil  will  hold,  and  more  than  ho-ld,  its  own;  while 
a  pinch  of  common  sense  is  needed  in  the  selection  of  a  few 
varieties,  not  to  be  budded  on  the  Manetti,  not  a  single  pinch  of 
“plant  food”  in  any  shape  to  grow  big  back-row  blooms  for  ex¬ 
hibition  should  be  given,  and  then  the  public  will  have  no  cause 
to  complain  of  iflants  they  receive  grown  on  that  stock.  In  the 
Rose  garden  of  your  correspondent  there  are  now  two  great 
novelties  of  the  season — H.P.  Frau  Carl  Druschki  and  Ben  Cant, 
on  the  Manetti  between  6ft  and  7ft  high!  What  grand  cut-backs 
v.dll  they  not  be'  next  year. — ^Heb-efoedshire  Incumbekt. 
