This section is from the book "The American Garden Vol. XI", by L. H. Bailey. Also available from Amazon: American Horticultural Society A to Z Encyclopedia of Garden Plants.
If President John May will only keep this from evaporation, he will confer a great favor on all lovers of flowers.
SENSE of proportion seems to be unknown to many minds. A single fact or observation impresses itself upon the mind and generaliza-tions are made from it, even though they may be contradicted by a dozen other facts just as positive; and this unbalanced mind insists upon its generalization with all the stubbornness of bigotry. In fact, just this feature of thought is the chief curse of our agriculture, for it runs through all transactions and all practices.
It is admirably illustrated by the current discussions of grafting, particularly across the Atlantic. During the last year the whole practice of grafting has been denounced as unwise and unscientific, and numerous instances have been cited to prove that it is followed with ill results. But why will not these writers make a corresponding citation of cases in which good results have followed ? In other words, why cannot fairness and honesty be used here as well as elsewhere ? We grant that instances are many in which ill results follow grafting and budding. We will suppose, in extravagant liberality, that any writer knows ten thousand such instances; then, in honesty, let him count the trees in our orchards, the trees on our lawns, the shrubs in our greenhouses, in which grafting is not only beneficial but essential. If one man is a cripple, does the fact prove that all men cannot walk ?
*
THE want of encouragement with which horticulture is treated in many localities is often bewailed, and the poor display made at exhibitions in localities horticulturally rich is a matter of great comment. Sometimes the causes that operate to produce this are beyond the control of the societies holding the exhibitions, but would it not be well for the executive officers this season, while making plans, to carefully consider once more the matter of premiums ? "Premiums too small," is the general complaint among would-be exhibitors; the societies admit it, but say that they can afford no larger ones. Yet they can afford £25 for a horse or cow and only 50 cents for a show of flowers ! One of our state societies offers $50 for the best Shorthorn bull, and not half as much for the best general collection of cut-flowers. Yet the expense of taking the animals to the exhibition is rarely as much as it is for the flowers. The flowers are worthless at the close of the fair, no matter how much money and labor have been expended on them. The animals are quite as good as when they left home, and if they receive favorable notice or a prize their value is increased. Often they find a purchaser on the spot at a handsome profit.
It is too much to expect us to sacrifice $50 worth of flowers of our growth or purchase, for the chance honor of getting a $10 or $20 premium for the best floral work. A good flower show will attract more visitors than any department of a fair, except the horse races.
THERE are few who have not read of "The Angelus," a little picture that has been exhibited for some time past by a firm of picture dealers in New York. Thousands of people have paid for the sake of looking at it, and have regarded it with varying emotions. Many do not hesitate to say that they regard the whole thing as a "fake," gotten up to enrich an ingenious company of speculators. Poor Millet, when he painted it, had hard work to sell it at any price. Were he alive and able to furnish many pictures, he would likely find it as difficult to profit by them as by this one. His pictures are now "boomed" and advertised in the most skilful and ingenious manner, until those unlearned in art are silenced. Undoubtedly the Angelus shows brush-work and a luminous quality of the atmosphere both in the lights and shadows that are fine, but these are artistic points only appreciated by few out of the many thousands that look upon it. But we are told that it is the exalted sentiment which the picture shows, that gives it, value and teaches us that there can be a beauty even in the most barren lives.
Let us consider it from this point of view, and see if its lessens are moral and good ! Poverty and hardship are hard to bear in all parts of the world, and we welcome any true alleviations that come to the lot of those compelled to endure them, but we think modern knowledge and appliances will do more for us than the methods of the middle ages. If, as we are told, this picture truly represents the condition of many people, it is indeed depressing. Their prayers must be for deliverance, not of thanksgiving. They and their ancestors have bowed their heads at the sound of the Angelus bell for many generations, but if the lot of the present generation is an improved one, that of the others must have been worse than despair.
In slowly harvesting such a poor crop of potatoes, any excuse for a pause would be welcome. Let any of us attempt to dig a field of potatoes with a three-pronged fork whose only handle is a straight stick and we will incline more to profanity than prayer. Let any American woman take a heavy load on a rough wheel-barrow like than shown in the Angelus, and wheel it over newly dug ground and see how loud she will * * lift her voice in prayer and thanksgiving.*' Yet such women as the picture shows spend their lives in this work, and contentment is preached to them as the greatest of virtues. We think that better tools and knowledge of cultivation will do more for these people than the practice of mediaeval customs. Let those who disagree with this, get a pair of wooden shoes and wear them one day! To us the picture is depressing in its spirit and teaching, un-American, superstitious, and useful only as an example of what our country should avoid. May the bells of America send their sound over well-tilled gardens and fields, unto the ears of a progressive and intelligent people, whose lives under our beautiful skies can combine the color and picture squeness of old world life without its horrors, bigotry and immoral ideas ! May our gardens combine the good of nature and art from every land, but may we lead the world rather than follow it!
"PURCHASE and distribution of seeds by the Department of Agriculture shall be confined to such seeds as are rare and uncommon to the country, or such as can be made more profitable by frequent changes from one part of our country to another ; and the purchase or propagation and distribution of trees, plants, shrubs, vines and cuttings shall be confined to such as are adapted to general cultivation, and to promote the general interest of horticulture and agriculture throughout the United States." This is the statute which creates the seed bureau of the National Department of Agriculture. The intent of the law is clearly beneficent, and were it followed, great advantages would come to our agriculture. The clause which defines the Department of Agriculture itself directs that "to procure, propagate and distribute among the people new and valuable seeds and plants" is one of its leading functions. It is well known that the department does little of the sort, at least, so far as seeds are concerned.
In fact, gardeners, at least, have long since given up any expectation of receiving from Washington anything "rare and uncommon," or such as has been made or is likely to be made, through the efforts of the department, "more profitable by frequent changes from one part of our country to another." Perhaps, upon second thought, however, we should admit that things "uncommon" are often enough submitted to the unsuspicious cultivator, for Bill Nye's ecstacy over a choice parcel of cotton seeds sent to him in Wyoming from Washington is still fresh in our minds; and we ourselves have been the recipients of seeds of cotton and tobacco in quantity, while we were living in a country where these products would be little more than a practical joke.
For years we have had and grown these seeds from the Department of Agriculture, and we have never found among them anything of superior or unusual merit; and when we are particularly anxious to have a good crop, we never touch them.
What can be the excuse for sending out such seeds as these ? Any large dealer sells them, and some of the varieties are older than the Department of Agriculture itself. Why have all the complaints and denunciations of the press and of good gardeners for years borne no fruit of reform ?
But it is an easy matter to account for much of the persistence of this disgrace : two-thirds of all the seeds are distributed by members of congress. The seed-shop is a convenient means, maintained at public expense, by which the congressman "remembers" his "friends" at home. It is a political attachment rather than an agricultural one, and therefore reforms are difficult. But if we despise the politician who uses the seed-shop for his personal ends, what shall we say of the voter who is influenced or won by such paltry means ? But it is the "remembrance," that a public man thinks of him, which gratifies the vanity of the witless sower.
It is a part of the scheme of the Department that reports shall be made of the behavior of these "rare and uncommon seeds." This is well, but two factors prevent its complete operation: First, the seeds are usually not worth reporting upon, for the varieties are well known ; and, secondly, the two-thirds over which the department has no immediate control are not reported to it. One commissioner complained mildly of this, adding, "it is obvious that these representatives of the people are better acquainted with the best intelligence and needs of their respective districts than the department is." So !
'
 
Continue to: