educate a certain number of young men as gardeners. As "an inviting
scene of public recreation," it is observed, "those who are little
interested in the cultivation of Botany, and who may regard the
employments of Horticulture with disdain, may still be induced to
frequent the Botanical garden, for the beauty of the objects, the
pleasures of the society, and the animating gaiety of the scene."

[1] How pleasingly is the substance of these observations embodied
in one of our "Snatches from _Eugene Aram_:"--"It has been
observed, and there is a world of homely, ay, of legislative
wisdom in the observation, that wherever you see a flower in a
cottage garden, or a bird at the window, you may feel sure that
the cottagers are better and wiser than their neighbours." Vol. i.
p. 4. Yet with what wretched taste is this morality sought to be
perverted in an abusive notice of Mr. Bulwer's _Eugene Aram_, in
a Magazine of the past month, by a reference to Clark and Aram's
stealing flower-roots from gentlemen's gardens to add to the
ornaments of their own. The writer might as well have said that
Clark and Aram were fair specimens of the whole human race, or
that every gay flower in a cottage garden has been so stolen.

The Manchester Garden, we should think, must, by this time, have an
Eden-like appearance. The Committee began fortunately. Mr. Loudon, in
one of his valuable Gardening Tours,[2] refers to "a few traits of
liberality in the parties connected with it; the noble result, as we
think, of the influence of commercial prosperity in liberalizing the
mind. Mr. Trafford, the owner of the ground, offered it for whatever
price the Committee chose to give for it. The Committee took it at its
value to a common farmer, and obtained a lease of the 16 acres (10
Lancashire) for 99 years, renewable for ever at 120l a year." He